Global warming swindle

[Lord Braykewynde]

You are right LOL, the origins of global warming were brought to the attention of the world by the U.K.

No, not by Gordon Brown or Tony Blair who, if reading comments under most threads in these forums, are the blame for the capitulation of this country during Norman Conquest in 1066 to the problems of today in the Middle East.

It was Mrs Thatcher who promoted global warming at the summits she attended as Prime Minister but I would hardly hold my head in shame because of it. All she was doing was getting world leaders and scientists to debate this problem. I'm sure the leaders of various countries didn't accept that Thatcher was an authority on the subject and take her word as gospel.

 

[Colinn]

So what exactly do we pay our political leaders for if it's not to deal with world issues of this nature??? My point is that without THEIR concerted action, OURS are totally, utterly pointless...

It doesn't really matter what your view of politicians is, the fact is that they are in power. They have the power to act, individuals don't, other than to lobby them. What is the point of the UK saving, say 2%, when the USA and China churn out about 60% and a blowing volcano can blast all figures into the stratosphere. I just don't believe in futile exercises.

However, if there WERE sound grounds for taking action and there WERE sensible global moves to counter it, then I would be right up there with the advocates...

 

[colin(bridgend)]

A classic example where this country has taken a backward step is the import of natural gas. years ago the steel works in Port Talbot supplied sufficient town gas to feed all of west Wales. Now we are importing natural gas and the gas from the works is constantly burning away into the atmosphere 24 hours of the day.

Also a large infill site in the Bridgend area has recently been earthed over and stand pipes inserted into the ground to burn off the methane gas developed within the tip. A firm applied to the local council for planning permission to set up a small electricity station on the site to develop electricity from the waste methane gas. Lo and behold they were turned down under planning as the council thought it was not a viable proposition. The firm had carried out research and estimated there was a minimum of 30 years of life within the tip for producing electricity. There were no objections from either the public or industry close by. Now we have stand pipes connstantly burning off the methane day and night. However the council gave permission for the extension of an open cast coal mine just a few hundred yards from the village of Cefn Cribwr although all the residents objected on the grounds of noise, dust and possible subsidance through 24 hour working of the site.

 

[Lol1]

You are right LOL, the origins of global warming were brought to the attention of the world by the U.K.

No, not by Gordon Brown or Tony Blair who, if reading comments under most threads in these forums, are the blame for the capitulation of this country during Norman Conquest in 1066 to the problems of today in the Middle East.

It was Mrs Thatcher who promoted global warming at the summits she attended as Prime Minister but I would hardly hold my head in shame because of it. All she was doing was getting world leaders and scientists to debate this problem. I'm sure the leaders of various countries didn't accept that Thatcher was an authority on the subject and take her word as gospel.

I'm left wondering about two things here, Lord B.

Firstly, did you watch the program, and if you did, you will already know why Maggie did what she did, and it wasn't for any moral reason.

Secondly, if you didn't watch the program, where did you get that freakishly good memory from?

 

[Lol1]

Do we import or export our politicians with Wales, Colin? Somehow we seem to have ended up with the same idiots. You don't think Scotland is having a sort out do you?

 

[LizCornwall]

Hi Lol, I like that one Liz Cornwall,

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

You are right LOL, the origins of global warming were brought to the attention of the world by the U.K.

No, not by Gordon Brown or Tony Blair who, if reading comments under most threads in these forums, are the blame for the capitulation of this country during Norman Conquest in 1066 to the problems of today in the Middle East.

It was Mrs Thatcher who promoted global warming at the summits she attended as Prime Minister but I would hardly hold my head in shame because of it. All she was doing was getting world leaders and scientists to debate this problem. I'm sure the leaders of various countries didn't accept that Thatcher was an authority on the subject and take her word as gospel.

