Extinction Rebellion Protests

[Maz]

You want us to look at a twenty minute video?


Can't you make your point more succinctly?

[Salad_Burnet]

Yeah, especially when we've all just read Melanie Philips's point that if you don't toe the Anthopogenic (spelling conjured from memory) line you don't get funding.

[Ifill Over]

Originally Posted by weltklasse

not comparable at all.

The same parties involved 2 years later.

The G8 Climate Change Roundtable was formed in January 2005 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Its purpose was to address the global climate change issue facing governments, business and civil society. The first meeting was held in Gleneagles, Scotland, from 6–8 July 2005, to coincide with the 31st G8 summit.

The roundtable was established by twenty-three leading international businesses with the assistance of G8 President and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, to co-operatively engage in a global plan of action. The aim of the group was to ensure that a long-term policy framework was set up to enable consistent and transparent market-based solutions in mitigating climate change, while also addressing issues linked to climate change; such as economic growth, poverty, and adequate energy supplies. Carbon trading is one of the most popular pricing mechanisms used to reduce greenhouse emissions worldwide.

[Ifill Over]

Originally Posted by Maz

You want us to look at a twenty minute video?


Can't you make your point more succinctly?

A scientist should be able to freely represent his findings, even if that goes against the consensus. His motivation was that he saw policies being introduced that would unnecessarily impact businesses in Queensland.

He was fired from his University and used crowdfunding to fight his case for unfair dismissal. The consequence is that it gags scientists questioning science deterring other scientists in the process.

Interestingly he raises the 'Replication Crisis' present in science for the past 40 years, basically, 50% of Science cannot be replicated.

I did a little further digging, he has since won his case, but the university has appealed, which is going to cost him a further AUS $1,200,000 to fight.

[cockles]

Originally Posted by johnbush

"Patrick Moore Co-founder of Greenpeace" ...well you made that up for a start.
He isn't (unless you choose not to believe Greenpeace).

I felt compelled to know the truth of this, so have checked it out. Having now done so, I choose not to believe the current leaders of Greenpeace, and choose to believe another of the co-founders and who is no friend of Patrick Moore, and yet was also memory holed by modern Greenpeace:

To view the link you have to Register or Login

But, as Paul Watson says, "Although I disagree with Pat, he's still a co-founder. You can't take that away from him just because you disagree with him." (Greenpeace, for its part, vehemently rebuts that Moore was a "co-founder", and much else that Moore contends.)

What I don't know is why Greenpeace are lying about these two men being founders.

[cockles]

Originally Posted by Ifill Over

A very good article, this is all reminiscent of the UN, Blair and Bush weapons of mass destruction rouse.

Originally Posted by Ifill Over

The same parties involved 2 years later.

The G8 Climate Change Roundtable was formed in January 2005 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Its purpose was to address the global climate change issue facing governments, business and civil society. The first meeting was held in Gleneagles, Scotland, from 6–8 July 2005, to coincide with the 31st G8 summit.

The roundtable was established by twenty-three leading international businesses with the assistance of G8 President and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, to co-operatively engage in a global plan of action. The aim of the group was to ensure that a long-term policy framework was set up to enable consistent and transparent market-based solutions in mitigating climate change, while also addressing issues linked to climate change; such as economic growth, poverty, and adequate energy supplies. Carbon trading is one of the most popular pricing mechanisms used to reduce greenhouse emissions worldwide.

Good posting. Despite myself noting the similarity prior to your first post, I had not remembered the G8.

[Ifill Over]

Climate activists and the United Nations are suffering a major black eye this week as protests and riots resulting from high energy prices have erupted in Santiago, Chile.

Chile, which is hosting a major U.N. climate conference in December, earned praise from climate activists for recently imposing a carbon dioxide (CO2) tax on conventional energy sources and switching the Santiago Metro system to renewable power.

Now, the people of Chile are rising up and firing a shot across the bow of other nations considering similar energy taxes and expensive renewable energy programs.

[wedgetail]

The riots are the result of the corruption of governments world wide by right wing economic policies. Also renewable energy is now becoming cheaper than fossil fuels, so you really don't have a point at all. I suppose you will find some other news story/PR from the fossil fuel industry that allows you to feel good about willfull ignorance.

[Ifill Over]

Originally Posted by wedgetail

The riots are the result of the corruption of governments world wide by right wing economic policies. Also renewable energy is now becoming cheaper than fossil fuels, so you really don't have a point at all. I suppose you will find some other news story/PR from the fossil fuel industry that allows you to feel good about willfull ignorance.

Expensive Climate Policies Sparked the Chile Riots, Just Like the Yellow Vest Protests in France.

To view the link you have to Register or Login

You misjudge me, I am all for clean energy removing pollutants providing it has no ecological impact.

