• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

global warming

Damian Kimmins said:
As like the news reader on the Sky News Australia piece?
Being open to having an opinion changed is not just saying those words out aloud! It's about being open, about looking at things case by case.
The need to underscore your climate change beliefs with the pretext that climate change is false if it is accompanied by a restriction in freedoms is somewhat limiting being open.
Click to expand...
I am open to having my opinion changed. However, not by Greta :). Are you? Many debates offering empirical evidence debunking 'climate change driven by CO2 levels' have been removed, de-platformed or not given much publicity. Quite a few examples of data being fiddled to support a narrative. East Anglia University being one of the more infamous examples. There is evidence all around us of climate change...the glacial lakes being a good one! Climate change has always happened. Colder and warmer. CO2 levels higher and lower than currently. 'Climate change' offers an ideal opportunity for increased taxation, wealth redistribution and restrictions on the freedom of movement for the average person. Not for the chosen few.
 
Tell me Ady, what do you make of the Sky News Australia piece about Oxfordshire County Council's 'climate change lockdown'.
 
Last edited:
Nick Coulthurst said:
If you looked at a graph of co2 emissions (along with all the other damaging gases) over the last 200 years, I would assume most people’s default position would be that it must have a significant impact on the climate, and yet for some, not so. For some, the climate change agenda is being driven by vested interests who are seeking to profit from it. The vested interests in maintaining the status quo (fossil fuel dependency) which are absolutely huge by comparison, and already control our ‘democracies’ via their extensive lobbying and social networks seem to be ignored by the same people, however. This idea that the amount of green seen from space is increasing and the planet is self regulating co2 via plants doesn’t make sense either to me. Green is just a colour, is provides no indication of the co2 absorbing qualities of ‘the green’. Man is cutting down and burning forests for agriculture, releasing tons of co2 and replanting with crops which will never absorb as much co2 as the original forest. In twenty years time when the ice caps have melted and no longer reflect the suns rays and all the methane has been released from beneath the permafrost of the Siberian tundra, it will be too late. Economic growth and filling up our houses with endless crap will rightly see the end of us whether it be by climate change or war. Just like relatives at Christmas, we have overstayed our welcome on this planet. I’m 56 and I honestly think I’ll see the end. Man’s greed and the fact that sociopaths and self serving egotists seem to control our countries these days make it inevitable imo. If you check out GB news, fine, I do as well, but for heavens sake check out other news sites for some balance. Double down news, Novara media and even Russell Brand on YouTube all provide eye opening content. Listening to only news outlets that mirror your existing views isn’t healthy imo. I have some left wing opinions and some right wing ones, neither term is a dirty word as far as I’m concerned. I also have friends from both sides, some quite extreme, it’s not a problem, it’s what a democracy with free speech should be all about.
Click to expand...
Good post Nick, most of which I, and am sure others agree with. Except the CO2 driven climate change bit. We can all agree that man hasn't done the planet any favours, and as anglers, we all want what is best for the environment.

I would argue that we need more investment for the UK offshore Oil and Gas industry. Investment has been lacking over the last 5 years. Fields are ending or nearing end of life with very little being commissioned to replace. Investors are not providing the funds. Fracking is not the healthy option for the environment though. That is one of the better decisions of the sociopaths that we have in charge.
 
Damian Kimmins said:
Tell me Ady, what do make of the Sky News Australia piece about Oxfordshire County Council's 'climate change lockdown'.
Click to expand...
I watched the Sky News item and compared it to the statement from Oxfordshire Council that you linked. I thought that the Sky News Australia was rather sensationalised and exaggerated. In contrast, I thought that the Oxfordshire Council press statement, although most likely quite factual and truthful, downplayed where their vehicle recognition technology (basically surveillance) and taxation might end up in the future.
 
Climate change has never happened at the pace we are seeing now, not even anywhere near close to it. What’s the obvious, glaring event that’s occurred alongside this ? If something doesn’t smell right, follow the money, and the real money is undoubtedly behind fossil fuels. It’s easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled. Most people never change their minds even in the face of overwhelming evidence - our egos have a lot to answer for.
 
Ady Brayshaw said:
I am open to having my opinion changed. However, not by Greta :). Are you? Many debates offering empirical evidence debunking 'climate change driven by CO2 levels' have been removed, de-platformed or not given much publicity. Quite a few examples of data being fiddled to support a narrative. East Anglia University being one of the more infamous examples. There is evidence all around us of climate change...the glacial lakes being a good one! Climate change has always happened. Colder and warmer. CO2 levels higher and lower than currently. 'Climate change' offers an ideal opportunity for increased taxation, wealth redistribution and restrictions on the freedom of movement for the average person. Not for the chosen few.
Click to expand...
The UEA email hack categorically did not reveal any evidence that climate change data was deliberately manipulated or that any scientific fraud had taken place. This was only claimed by the likes of James Dellingpole who misinterpreted (intentionally or unintentionally) the hacked data and an innocent reference to 'Mick's Trick'.

What happened to Prof Jones was utterly disgraceful and has no place in any civilised society. All the UEA episode did was to seriously damage the quality of public discourse around climate change science. It was a sorry and incredibly damaging episode.
 
Nick Coulthurst said:
It’s easier to fool someone than to convince them they have been fooled. Most people never change their minds even in the face of overwhelming evidence - our egos have a lot to answer for.
Click to expand...
Absolutely Nick, well said.