Wonder no longer LOL. No I never saw the programme unfortunately and no, it's not my memory but my position in life. Whilst taking claret in the members club at the Lords I asked my secretary to check Hansard for me and it was he who supplied me with the said information :O)

 

[colin(bridgend)]

Lol in Wales there is an old saying that if you were to put a donkey up for election for Labour in Wales it would win and the majority of our politicians are acting like donkeys. Our Labour MP asked an important question in Parliament, I may be wrong but I think it is the only time she has opened her mouth. What did she ask of the Government? To legisalte for the protection of certain butterflies as they were at risk of becoming an endangered species. It is a pity that the politician did not become an endangered specey.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Lol in Wales there is an old saying that if you were to put a donkey up for election for Labour in Wales it would win and the majority of our politicians are acting like donkeys. Our Labour MP asked an important question in Parliament, I may be wrong but I think it is the only time she has opened her mouth. What did she ask of the Government? To legisalte for the protection of certain butterflies as they were at risk of becoming an endangered species. It is a pity that the politician did not become an endangered specey.

I must admit I think she was acting honourably and with good intent Colin, I prefer butterflies to politicians so I think they should be saved :O)

 

[BrianStAlbans]

Butterflies and politicians Lord B have a lot in common.......

...start off as one thing, end up as something completely different.

Brian (",)

 

[JandP]

If you missed this program its on again tonight at 10 on more4. It doesnt finish until 11.40 so you may want to record it but its well worth the effort, you will have a wonderfully clear conscience afterwards! Jim.

 

[rob_jax]

Global warming - Who do we believe?

So thanks to a TV programme, we have two apparently different theories proposed by two groups of scientists, both supported by facts and with differing conclusions.

This happens quite a lot in science - and the way you can discover the true answer from a series of sensible sounding alternatives is by critically reviewing each theory in isolation. What you cannot do - and the TV programmes seem to enjoy - is to have some sort of competition or verbal disagreement between the authors.

A TV programme is not "proof" - you have no means to peer review the claims, no means to confirm the claims or check the references.

So in answer:

1. The earth does undergo long term (20,000 years) climate changes - caused by long term wobble in the earth axis (like a spinning top that wobbles) - that causes alternating hot and cold

2. There are several shorter term effects - like the 7 year solar cycle where the output of the sun varies with sun-spot activity

3. There is a very long term (millions of years) upwards drift in the output of the sun

If we take all of these and other effects in hand, then the TV programme you mention is right - the earth is heating up because of these effects - but that's not the total story and they were being disingenuous.

What the Global warming scientists say is that they have already included these effects and "Global Warming" is the extra heat that sits on top of these natural processes. And it's this extra heat that is man made and is a real cause for concern.

It's pretty clear that the last 100 or so years have seen accelerating global temperatures on top of the already increasing temperature due to natural effects.

Dr. Robert

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

I wonder who funded those scientists findings?

Probably the petro-chemical companies, U.S. government, worlds airlines, etc. etc......

...........oh I forgot, the 4x4 lobby hehheh! ⇦ only joking before someone see's redmist ;O)

 

[Lutz]

I really think it's time to stop arguing (and I mean on a global basis, not between contributors to this forum) who is to blame or what proportion of the problem is natural effects or man-made and start getting our fingers out and doing something. It would be absolute folly to expect the biggest culprits to take the first step as they'd have to make the biggest effort and that's going to hurt them most. It's only natural that they will not take the lead. One can only hope that they will be coerced into following the example of others.

 

[colin(bridgend)]

The downside to the so-called measures which Blair/Brown propose to introduce is that industry will not afford the new machinary/plant required for reduced emmissions and therefore are going to transfer their manufacturing centres to the countries which ignore the measures. Another way of exporting our manufacturing industry yet again all in the name of progress.

 

[Colinn]

I know the solution - as everything else seems to be banned, why stop there...ban sex. Banned sex means no more kids. Means population fall. Means sooner or later no people. Means problem solved - and planet saved...!!

Any volunteers to be first??

 

[cris_408518]

We just all know in the UK that we will be hammered over the costs re wahtever the numpties in power decide we need to do be they right or wrong

Just the ending of the use of traditional light bulbs will come at what cost to us.

Will there be any study into the cost of replacement bulbs and their sale price or will we get stitched up yet again.

