Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Billionaire Entrepreneur Richard Branson, head of the Virgin Group, who sometimes features on WUWT for his strong pro climate advocacy views, has upset fellow travellers by allowing airtime for prominent British climate skeptic James Delingpole.
According to the Virgin website;
“In everything I write, I try to be as honest as I can and cleave to the truth as much as possible.” This week we welcome journalist, author broadcaster James Delingpole to the show. James is an extremely provocative man, and he believes that fears over climate change are unfounded.
I should stress that James’ views are in direct contradiction to the Virgin house view, and I think it is to Virgin’s great credit that they are prepared to hear and give airtime to the other side of such a divisive argument.
Where James and Virgin do agree, however, is on the issue of the legalization of drugs, and this is where our conversation takes us next. “Politicians are not addressing drugs laws,” says James, “for fear of headlines in the Daily Mail.” What a sad state of affairs.
Read more: https://www.virgin.com/entrepreneur/virgin-podcast-james-delingpole
Listen to the Podcast here
The greens have responded strongly to yet another incursion of unsanctioned climate views into mainstream media;
Aside from the facial hair and the petrol-guzzling international airline, one thing Virgin founder Sir Richard Branson is known for is his passion for fighting climate change.
“We need every person on Earth to acknowledge that climate change is real, and encourage each other and our leaders to address the challenge,” wrote billionaire Branson last year.
So with this in mind, some listeners might find it odd to hear on the latest official Virgin podcast that human-caused climate change is not a fact agreed upon by every credible science academy on the planet, but is instead “essentially a bankrupt theory.”
These were the words of James Delingpole, the British polemicist, climate science denialist and guest of Dominic Frisby, the writer, comedian and Virgin podcast host.
In a knockabout 20-minute segment full of laughs and japes, Virgin podcast listeners can hear how volcanoes emit more carbon dioxide than humans, that global warming stopped 18 years ago and how wind turbines are “bat chomping eco-crucifixes” (Frisby especially liked that one).
I doubt this podcast represents a significant shift in Richard Branson and Virgin’s position on climate change. However it is not the first time Richard Branson has been criticised by greens, though usually criticism is for the apparent contradiction between Branson’s public views, and his carbon intensive business activities and lifestyle.
simon,
Al Gore is smiling here because so many knuckleheads believe his trash talk about climate change and rising sea levels. He is smiling because he gets rich by telling climate lies that those knuckleheads and gullible dunces then promote as “fact” and deliver him the $$. People: You are the problem. The gullible enviros deserve the fate they imagine.
dbstealey. I await your contribution to science.
Not according to Max Planck: Science advances one funeral at a time.
D. Horne,
You wouldn’t understand real science if someone sat you down and explained it to you.
All you do is assert your stupid ‘appeals to corrupted authorities’ BS.
I post verifiable links to empirical data and observations.
No contest. You lose.
Who better to explain science: The scientific community or some wit who can’t grasp the simple fact CO2 is a greenhouse gas and GHGs causes Earth to retain more energy, keeping us from freezing.
Measurements, please…
…oh, sorry, you don’t have any, so you lose. All you have is your incessant ‘appeal to corrupted authorities’ logical fallacy. If you had facts and evidence, you would post them.
That means AGW is just too minuscule to measure. Therefore, it is a non-problem. That’s why global warming stopped for almost 20 years. Or should I say, “paused”?
But who am I kidding? Horne can’t even understand that simple logic. It’s like trying to teach a dog trigonometry.
Some wit! High praise in the midst of insult, appeal to authority, and ad hominem. Confusing.
The only good thing about giving nutters like Delingpole a platform is that they usually make fools of themselves exceedingly quickly.
What Delingpole needs is a Nurse – Sir Paul Nurse!
A Nurse cannot help an Interpreter of Interpretations … it’s sadly incurable.
Neither of you have the knowledge or intelligence to comment here.