This article, although a little old, explains why in quite a concise fashion.

www.theguardian.com

Why people fall for pseudoscience (and how academics can fight back)

Ingrained cognitive biases play a role, as does inverted snobbery about educational privilege. But we must battle on, says this scientist
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Damian Kimmins said:
I'm with you mate, but that perceived closing down only adds don't you think?
Click to expand...
I don't believe the purpose of this report was to close down peoples opinions, moreover to shine a light on the global sources of misinformation. And to address the growing problem of viral-disinformation.

People can then judge for themselves if they possession of the facts and a better understanding of who is funding what and why.
 
Ady Brayshaw said:
I am open to having my opinion changed. However, not by Greta :). Are you? Many debates offering empirical evidence debunking 'climate change driven by CO2 levels' have been removed, de-platformed or not given much publicity. Quite a few examples of data being fiddled to support a narrative. East Anglia University being one of the more infamous examples. There is evidence all around us of climate change...the glacial lakes being a good one! Climate change has always happened. Colder and warmer. CO2 levels higher and lower than currently. 'Climate change' offers an ideal opportunity for increased taxation, wealth redistribution and restrictions on the freedom of movement for the average person. Not for the chosen few.
Click to expand...
I am open to change and do not limit the scope of the possible change on my thoughts and opinions on who or where it may come from, I think that's a fundamental of being open, otherwise in reality, you are not.
I read with interest the CRU email server hacking and subsequent release of over 1000 emails between 4 Climate Research Scientists. Forgetting of course the Information Commissioners Office deciding consequently that from Sept 2011 there will be exemptions to FOI requests to allow for the exchange of ideas among academics, because that will be viewed as evidence of a cover up, it is difficult to avoid the fact that the scientific concensus on climate change through human activity never changed throughout the course of all the inquiries.
This debate reminds me of what happened during the Covid-19 pandemic - that the whole thing was quite the hoax or invented virus to enact a control and a restriction on our freedoms. Yet here we find ourselves, albeit having lost loved ones, through restricting our freedoms momentarily and the rollout of a very effective vaccine, with no Covid-19 related legislation on the statute books.
I remember vividly reading several blogs of deniers of Covid-19 being a threat to life, positing evidence of that being the case by way of videos of You Tube from Doctors showing studies of certain medications being so effective at curing Covid as to show this was a conspiracy. It turned out that what you were looking at, put forward as proof of said conspiracy, was nothing more than a Doctor putting forward, albeit passionately, observational studies.
 
Joe Winstanley said:
The UEA email hack categorically did not reveal any evidence that climate change data was deliberately manipulated or that any scientific fraud had taken place. This was only claimed by the likes of James Dellingpole who misinterpreted (intentionally or unintentionally) the hacked data and an innocent reference to 'Mick's Trick'.

What happened to Prof Jones was utterly disgraceful and has no place in any civilised society. All the UEA episode did was to seriously damage the quality of public discourse around climate change science. It was a sorry and.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Joe I'm grateful for the name James Dellingpole. I hadn't paid any attention to the alleged data fiddling by the UEA at the time. Nevertheless, I supply the following link to JD's article in the Daily Telegraph concerning the UEA hack.

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?

At first glance it seems very damaging to the 'climate change' research conducted by the UEA. Hacked and disseminated Emails containing:
Threats to scientists that have contrary views on climate change. Collusion between scientific peer groups within the UAE (and possibly beyond) to delete emails that contain 'inconvenient' truth. Admitting their measuring equipment is not up to the job. Admitting the data obtained does not support the climate change agenda. I won't go on. But not a good luck for the UEA and the climate change narrative.

It just confirms my view that it's mostly a load of self serving bollocks.
 
Last edited:
Ady Brayshaw said:
Joe I'm grateful for the name James Dellingpole. I hadn't paid any attention to the alleged data fiddling by the UEA at the time. Nevertheless, I supply the following link to JD's article in the Daily Telegraph concerning the UEA hack.

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?

At first glance it seems very damaging to the 'climate change' research conducted by the UEA. Hacked and disseminated Emails containing:
Threats to scientists that have contrary views on climate change. Collusion between scientific peer groups within the UAE (and possibly beyond) to delete emails that contain 'inconvenient' truth. Admitting their measuring equipment is not up to the job. Admitting the data obtained does not support the climate change agenda. I won't go on. But not a good luck for the UEA and the climate change narrative.

It just confirms my view that it's mostly a load of self serving bollocks.
Click to expand...
Yes it was very damaging to the UEA CRU because mud sticks. The old saying about a lie travelling halfway around the world before the truth has put its boots on etc etc.

Of course none of the leaked data showed anything that was alleged by Delingpole or any of the other climate change deniers.

The truth matters don't you think?
 
Joe Winstanley said:
Yes it was very damaging to the UEA CRU because mud sticks. The old saying about a lie travelling halfway around the world before the truth has put its boots on etc etc.

Of course none of the leaked data showed anything that was alleged by Delingpole or any of the other climate change deniers.

The truth matters don't you think?
Click to expand...
The truth definitely matters and I won't be going through the many leaked emails and documents🫣 . I am just surprised, that if what you say is true, that the Daily Telegraph, arguably, one of the more sober UK media outlets, would publish untruths. Doesn't the DT check the source of what it publishes?
 
Being sceptical of anything is a healthy position, choosing what to be sceptical of is different entirely.
 
Damian Kimmins said:
Being sceptical of anything is a healthy position, choosing what to be sceptical of is different entirely.
Click to expand...
If any proof was needed about the validity of Scientific ‘facts’ then their response about the Covid crisis blew that out of the water. Experts were queuing up to give an opinion that was modified to suit their agenda on any particular day. At least Professor Van Tam was honest to start his tv bulletins with ‘ my best guess’.
G.T.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top