Monday
Dec142015
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Kaye sera sera
Dec 14, 2015 Climate: WG3 Greens ;)
I was on the Kaye Adams show this morning, talking about Paris and what one can do about one's personal carbon footprint. Also featured was BH favourite Louise Gray, although we didn't get a chance to interact.
We touched on energy, recycling, the global warming movement and green gestures although I'm not sure Ms Adams realised I was a "bad person" until rather late in the day. It was great fun.
Audio should be available here this afternoon (climate segment was from the top of the show, with me on after about half an hour).
Reader Comments (58)
That is very ungrateful of Louise Gray. She was always highly commended here, for her ability to cut and paste Green Blob publicity material, with a breathtaking economy of effort.
"I'm not a conspiracy theorist" followed by a bunch of conspiracies. Well done. At least you didn't snigger childishly this time - I think.
BBC Scotland seems to be at an earlier stage of Green Syndrome than the version "south of the borderrrr", they even had Judith Curry on the radio a few years ago.
Sceptics were nowhere to be seen or heard over the last few weeks, apart from a few token Lomborg statements, and I guess now is not the time to be party-poopers or to intrude on private grief.
The other day I complained to my GP about the unbearable noise inflicted on patients in the waiting room. That noise was Radio Scotland.
Victor Meldrew.
The Seer of Blackford Hill returns, drops a pearl of wisdom (or something), and — hopefully — departs.
I haven't listened to the segment yet, but well done for making the effort. Kay Adams is not the brightest of talking heads, two stories:
1. On a discussion about the future of the Labour Party in Scotland (a post mortem as it was the day after a serious election losses to the SNP, about 5 years ago iirc) Kaye interrupted a Labour party member guest to ask "but what are WE going to do about it". She never felt the need to correct herself - so a la Harribin another blatant exposition of BBC bias.
2. a few years ago on a radio discussion on windfarms, a contributor made the point that with a typical load factors of only 20% they were very inefficient and didn't generate much electricity. Kaye responded by saying that this was surely a reason for building even more.
So she's likely a card carrying member of the Labour party with deep green tendencies.
Both these stories are from a few years ago, because I don't listen to Radio Scotland any more.
I love the way the meaning of words is so malleable for ATTP. Humpty Dumpty without the charm.
aTTP 10:50 are you familiar with the recycled output of Louise Gray???
If you are, and see no problem, you really ought to relearn your basic Physics, Maths, Economics and use of English.
If you are not familiar with the recycled output of Louise Gray, you are lecturing on a matter you have no concept of.
Either way, thanks for a good laugh on a monday morning.
Andrew,
You do realise that telling people that you aren't something, doesn't mean that you aren't. If anything, having to tell people that you aren't something, probably means that you're doing a very poor job of making it obvious that you aren't. I, for example, am charming ;-)
ATTP is a fly-by troll with nothing going in his favour. He's never had a real job and has done nothing of any use to mankind.
aTTP, we all note your claims about your expertise in physics. Do tell us more about Mann's Hockey Stick, and the pause in global warming. Your fellow experts in global warming would really like some answers, because they can't figure it out either.
Philip,
You're charming too, aren't you?
Golf,
I think they are doing pretty well, despite what you might think.
Let's talk about the subject of the thread shall we?
If it weren't for charmless trolls, we would stay on topic.
I can't wait for Louise Gray to take a leading role in Green Advocacy again. She has really helped some people make up their minds about the quantity of natural resources wasted on dumb thinking.
AM section starts here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06rd2rm#playt=34m10s
Quite rightly points out that many people on both sides agree that the Paris meeting was a bit of a farce.
Direct link to Bish speaking
Listen to the others if you want. (Care in the community is a wonderful thing)
Bish said CO2 saving, people have talked about at COP is just gesture
..except for Bill Gates energy research initiative etc.
.. micro-nukes etc.
Need low carbon energy cheaper than fossil fuels
Bish time 34m15s to 40 min ah he's back at 46m pointing out the coffee cup energy..(presenter mentions how the BBC dutcheed paper cups and has given presenters wasteful ceramic mugs)
recycling "Andrew you are blowing my mind" .'I've been wasting my time recycling!'
then followed by caller Lizzy in Ayr who asserted that simple measures COULD make a difference
- 'Don't change your car, pots, metal good (they've got a footprint)
..I don't fly a lot, yes I drive 500 miles/day sometimes'
-
Then the presenter called for a counter view ...No only joking.