In science, what is important is the balance of informed opinion. Eventually, if there is enough evidence and agreement, a consensus develops. Like. The Earth is round and goes around the Sun. Plants and animals alive today evolved from earlier species. When you believe the global scientific community is involved in a conspiracy, your views can safely be ignored by any rational person…
Much of what you described occurred before the States took over scientific endeavor and put scientists on their payrolls, with conditions. States don’t relentlessly conspire to increase their power and control over us? When did that happen?
You’re right James, it’s all a grand conspiracy and every country and every major scientific organization is in on it. Like the faking of the moon landing, vaccines and statins.
Mike, you’ll need a moniker. Let’s go with poltroon. I asserted none of those things. Weak, man.
A Nobel Prize awaits the first scientist to show the IPCC wrong.
Instead, we are asked to believe a conspiracy stupefying the global science community, in order to destroy America.
P.S. There is a world outside America. You know, Europe, where science started. And continues…
[Deleted. This is a Potholer-free zone. -mod]
“The long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” – IPCC
Yup. A Nobel Prize awaits the first scientist to show the IPCC wrong. Group 3 members, watch this video to get some education beyond activist’s propaganda and media hype
https://www.prageru.com/courses/environmental-science/climate-change-wh
Hi Mike
I’ve seen this a lot.
“it’s all a grand conspiracy and every country and every major scientific organization is in on it.”
If you replace “conspiracy” with “gravy train” or “band wagon” or “trough” it all becomes clear.
Horne says:
… we are asked to believe a conspiracy stupefying the global science community
Horne is self-admiddetly stupefied.
Horne, do you have anything else in your arsenal besides ad hominem, strawman, and Appeals to Consensus arguments?
Thought not.
Watch the videos and educate yourself.
When people agree something is true, that is a consensus. When scientists agree the science is clear and incontrovertible, that is reality.
The appeal to authority fallacy is what lawyers do. Find some ‘expert’ prepared to say what they want, even when it’s nonsense and contrary to the balance of informed opinion.
Earth is warming and ice is melting; the climate changing. Due to CO2. As predicted many many years ago.
Bruce Cobb,
Horne actually believes ‘consensus’ arguments are appropriate in science discussions. How much more clueless could he be?
Horne says:
When people agree something is true, that is a consensus.
And when people agree on something that isn’t true, like CO2=cAGW, that’s also a consensus.
Horne’s problem is two-fold: the scientific consensus is not on his side, and CO2=cAGW is bunkum.
Horne says:
In science, what is important is the balance of informed opinion.
WRONG.
Science is about truth, not opinions.
Paul nurse disagrees with you and James.
Bosh.
D. Horne says:
When people agree something is true, that is a consensus. When scientists agree the science is clear and incontrovertible, that is reality.
That is one of the biggest logic FAILS in this thread.
The scientific consensus was that the earth was the center of the Solar System. That didn’t make it reality.
Next, ‘Mike’ posted a video with only some 400 views. Here’s a video with hundreds of thousands of views: climate scientists laughing at global warming hysteria:
Alfred Wegener, call your office. Dr. John Snow, call your office.
D. Horne, call your mother.
So. You read that as meaning the IPCC is saying it doesn’t know what it’s doing? Not a warning that Earth is retaining more energy and the climate system is unstable, and may be disrupted to our detriment?
Have another coconut.
Horne,
Have some more Kool Aid.
The IPCC knows what it’s doing: emitting scary propaganda. It works on the clueless, like Dennis Horne. He actually believes the climate is “unstable” and may be “disrupted”.
‘Maroon’ doesn’t begin to describe people like Horne. The IPCC has their invisible ring in his nose, and they’re leading him in the frightened direction they want him to go. Yes, they know exactly what they’re doing.
[Snip. More comments like that and you can find another blog to post on. -mod.]
If you say so stealey.
Then of course you win the Nobel.
Err, nope.
That ain’t te way the world workss.
Either in actuality of via common sense.
Hand-waving and insult doesn’t .
Even though not directed at me, that needs pointing out.
A disreputable individual QED.
Toneb,
Put away the cooking sherry, you’ve had enough. Your spelling can’t normally be that bad.
