Seen elsewhere



Click images for more details

Recent posts
Recent comments
Currently discussing

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

Powered by Squarespace


Again, anti-fracking idiots protesting at a site where no fracking was going to happen.
I wonder who the F***wit with the 'power to the people' banner will blame when the lights go out.

Sep 30, 2014 at 11:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterRoger Tolson

Latest news on the progress of shale gas extraction in the UK.

Sep 30, 2014 at 9:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man

Discussion with the normal angry bullying alarmists "You are an evil denier, Climate change is obviously true !"
oh can you define your tems and give me proper VALIDATED science ?
..after an hour of shouting they say "well the AAAS webpage says : 'Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening.' "

em 0. it does not quote any reference
1. It's a logical fallacy of argument from authority
2. It does not say what question we are dealing with (in science one is careful to define terms)
3. it does not tell us the sample size (that is crucial in polling, it's no good having a small cherrypicked sample)

These guys want to us to give up freedoms and money based on this kind of flimsy evidence ?
..Why is that 97% idea on the page of an org that is supposed to promote science ? it's just deceptive PR spin
Their come back " ask why we are NOT doing it if the future of life on the planet may be in peril."
..that seems too like a logical fallacy to me

Sep 30, 2014 at 7:53 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Bish! The Zit is back!

Sep 30, 2014 at 6:13 PM | Registered CommenterMartin A

Oh look, the charities commission has smacked down the GWPF for "blurring fact and comment and for lacking neutrality on climate change."

Yet Andrew Montford seems to have completely ignored this news story regarding his most significant ally. I wonder why?

Sep 30, 2014 at 5:35 PM | Unregistered CommenterZedsDeadBed

Barry / Hilary:

As to what Zhang Gaoli actually said at the NY "summit", I'm inclined to trust the detailed RTCC report. Here's the relevant extract:

1849 BST - Chinese vice premier Zhang Gaoli ... was cagey on the hotly debated issue of when China’s emissions will peak, saying only they would try to make it “as early as possible”. While he did not direct his talk quite as pointedly to the US as Obama did to China, it was clear that the old positions remain, with Zhang emphasising that the old division between developed and developing countries – embedded in the original convention – must remain in place. This is the opposite of what Obama means when he said that a new deal must apply to “developed and developing alike.
To "try" to reach an emissions peak "as early as possible" is almost completely meaningless and commits China to nothing. In any case, as Andrew Revkin pointed out recently, a "peak" is not a cut.

But the most important part of RTCC's report is Zhang's observation that China has no plans to change its position on "the original convention" - i.e. the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), under Article 4.7 of which developing countries have the right to make the increase in emissions in pursuit of economic growth an overriding priority.

And India's position is, if anything, even clearer. In a post conference interview with the New York Times, Prakash Javedekar, India’s environment minister, said:

India’s first task is eradication of poverty. Twenty percent of our population doesn’t have access to electricity, and that’s our top priority. We will grow faster, and our emissions will rise.

It must surely be obvious by now to any sentient person that there is no prospect of a binding emission reduction deal in Paris?

Sep 30, 2014 at 4:01 PM | Registered CommenterRobin Guenier

Sep 30, 2014 at 2:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterJo Beaumont

"He does, of course, agree with me". Sounds like an eminently sensible man. :)

Sep 30, 2014 at 3:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterKevin Lohse

@Jo thanks I did suspect that many other people also feel bullied by this relentless assault ..Everyday the BBC will run climate alarmist propaganda in it's news items... then we have to stop and think "is that true ?" then spend time checking the full story ..which always turns out to be not what it first seems
- God I feel bullied by people being given a free platform to promote their political views on the BBC, cos to get back to an equal footing I have to spend time pointing out their bad evidence and reasoning errors
..that feels like an assault or some form of discrimination in that if you are a Green you can go on happily listening to the Beeb world view totally unassaulted or challenged..whereas the rest of us have to suffer rising blood pressure and shout at the radio..or take their anger out on their nearest & dearest

Sep 30, 2014 at 2:54 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

As a "lurker" I am very fed up with these PR machines. especially the way the BBC rush to present these claims for them. I now have a growing list of charities I refuse to contribute to (WWF, RSPB, Greenp**** to name a few) Every time I hear a report on R4 in the morning, my poor husband has to listen to my rant on our dog walk! He does, of course, agree with me. Our latest gripe is the way the National Trust is promoting it's "green mantra" and yet not even managing to do it in a sensible and effective way. But don't get me started on that.

Sep 30, 2014 at 2:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterJo Beaumont

Yes re WWF report : I switch on the radio and the BBC is giving a free ride to WWF terrorizing us with it’s shock horror report quoted as “WWF Audit: Half Of The Earth’s Animals Have Disappeared” or “The Earth’s vertebrate wildlife population has halved in 40 years”

I too am sick of the sound of my own voice would be interesting to hear what the lurkers here feel
Do you too feel continuously deceived by a PR machine of such Green orgs, BBC & Coca Cola ?
..maybe the Bish will write an article ..pauses ..WUWT just opened an article on it

Sep 30, 2014 at 1:56 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>