I appreciate it was a radio programme, but does anyone know the Indian, Russian and Chinese equivalents of sticking 2 fingers up in a 'V' formation? I get the impression these may become common gestures in CO2 negotiations, and a translation phrasebook would be very helpful.
I believe Faye and Louise are familiar with traditional anglo saxon sign language.
Best you can hope for in such an environment is to gain attention and make people think. So all in all well done.
Quite interesting to hear the pro coal guy quoting this morning 20+% of UK energy demand was being supplied by coal plants. Not to mention another 40+% CCGT, 18+% nuke, whilst wind contributed 1.6% and the sun isn't shinning. I am at a loss to understand how the Paris piece of paper is going to make the sun shine and the wind blow.
Min 53 Andrew and guest agree EVs not great ..presemter "but I thought electric cars were the next big thing"
Not a conspiracy theorist then mentions GreenBlob/NGO industry it's their bread and butter.. (ATTPS idea of a conspiracy theory)
Min 54 "You are not a Climate Change Denier ?" (I guess her producer had Bish down as another-eco-man)
Islands aren't sinking, no one will tell you they are getting bigger.
Min 55 The Re-open the Coal Man..keep the lights on
Next Man "We've not got much solar in Scotland yet... its just logistics we can get over"
59:30 ends
Sorry, I tried to listen but found the fantasy too unreal. How can anyone seriously think that current targets will limit temp rises to 2.7C, then discuss the decremental minutiae involved with each of the 5 year plans that reduce this to 2.0 then 1.5. Do these eejits seriously think they can control the climate with this level of detail?
Roy Spenser has summed it all up nicely here.
Listening to all the crack 'experts' talking of '1.5 degrees', '2 degrees', '2.7 degrees' and so on...oh yawn. Totally false precision and predicated on the demonstrable rank nonsense of high climate sensitivity. We've completely lost the plot as the actual 'agreement' is voluntary and will therefore achieve next to nothing.
By the way the move to a 'low carbon future' is also predicated on actually developing a viable 'low carbon' energy source (bar nuclear). Currently we have nothing worthwhile so coal and gas will rule globally for decades.
The presenter sounds nailed-on for all-things 'global warming' too. All in all very naïve stuff and China and India must be laughing their little c*cks off.
There is a underlying assumption amongst almost all of the callers that co2 output can be reduced by personnel choice.
They do not seen to comprehend that the increased activity especially seen in the transport field is a result of the extraction of purchasing power.
There is therefore a need to work harder to get access to it again.
Euro green / banking policy is simply a transfer of energy from the human to conduit activities.
Just one example is the massive decline of rail freight seen in countries upon EEC and subsequently euro entry.
A consequent and wasteful increase of road freight inputs .
Banks sustain themselves by keeping prices up.
Approx 50% of the cost of goods is a result of usury.
Typically people must travel further so as to gain access to cheap goods via discount stores with extremely long supply chains (aldi ,Lidl etc)
The data is pretty conclusive in Ireland given its extreme model euro economy nature.
The recent carbon taxes on solid fuel clearly has political goals.
To destroy peasant redundancy.
Destroying the local .
It is sadly succeeding .
Unfortunately, the whole global climate debate until Nov next year will be dictated by the Republicans in the US.
Ted Cruz is clearly intelligent and he thinks he can win the debate. Clearly that involves more than just pointing out to the idiot warmists that the evidence does not support them as we sceptics have been doing since before Climategate.
And worse - for obvious reasons the climax of the Ted Cruz's climate campaign will be toward Nov 2016 at the presidential election and not the much earlier Scottish elections.
So, yes the media in Scotland are going to be be sooner or later taking more interest - but if there's some kind of "killer blow" being planned by the Republicans - there's no guarantee that it will effect us in Scotland as it may occur after the elections - and who knows we may have even more daft anti-science SNP MSPs than before.
There are a number of fallacies that warmists keep falling into. The ‘every little helps’ is an illustration of how little people have thought about their own emissions. We’d need to make radical changes to our lifestyle to substantially cut emissions. We’d need to accurately calculate the benefits of new, improved products eg a more efficient car vs the energy to build and dispose. We’d have to have laws guaranteeing the durability of products and people who change things for fashion and taste would have to be shot.
