|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 1, 2023 17:22:37 GMT
dailysceptic.org/2022/08/18/1200-scientists-and-professionals-declare-there-is-no-climate-emergency/"The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd." It seems strange that a link to an oil company of any sort calls into question a person's impartiality in the climate debate, however relying on grants to discover more about the 'settled science' of AGW still means impartiality of such scientists should not be called into question.
|
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 2, 2023 0:22:49 GMT
"Drawing on extensive historical and policy analysis, this timely and provocative book offers a lucid history of environmental alarmism and failed policies, explaining how "scientific consensus" is manufactured and abused by politicians with duplicitous motives and totalitarian tendencies".
This book should be part of the national curriculum, instead, the eco lobby want it burned. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2023 2:53:51 GMT
"Drawing on extensive historical and policy analysis, this timely and provocative book offers a lucid history of environmental alarmism and failed policies, explaining how "scientific consensus" is manufactured and abused by politicians with duplicitous motives and totalitarian tendencies".
This book should be part of the national curriculum, instead, the eco lobby want it burned. Not burned. Composted or recycled. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 2, 2023 3:18:11 GMT
Not burned. Composted or recycled. I can live with that, as long as you read it first. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2023 3:21:41 GMT
Not burned. Composted or recycled. I can live with that, as long as you read it first. Conrad Black? He should still be in prison as far as I'm concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 2, 2023 3:27:04 GMT
I can live with that, as long as you read it first. Conrad Black? He should still be in prison as far as I'm concerned. Well yes, I wondered if a lefty would pick up on that, lol to be expected. But he didn't write the book, and go with me on this one Monte, it's well worth a read. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 2, 2023 9:21:27 GMT
The problem is that comment or research that doesn't support the current climate orthodoxy is suppressed by the MSM. The BBC, for example, has an official editorial policy not to give a platform to "deniers" - despite the fact that many respected scientists dispute the warming propaganda. I was wondering if the 77th Brigade have any involvement in this? After all it's probably on their list of "disinformation" because it goes against govt policy. I wonder if they're also colluding with the search engines to prevent people finding these contrary opinions.
I've been surprised at how little interest there has been in the activities of the 77th Brigade. The govt are controlling what we're allowed to read.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2023 10:36:50 GMT
Conrad Black? He should still be in prison as far as I'm concerned. Well yes, I wondered if a lefty would pick up on that, lol to be expected. But he didn't write the book, and go with me on this one Monte, it's well worth a read.I very much doubt that. It's probably a load of shite but I am not going to waste many hours of my time finding out. I have better things to do with my time than that. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2023 12:05:00 GMT
Conrad Black? He should still be in prison as far as I'm concerned. Well yes, I wondered if a lefty would pick up on that, lol to be expected. But he didn't write the book, and go with me on this one Monte, it's well worth a read. It's not a good look to have a fraudster, who was convicted of stealing over $6 million from shareholders, write the foreword to your book. Black is also a former business associate of Trump. So you'll have to excuse my reluctance to read a book with a clear right wing bias and instead take the word of actual climate scientists. |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 2, 2023 13:35:45 GMT
Well yes, I wondered if a lefty would pick up on that, lol to be expected. But he didn't write the book, and go with me on this one Monte, it's well worth a read. It's not a good look to have a fraudster, who was convicted of stealing over $6 million from shareholders, write the foreword to your book. Black is also a former business associate of Trump. So you'll have to excuse my reluctance to read a book with a clear right wing bias and instead take the word of actual climate scientists. You've never read anything written by an "actual climate scientist". If you've ever read anything at all on the subject it's just the management summary of an I{CC report - which was NOT written by a climate scientist. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 2, 2023 18:24:07 GMT
Well yes, I wondered if a lefty would pick up on that, lol to be expected. But he didn't write the book, and go with me on this one Monte, it's well worth a read. It's not a good look to have a fraudster, who was convicted of stealing over $6 million from shareholders, write the foreword to your book. Black is also a former business associate of Trump. So you'll have to excuse my reluctance to read a book with a clear right wing bias and instead take the word of actual climate scientists. So because you don't like Conrad Black, you refuse to read a book by Rupert Darwall? Doesn't make a lot of sense tbh. I suspect Monte, that had you been around in the 1930's you would have approved of book burnings. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2023 19:19:29 GMT
It's not a good look to have a fraudster, who was convicted of stealing over $6 million from shareholders, write the foreword to your book. Black is also a former business associate of Trump. So you'll have to excuse my reluctance to read a book with a clear right wing bias and instead take the word of actual climate scientists. So because you don't like Conrad Black, you refuse to read a book by Rupert Darwall? Doesn't make a lot of sense tbh. I suspect Monte, that had you been around in the 1930's you would have approved of book burnings. No need to get all Godwins on me Red. I'm just pointing out your book is not unbiased or based on science. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 2, 2023 19:22:42 GMT
So because you don't like Conrad Black, you refuse to read a book by Rupert Darwall? Doesn't make a lot of sense tbh. I suspect Monte, that had you been around in the 1930's you would have approved of book burnings. No need to get all Godwins on me Red. I'm just pointing out your book is not unbiased or based on science. I'm not, getting all Godwins on you. The book is a very interesting read, as long as the reader is not biased.  |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2023 19:32:45 GMT
It can be summarised as ''economist doesn't like more expensive energy production''. It has very little to do with environmental science and lots to do with protecting profits and the status quo.
How many shares in the fossil fuel industry does he hold Red?
|
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Feb 2, 2023 19:34:54 GMT
No need to get all Godwins on me Red. I'm just pointing out your book is not unbiased or based on science. I'm not, getting all Godwins on you. The book is a very interesting read, as long as the reader is not biased. You mean so long as the reader has the same bias as the author. How long did you work at a coal fuelled power station Red? |
|