Our house has 11 dimmer switches that do not work low energy bulbs. Not only will we have to replace the bulbs but the switches to.

What the green cost will be of replacing millions of switches around the country and add on the green cost of electricians being called out to change them and exactly how clever a move is it?

They now want manufacturers to do away with TV and Recording equipmment stand-by lights, no doubt they will be replaced with a battery back up to keep timers running and waiting to turn on when you set to record.

So I guess that will be millions more batteries as used inside your PC to keep the systems timers running.

We are all supposed to roll over and obey yet very many Public buildings are left lit up 24/7.

 

[Lutz]

Yup, it's not going to come for free and the cost of changing light bulbs is absolute peanuts compared to some of the costs that we, as a whole, are inevitably going to be faced with. For a start, a not insignificant number of complete power stations are going to have to be decommisioned and rebuilt with more modern emissions equipment or replaced by alternative forms of energy production. Somebody's going to have to pay for that and you can be sure that the companies concerned are not going to take the necessary cash out of their own pockets in the process. We can say "good bye" to cheap energy forever. In about 20 years' time we'll probably be laughing over our electricity and gas bills of today, never mind about the price of petrol.

 

[cris_408518]

My wife hates the light from the new energy bulbs and even the latest ones still seem slow to start up.

A box of conventional bulbs can be bought for less than one low energy bulb at present.

We will need to replace over forty bulbs and 11 switches that I can do myself. At the moment I can's see that as being cheap without an electrician being called in.

My daughters house has all low energy bulbs and low wattage spots, but there are so many of them to get good lighting we can't see that there is any real electricity saving !

Goodness only knows what else we'll end up paying for.

 

[rob_jax]

For the past 250 years, we in the UK (and Northern Europe) have greatly benefited from the industrial revolution, and have also been the instigators of climate change. Thomas Telford of Ironbridge fame was born 250 years ago this year.

Maybe we should be the first to lead the way into a "greener" future and lead by example, certainly I can't see how we could ask India or China (for example) to take the first step when they've only had a decade or so of benefit.

Robert

 

[Val & Frank]

Following this thread it appears we have about 70% agreeing we need to do something about this Global Warming thing. The leaders in China are not going to put on the brake and then watch China implode, because the people can't get what they want ie A/C and lighting.

This can't be stopped it can be slowed yes but stopped no, unless Technology lends a hand. Remember 20/30 years ago, no catalyst converters ??? France without Nuclear power ??? How do you stop 2 billion peole in Asia wanting what we have had ???. Increasing passanger air tax means nothing. All we need do is spend what we have spent on space technology to answer all the questions asked by Global Warming. Incentives not Taxation changes peoples attitudes. Here we go again, squeeze the poor the rich can always afford to travel.

Val & Frank

Val & Frank

 

[cris_408518]

People numbers seem to be a big part of the problem, the population has grown so much in the past 100 years and we are all living longer with more goodies to play with and with modern communications others can see what they are missing.

In the last Century we had our friends over the water kicking off twice and the wiping out of many millions, may be we should give war another chance.

I thought they said that Frances Nuclear Power prog is one of the cleanest options providing they have no accidents:-(

 

[emmerson2]

Yup, it's not going to come for free and the cost of changing light bulbs is absolute peanuts compared to some of the costs that we, as a whole, are inevitably going to be faced with. For a start, a not insignificant number of complete power stations are going to have to be decommisioned and rebuilt with more modern emissions equipment or replaced by alternative forms of energy production. Somebody's going to have to pay for that and you can be sure that the companies concerned are not going to take the necessary cash out of their own pockets in the process. We can say "good bye" to cheap energy forever. In about 20 years' time we'll probably be laughing over our electricity and gas bills of today, never mind about the price of petrol.

And it won't make a ha'porth of difference.

 

[Lutz]

When the first mass exodus from flooded or arid regions occurs and these people want a share of fertile ground already occupied by others, I don't think we'll have to wait long for a war.

 

[cris_408518]

Well we're OK, we can flood the channel tunnel and keep

em out ;-)