The other issue – thinking that governments and businesses are the bad guys is getting very boring. It all stems from the Left. They’ve perpetuated the idea that people are endlessly the victim of business, irrespective of how much business has advanced overall prosperity and irrespective of how individuals, both workers and customers are integral parts of any business. Almost any attack on business is an attack on the public. There’s an odd thought process wherein the left think that business survives at any cost, they just need to be pushed, but in reality business just folds and/or moves abroad. I could say that they’re not charities but charities aren’t run on the charity of their workers either. When the free money stops, the charity folds. The leftist argument would be nationalisation but we’ve been there, done that and we were less efficient and more expensive. Even the argument that government run industries would be cheaper because there would be no massive salaries is bogus because not only are public sector salaries equivalent to private sector wages, they benefit in countless other ways both big and small. Even the ‘vast’ profits for investors are exaggerated. Many pensions are invested in ‘greedy’ industries, but who needs a decent pension when you won't be able to buy anything, do anything or go anywhere?
I can't say what we might need to do in the future but I will never place my trust in idiots who can't see the value of where we are now.
Global warmists know where the sun is always shining.
For Christmas, give them a pair of pants, with a solar panel sewn into the lower rear gusset.
When they can make wind turbines small enough, the personal 'combined wind and solar' fashion accessory is sure to be a winner.
http://www.geograph.ie/photo/248769
High level blanket bog (400meters~) used to service the needs of the Catherdanial community at the extreme SW of the Iveagh peninsula.
It can only be used effectively during a good hot June , later in the year the drying is just no sufficient.
Used much less intensively today for two primary reasons.
The permanent winter community is much smaller. (Like me burning gas in the city)
Road has improved over the years making the transport of oil hearing fuelmore viable.
If local purchasing power was increased ?
Is our problem the sheer scale of the (extractive)banking system.
Also one little farmer located near the village grows spuds for the holiday market.
The locals cannot afford his product......
In 1990 coal and peat was a major element of our energy balance
In 2014 it is not.
Our emissions have remained more or less static
Transport inputs have merely replaced other inputs.
aTTP you doing your bit to reduce your Personal Christmas Carbon Footprint for this year.
No Christmas Tree Lights in the living room or just no Christmas presents for the kids.
I cannot get over the mental image, of Al Gore and Co standing up and applauding the great deal [of nothing] in Paris, shiny empty head people, I should write a song.
On LouLou and that interview, I had a similar thoughts to CheshireRed. In that, why is it, they [the sheeple] think they [some climate scientists, industry, the world et bloody cetera] can somehow tweak the Earth's temperature like a thermostat 'thingy dofuss' can do on the interior walls of their houses?
And isn't that the point really, that these liars and political charlatans have so bamboozled a rather dullard public - the trick is to make people believe in it.............."yadda, yadda, by merely simply adjusting MMCO₂ levels - all will be well folks - trust me I'm a climate scientist - have you seen the size of my Nobel Prize!"
Or, was it all just a nightmare and life goes on until - end of cars days "it's all legally binding" rears its ugly head or, the LIGHTS go OUT?
Athelstan, for the most part the sheeple aren't thinking about it at all, which includes most politicians. If they were, there would be some hard and fast research on what renewables can and can't do. How much mass implementation would cost and exactly how much the public are prepared to spend. My Mum was a master at this. She spent a lot of time worrying about problems she wouldn't put into perspective but equally didn't do anything substantial to solve them. It's the worst of both worlds.
I listened to the entire show. Sigh. What a bunch of ill-informed (except of our host of course) and probably uneducated people. It's all about virtuous signally. Nobody willing to discuss or agree if Carbon Dioxide is really a "problem", and even if it is, is it truly a thermostat on the weather? People have been conditioned to believe it is. Welcome to 1984.
Bish also made good points about:
China constantly building new power stations - only about 1% of their energy is solar.
Most people aren't very interested in the climate issue, as surveys repeatedly show.
On an individual level, what can we do: nothing. If it makes you feel good, then fine.
The bit about recycling was quite amusing - Kaye got quite excited at the idea she might have been wasting her time washing out yoghurt pots.
"Andrew Montford has completely ruined my Monday".
In the above Kerry example the previous peasant community became dependent on the distribution of mainly Cork city tourism / distribution during the free state banking experiment.
Prices of the pint increased but so did cash flow.
During the first Euro depression of the 80s and most recent euro depression these national tourists were increasingly replaced by airborne travellers.
The energy austerity drives we witness is merely the rationing required to increase the scale of banking operations.