Why don’t you go ahead and tell us all the name of the law of thermodynamics for calculating temperature in gas chemistry? I say you don’t know what you’re talking about. What does that law’s equation stand for? In other words what are the factors in the equation representative of? Which of these factors represent the GHGE?
Show me you would know if someone was properly calculating the temperature of air by simply telling me what the law of thermodynamics,
for calculating gas temperature,
is named.
Tell me what it’s equation is and what those factors mean in it; which of them is the GHGE.
I’ll wait.
Red herring. The temperatures are measured.
The temperatures are rising: the oceans, the surface – noticeable especially in the Arctic: hundreds of GT/y of ice is being lost from the Greenland ice sheet.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, R Hargrove. Learn some climate science.
The temperatures are rising: the oceans, the surface – noticeable especially in the Arctic: hundreds of GT/y of ice is being lost from the Greenland ice sheet.
I have seen the future… noooo the present and it is horrible!! Over the last 150 years of the 5 billions of our planet the temperatures have been rising… it is really horrible! believe me! And the Greenland, why this stupid name, is also melting, well at least I believe, nooo I am sure… but don’t mention Antarctica!!
Renaud,
Very good. You have the wacko contingent pegged.
Confession you’re too stupid to tell if someone’s even using the right mathematics to solve for temperature isn’t enough to get you off the ”one of the stupidest clowns in the room” hook.
The simple minded low i.q. response you attempted is identical to all the others who preceded you
in having their fake religion busted open in front of them for the REAL goods roll down your face like so much rotten egg.
red her·ring
noun
noun: red herring; plural noun: red herrings
1. a dried smoked herring, which is turned red by the smoke.
2. something, especially a clue, that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting.
D. Horne says:
” Learn some climate science.”
What an insufferable clown. Most readers here are scientific skeptics. But as I’ve constantly pointed out: if you are a climate alarmist, you are NOT a skeptic.
Climate alarmism and scientific skepticism are mutually exclusive.
We should be very pleased we happen to live in a period of warming . If humans make some fraction of 1% difference then great . You have to tip your hat at the scary global warming hustlers for trying to tell us the equivalent that vegetables are bad for us . Climate changes whether we are here or not and anyone who thinks humans are going to set the earth’s thermostat is a full fledged idiot .
No scientific organizations have made the case that global cooling is better for plants ,animals ,forests and humans than warming . History proves it . 100% the current exit from an ice age is better than a cooling
cycle . Why do so many of the scary global warming promoters live in California ? If they were truly concerned why do none live in Antarctica ?
Scary global warming is this societies version of witch burners .
“A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, R Hargrove. Learn some climate science.”
Yes.
It’s actually called Dunning-Kruger syndrome.
He/they don’t want to.
It will destroy their world-view.
Which is why they inhabit WUWT
And do not use Google scholar.
You’ve been chased off like a chihuahua running from a broom with the challenge that YOU’RE too stupid to know how to calculate the temperature of air, TOO.
You’re a fake. A posing, name calling nobody, who can’t name the law of thermodynamics for solving temperature of gas.
It’s intellectual ‘leadership’ who have been busted over, and over, committing fraud. The people who sent YOU – YOUR leadership have been busted claiming the laws of chemistry can’t solve the temperature of air and atmospheric mixes. Not mine.
Name the law of thermodynamics for solving temperature of gas, show us what the equation looks like, and explain it’s factors.
YOU ANSWERED WRONG when you TRIED several WEEKS ago so
TRY AGAIN and this time don’t project your own psychological disorder, -which no doubt led you to affix yourself to the scam – on me. I already showed everyone in here just how little reality based thinking goes on in your thermodynamically befuddled head.
ONE question.
And you’re revealed a complete, utterly incompetent, BUFFOON.
I AM NOT HERE straight from BUSTED, ADMITTED, CHEMISTRY SCAMMER COUNTRY.
YOU are.
Toneb is another anti-skeptic. Once skeptics start asking questions about the “dangerous man-made global warming” nonsense, that conjecture collapses.
Climate alarmists ignore questions. They refuse to answer skeptics’ questions. If they started trying to answer, the resulting cognitive dissonance would make their heads explode.