I see CO2 as a positive and not negative. From where I am we have been led up a garden path by the UN/IPCC, politicians Left, right, centre and media on CO2. I am more concerned about the pollutants in burning some fossil fuels and the social impact on society reducing CO2 will have.

As for renewables:-
o My energy suppliers are 100% renewable.
o wind turbines kill birds and only operate with wind speeds of 4-15 meters per second. Although impressive looking can spoil natural beauty spots.
o solar panels do not work at night. Are prone to damage and use during adverse weather conditions. Snow, hail, sand storms.
o biofuels apart from the recycle of vegetable oils they should be banned due to ecological damage.
o Hydroelectricity has ecological impacts which are managed.
o Electricity storage, this really has not progressed enough.
o The only reliable alternative to fossil fuels is nuclear.

I am also aware of initiatives which I remain sceptical of which if true would be absolutely amazing. To view the link you have to Register or Login

[bubbs11]

To view the link you have to Register or Login

[Golf Boy]

Originally Posted by bubbs11

To view the link you have to Register or Login

Let’s be fair. It’s sixty and seventy year old CEO’s making all those decisions on plastic wrapping etc etc. Is it really the kids fault?

[rhino_mik]

Yes. You can't blame the kids for living in the world created for them by those from the sixties and seventies.

If you agree Share.

[Ifill Over]

An interesting set of advertisements fighting CO2.

To view the link you have to Register or Login

[weltklasse]

Originally Posted by Ifill Over

The same parties involved 2 years later.

The G8 Climate Change Roundtable was formed in January 2005 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Its purpose was to address the global climate change issue facing governments, business and civil society. The first meeting was held in Gleneagles, Scotland, from 6–8 July 2005, to coincide with the 31st G8 summit.

The roundtable was established by twenty-three leading international businesses with the assistance of G8 President and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, to co-operatively engage in a global plan of action. The aim of the group was to ensure that a long-term policy framework was set up to enable consistent and transparent market-based solutions in mitigating climate change, while also addressing issues linked to climate change; such as economic growth, poverty, and adequate energy supplies. Carbon trading is one of the most popular pricing mechanisms used to reduce greenhouse emissions worldwide.

sounds nothing like the UN and iraq war - just because a certain T.Blair was involved makes for a pretty poor comparison.

[Ardent Eagle Forever]

Wonder how many ER supporters were at fireworks displays last weekend and will be tomorrow night.

[Ifill Over]

Originally Posted by weltklasse

sounds nothing like the UN and iraq war - just because a certain T.Blair was involved makes for a pretty poor comparison.

'Weapons of Mass Destruction' and 'Climate Change' propaganda:-

1. based on allegations of dramatic new evidence
2. communicated with high emotional intensity and moral
outrage
3. apparently supported by an informed corporate media/
academic/expert consensus
4. reinforced by damning condemnation of anyone daring even to
question the apparent consensus
5. generated with fortuitous timing
6. characterised by tragicomic moral dissonance.

[TennesseeKing]

Originally Posted by Ifill Over

'Weapons of Mass Destruction' and 'Climate Change' propaganda:-

1. based on allegations of dramatic new evidence
2. communicated with high emotional intensity and moral
outrage
3. apparently supported by an informed corporate media/
academic/expert consensus
4. reinforced by damning condemnation of anyone daring even to
question the apparent consensus
5. generated with fortuitous timing
6. characterised by tragicomic moral dissonance.

You'll never admit you're wrong with regards to climate change will you, even if evidence is waved under your nose.

[rhino_mik]

Originally Posted by Ardent Eagle Forever

Wonder how many ER supporters were at fireworks displays last weekend and will be tomorrow night.

What an important and pertinent question. You are so intelligent.

[TennesseeKing]

Originally Posted by Ifill Over

'Weapons of Mass Destruction' and 'Climate Change' propaganda:-

1. based on allegations of dramatic new evidence
2. communicated with high emotional intensity and moral
outrage
3. apparently supported by an informed corporate media/
academic/expert consensus
4. reinforced by damning condemnation of anyone daring even to
question the apparent consensus
5. generated with fortuitous timing
6. characterised by tragicomic moral dissonance.

Just out of interest, could you explain to me why phenological mismatches are happening at unprecedented rates if climate change isn't a thing?

It's just one example of 'dramatic new evidence' to support the overwhelming scientific data on climate change. It's not just academics studying one subject. It's numerous different fields all studying different things, pretty much all coming up with supporting evidence to support the idea of climate change within their different fields.

[Icy]

Arguing with climate change deniers is no different to arguing with flat earthers or evolution deniers. If someone is prepared to ignore the overwhelming scientific evidence for climate change then they are either too stupid or too stubborn to be worth arguing with.