They have a net negative effect on the quality of life for most.
Life just becomes apparently pointlessly "faster"
The Rosetta stone for this is the % of transport relative to total TFC.
Flinging round accusations of someone being a 'conspiracy theorist' is very lazy dialogue. There are many occasions when it pays to wonder at conspiracy, Lewandowsky's lies notwithstanding.
Me, I'm happy to be seen as a sceptic and one who sees that there is good grounds for seeing a conspiracy. For instance, how come some very intelligent people (including a few who deign to offer us the wisdom of their oh soooo superior intellects) seem to think that by driving this country back into the 19th century will control the climate? We're now being told that any form of gas-fueled power/heating will have to be given up for the cause; that hugely expensive ground-heat pumps should be installed and that, with a bit more of a push on wind and solar the dream of a 2 Deg control of climate will be ours to have.
This, we and they know to be madness. John Christy at NOAA has calculated that even if the USA pumped ZERO CO2 into the atmosphere for the next 50 years the temperature change would be somewhere between 0.05 and 0.08 Deg C. Like I said, sheer madness. But that's why I think conspiracy: no-one could be so stupid as to believe this will happen. Therefore, they must have ulterior motives, or their arrogance and hubris knows no bounds.
In the meantime, it is arguable that adapting to the possibility (as if) of less than 2 Deg C rise in global temp is a far better and more cost-effective path to take than driving our shivering and dispossessed populations into climate gulags.
@Paul M
Kaye said :"Andrew you are blowing my mind"
..followed by ...'I've been wasting my time recycling!'
"Andrew Montford has completely ruined my Monday".
Can someone please complain about the loaded question, "You are not a Climate Change Denier ?"
as I don't have time
@Paul M on Jose Duartes website I just read this
"You should push back against any journalist, science writer, or scientist who uses the term denier, and ask them what scientific basis there is for it. "
@Harry
They do intend to drive these Isles back to the 19th century by engaging in pointless puritanical wasted effort.
Its shaping up to be complete sociolocal disaster again.
Now driving these Isles back to the 15th century , now that would be major improvement........
Harry Passfield
The "ulterior motive" has been clear for a very, very long time and I have drawn attention to it more than once.
The aim of the green lobby is to (as I call it) "unpick the Industrial Revolution". They are not interested in climate; they do not give a rat's ass about global warming; it can get 10° warmer or 10° cooler for all they care. Their intention is to prevent the use of fossil fuels at all costs and the global warming narrative has provided the perfect base on which to build their anti-civilisation, anti-development dream.
If you want to call that a conspiracy then you would probably not be far off the mark. And the main reason that the likes of the Seer of Blackford Hill mock the idea is either because they are an active part of this project or dupes. My guess is that, like so many academics, he is probably both since the modus operandi of the eco-activist is not a millimetre away from that of the Social Justice Warrior whose natural home is academia.
Whatever the science is trying to tell us, the demands of the eco-activists are built on a series of lies. This is not surprising because the first instinct of the eco-activist (as with the SJW) is to lie. Either by stating known untruths or by carefully ensuring that whatever truth is needed is carefully vetted to ensure that inconvenient truths are omitted or that words are redefined to suit the eco-narrative which will in any event itself be redefined as the outside world starts to realise that the original narrative has as many holes in it as a Swiss cheese.
So "global warming" morphed into "climate change" and "climate disruption" and then into "extreme weather".
The eco-activists do not and never have believed seriously in "global warming" as we understand the term but along with their useful idiots in the media and at the sharp end of political protest they have succeeded and will continue to succed in applying pressure to governments in a bid to persuade us to commit economic suicide.
They are hypocrites and charlatans to a man (or woman); they no more believe what they are selling than I believe in fairies.
To add further to my feeling of conspiracy, this quote from Mark Steyn's evidence to Congress re 'Data vs Dogma', where he was talking about how, for seeming dogmatic reasons, the historical temperature series were being tampered with, is surely most apt:
Mike Jackson. Well said!
The more fresh computer adjusted climate science evidence I hear about 1950, the colder it gets.
Was it in the previous decade that visiting American servicemen complained about British warm beer? Pub landlords must have kept their beer cellars heated with coal fires to achieve that, when it was apparently so cold outside.
golf charlie
The Paris agreement states that 1950 temperatures should (or was it shall) fall no more than 2 degrees in the next century. This will be achieved by imagining 25 extra coal fired power stations.
