Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Discussion > Is there a real conspiracy?

Lord Deben is president of Globe International which previously described itself as an organisation dedicated to helping governments to fight climate change.
Today they describe themselves in web searches in a different way: "The Global Legislators Organisation (GLOBE) supports parliamentarians to develop legislative responses to the challenges posed by sustainable development.".
What happened to climate change?
Connie Hedegaard this week made the same transition, she is not part of Globe International.

Sep 18, 2013 at 4:55 PM | Registered CommenterDung

I'm not sure that the word conspiracy fits. It suggests a plan to intentionally do harm. This is more 'road to Hell paved with good intentions' stuff. I'm sure they see making a profit while doing good works as a happy bonus. It makes them much more dangerous in my opinion. A devious plotter might see when the game is up and back off but these people will carry on to the bitter end because they think they're on a crusade. It's a feature of religions, communism, health and safety and anyone who worries about political correctness.

Sep 18, 2013 at 7:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2

Also, conspiracy implies planning and I don't think there's that much going on. Instead, there's lots of blue sky thinking going on, where they dream up a perfect world with no hurriacanes and people who only consume enough, and never too much. The appearance of co-ordination is mostly accidental. People with similar viewpoints tend to flock together. They like the things the others do and either copy or expand upon them. Humans are a mixture of individual and co-operative instincts. People like Deben and Hedegaard have more of the latter. They like the idea of rules and order and people doing what's good for them... and Deben et al get to decide what's good.

Too little control is not good either.

Sep 18, 2013 at 8:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2


In my defence:

I do say to those who are sceptical about Climate Change.....clearly there is no need to talk about Climate Change because we have got to do all these things anyway if we are going to meet "the needs of 9 billion people

Lord Deben 4th Sept 2012
Interview with DECC Committee.

Let's say that science, some decades from now, said 'we were wrong, it was not about climate', would it not in any case have been good to do many of things you have to do in order to combat climate change?.

Connie Hedegaard Sept 2013

Lord Deben gets the chair of the Climate Change Committee by telling the DECC Committee that "clearly there is no need to talk about Climate Change" ^.^

Sep 18, 2013 at 10:19 PM | Registered CommenterDung

remember that Deben is trying to maximise profits at his company - which wants us to recycle more, so his rubbish company can earn from all the crap, whilst using more power of the wind variety, while using less power of the real variety etc...meanwhile, his waste disposal company sources power from.....?????

Sep 18, 2013 at 11:48 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes

The new angle has come up because their old ones aren't working. They did try 'we have to switch to renewables because gas is running out anyway' but fracking has scuppered that. They also tried 'we need to get ahead of green technology so we can be world leaders when everyone else has to switch over' but a) we aren't making any of the green technology and b) it's terrible and nobody's ever going to make a mad rush to get it installed... except us. They keep trying to make cutting CO2 to somehow appeal to right wingers but it ignores the fact that people from all sides are shying away from CO2 reduction because it's economic suicide.

The main favourite is the idea they're not communicating the crisis properly. Are they really so insulated that they can't recognise disinterest when they see it? The public got the disaster message and went 'meh!'

Sep 19, 2013 at 1:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2

@Dung. Good spot - that really is quite remarkable. I too would doubt that that this is a simple coincidence. However, the bigger and more complex a conspiracy, the greater the number of players and also the chance of it being exposed. Like this ....

" I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"

Sep 19, 2013 at 7:45 AM | Unregistered CommenterFarleyR

There is most deffinetly a conspiricy. In my last missal to 35 MPs in 3 commons committies the same information was sent to the DPP and ICC. Put simply, if evidence is shown that something else (a reduction in African Easterly Waves) is causing global climate change, the evidence is distorted, rejected or countered by impossible off the shelf theories,plus factual information is redefined as theoretical, even when it used the exact same information and data as the CO2 lobby.
The cause of global climate change is demonstrated on Utube: 'The Nile Climate Engine'.

Sep 24, 2013 at 1:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterConor McMenemie