So they just make baseless assertions, erect strawman arguments, cherrypick factoids, and constantly use the ‘appeal to corrupted authorities’ logical fallacy.
Alarmists lost the science debate long ago, as CO2 continued to rise but global temperatures failed to follow. That falsified their belief system. So now they do pretend science, arguing politics and pretending it’s science. It isn’t. It’s politics and/or their eco-religion.
And the hole they’re digging gets deeper every day.
Toneb,
Read Amber’s comment. Learn something for a change.
[Comment deleted. Stop with the incessant name-calling of anyone you disagree with. Post facts, or post elsewhere. -mod]
Name the law of thermodynamics for solving temperature of atmospheric air and gas or you’re a sh** talking, pose: a cheerleading, know-nothing fraud.
You’re in here WHINING.
WHINING that the people who busted your scientific leadership in FRAUDULENT physics, (the law of physics for calculating temperature has a Green House Gas Effect)
FRAUDULENT statistics, (Michael Mann’s legendarily fraudulent Hockey Stick as well as ALL the dendro statistical work of your fraud daddies)
FRAUDULENT WARMING they simply MANUFACTURED and ADMITTED they manufactured (Phil Jones’ Feb 2010 BBC interview).
YOU’RE the one who is here representing BUSTED fraud.
YOU’RE the one who can’t even describe how to calculate the temperature of air.
You can’t even show up to name call without having your smug face slapped with the perfect example to everyone just how dumb you really are.
If you weren’t, you’d be able to explain how to properly calculate the temperature of a volume of gas, or atmospheric air. Then we could be sure that – like us – you could spot FAKE physics and FAKE temperature generation if you saw it.
Again, thermo-billy: YOU’RE the ONE whose LEADERSHIP GOT CAUGHT and ADMITTED FAKING FRAUDULENT WARMING for a DOZEN YEARS.
YOU’RE the ONE whose LEADERSHIP got caught TELLING the world a HOCKEY STICK generator is real math.
YOU’RE the ONE whose LEADERSHIP got caught using CLIMATE MODELS that had the ATMOSPHERIC COMPRESSION REMOVED, and the subsequent 30 DEGREE DIFFERENCE simply PASTED in with FRAUDULENT ”Green House Gas Effect Warming.”
YOU’RE the ONE whose leadership SUED a man for telling the world he is a liar, LYING in the filing he won a Nobel Prize he never won so the man was calling a Nobel winner a liar.
I’m the one who’s here to let everyone know just how simple minded and scientifically illiterate you are.
And you’re going to do nothing but name call, and ooze around, a BUSTED FAKE, in a discussion about not the most complicated phase of matter but the SIMPLEST.
Gas thermodynamics are the SIMPLEST phase of matter and energy.
Now you either tell us all what the law for solving temperature is or you’re nothing but another gloating political cheerleader who can’t properly analyze a thermometer given the right answers ahead of time.
Actually, R Hargrove nailed it. He described the mind-set of the climate alarmist crowd: they’re crybabies. They lost the scientific argument, so now they whine and complain about everything.
Well certainly no psychopathology there.
PS. “know nothing fraud ” is spelled this way, as opposed to “no-nothing fraud”. But I’m sure you’re a world expert in thermodynamics- even if you spell like a third grader.
“Hide the decline.”
Mike says:
“know nothing fraud ” is spelled this way, as opposed to “no-nothing fraud”.
He spelled it correctly. So why did you spell it “no nothing”?
“polemicist” I guess I’ll have to look that one up but it sounds vaguely threatening in a Harry Potter sort of way. If it means something not-so-good then it is to be taken as a compliment considering the source.
[snip – multiple policy violations. name calling, fake email address, fake name, fake ip address. Permanently assign to troll bin -mod]
“We need every person on Earth to acknowledge that climate change is real, and encourage each other and our leaders to address the challenge,” wrote billionaire Branson.