"The eco-activists do not and never have believed seriously in "global warming" as we understand the term but along with their useful idiots in the media and at the sharp end of political protest they have succeeded and will continue to succed in applying pressure to governments in a bid to persuade us to commit economic suicide."
That is ineffably well observed.
Plus, we see its workings, daily and never mind it's all gone star wars now pal - but have we moved on since 1977 or whenever?........HEY but don't worry dude! YUP, the lastest 199" bendy plasma gizmo screen will only 'set' - [did you see what I did there?] you back £999 FFS matey it's a bargaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin, in yesteryear - a cathode ray tube came in at 'bout £50 but listen mate that's progress and don't forget - planned obsolescence [your new telly will only last 5± years guaranteed!!!!] - and how green is your diesel - BABY?????????????
Hypocrites and deconstructionists - Mike, there are other descriptors.
Although he doesn't know it Jamspid is a bit of a poet
For Bishophill something to help him chill
Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall
Soundly not built was it not at all
Injured and crippled confined to bed
Anyway that is what Humpty said
Compensation he did get He contacted Claims Direct.
For this is a modern poem for the environmentally aware and the politically correct
But Humpty still did he sob
cause this was a no win no fee job
For without access to Oil Gas Coal poor the world will still be.
A tiny bit of warming we can live with we agree
CO2 the plants cannot live without
Warmest and Skeptics put your numbers on the table and let's argue it out
Renewables will come good one day
But that is many many years away
Thorium and Fusion is the other option
But enviromentalists bite the bullet and get serious about its adoption
Clever Enviromentalist are embracing nuclear reactor action
They know that the weakest of species die off by lack of adaption
For Tragic Humpty perhaps maybe
aTTP he to ,his errors he may one day see
Just listened to the broadcast and it makes one realise the difficulty for politicians to ever achieve anything with the various levels of belief & perception rolling around in the minds of the population fed by years of listening to biased / misinformed media & phases beginning with "Scientists say........"
"...the climax of the Ted Cruz's climate campaign will be toward Nov 2016 at the presidential election..." --MikeHaseler
You're assuming there will be a US election in November 2016. At this stage, it's too early to say with certainty, given what we've seen and what the Resident of the US has refused to see.
"Andrew Montford has completely ruined my Monday" --Kaye
Many happy returns of Monday. Looking forward to a ruined Tuesday.
""... have you seen the size of my Nobel Prize!"" --sarcasm; attributed to Al Gore by Athelstan
It's a whopper.
"Global warmists know where the sun is always shining. For Christmas, give them a pair of pants, with a solar panel sewn into the lower rear gusset." --golf charlie
Global warmists should note the mistletoe sewed onto my upper rear gusset.
I looked up the definition of a conspiracy theory.
I have listened to what Andrew Montford said this morning. The nearest seems to be an accusation that China’s renewables excluding hydro are trivial. It is just political flannel to please the climate lobby, whilst at the same time getting on with the real priorities. (though they might also have strategic energy self-sufficiency objectives as well, as shown by the conversion of coal to liquids). After the Tiananmen Square massacre 25 years ago, China went flat out for economic growth. They have been phenomenally successful, with growth rates since exceeding the Asian Tigers of Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. Andrew’s main messages (from 34:10) - and I will be contradicted if I get this wrong – is that the climate reduction policies are non-binding and that all the proposed policies do not add to much on a global scale. You are quite free to live an eco-lifestyle if that is your preference, but it will not make any real difference. Even the UNFCCC experts agree that the INDCs will make little difference to global emissions.
It is a common theme that those who believe in climate also believe themselves to be greater etymologists than those who write the dictionaries. Other examples are “academic”, “sceptic”, “skeptic” and “fake sceptic”. I will happily provide references, if challenged, but believe the main message of the blog post should not be diverted in other directions, a common tactic of climate propagandists.
@Kevin As I noted above it was around min 53..30 when Bish is speaking
'Not a conspiracy theorist'
then mentions GreenBlob/NGO industry it's their bread and butter
I think that is ATTP's idea of a conspiracy theory.. get him a dictionary for Christmas
(One would think that he here to intimidate & disrupt . Likewise it would not be against freespeech to block a certain Cork IP address)
Its a sign of distinction to be blocked by a nihilistic Get Carter British anti identity
I love it whether he is a Puritan American reject or a refined little English sub human hero.
The material just gets better and better.
Alf Tupper and his chips
4 minute mile baby........