Well done Mr. Branson. Of course climate change is real! DUH!! That’s like saying “We need every person on Earth to acknowledge that the phases of the Moon are real, and encourage each other and our leaders to address the challenge.” ‘Fighting’ climate change is a fool’s errand. You might as well ‘fight’ the phases of the Moon for all the good it would do. Twerp.
Indeed. The climate has always changed. The sea level has always changed. But right now the planet is warming rapidly and ice is being lost year on year – changes driven by our CO2 emissions.
It’s very complex and a bit frightening. Difficult to understand and accept. Clever informed scientists shouldn’t blame you…
LOL!! A brilliant riposte replete with baseless (although politically correct) assertions . . . except of course your first two sentences: “The climate has always changed. The sea level has always changed”. Well done you! So far so good.
But then it all goes downhill: “The planet is warming rapidly” . . . except that it hasn’t for the past 20 years. “It’s very complex and a bit frightening” . . . it’s actually very simple: it’s called “Nature”, as in ‘Nature doing its thing’. And the only thing “frightening” about it is the irrational, ignorant hysteria from so many bleating “yes” men demanding action to fight something that’s been happening for the past five billion years. Good luck with that!
Horne says:
It’s very complex and a bit frightening.
As Lord Monckton says, the thumb-suckers are frightened of natural variability.
And Horne says that natural variability is…
Difficult to understand and accept.
Only by the eco-religious contingent.
Name three papers in high-impact journals that show or even suggest the IPCC’s public stance or review of the literature is wrong.
Thanks.
Sure, just as soon as you produce three measurements quantifying AGW.
Planet Earth is making a fool of you and the rest of the alarmist contingent. That Authority trumps any argument that Horne has ever made.
Still waiting for those measurements…
KiwiHeretic May 15, 2016 at 12:07 am. The so-called “hiatus” never was statistically significant.
The mean global temperature is 1C higher than at the Industrial Revolution and most warming has occurred in the past 50 years.
You could start by trying to understand the difference between temperature and heat. Earth never stopped retaining more heat (energy) year on year.
And for goodness sake, stop reading these “nonsense” sites. Ignorance and incredulity won’t save you.
Funny how twenty years without any global warming to speak of is “statistically insignificant” when every two-week heatwave or blizzard, every week-long bush fire and every two-week flood or drought is hugely significant in the annals of global warming alarmism. Every so-called “extreme weather” event that lasts less than a month, and scares the sh.t out of every washed-up celebrity looking for a cause, is somehow significant while twenty years of no warming isn’t. How does that work?
And who knows whether the so-called “hiatus” is in fact a “hiatus”? Perhaps it’s here to stay? Who knows? Oh, right, I forgot. The much-vaunted models say its just a “pause” because these infallible follies project (forecast) that the ‘catastrophic’ warming that began at the end of the last Little Ice Age and reached a blistering 0.7oC over an entire century (WOW!! Hot!), will continue unabated until the planet resembles Venus.
So when will the ahhhm, the “Tipping Point” occur to bring this CO2-driven cauldron about? What will the atmospheric CO2 concentration be that triggers the ahhhmmm “Tipping Point”? It’s currently at 400ppm.
Pick a number. You might as well. What have you got to lose? “The atmospheric CO2 level that will trigger Prince Charles’ and Al Gore’s ahhmmm “Tipping Point” will be …ppm.
Fill in the blank. Use any computer model you like. You may also consult any alarmist scientist you like, including Prince Charles and Al Gore. Wait on… they’re not scientists, sorry, so you can forget them.
And who knows whether the so-called “hiatus” is in fact a “hiatus”?
Doesn’t matter. Irrelevant. Earth has retained more energy. Year on year. Regardless of any measurements made during a putative “hiatus”. Temperatures are up, month on month. Ice is being lost – hundreds of Gigatonne per year.
And who are you? I mean, what’s your opinion compared with that of the global scientific community of informed scientists?
https://theconversation.com/consensus-confirmed-over-90-of-climate-scientists-believe-were-causing-global-warming-57654
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002
Buddy, you are a dinosaur.
KiwiHeretic,
Horne is clueless.
Global warming stopped for close to twenty years. Scientists on all sides of the debate were trying to figure out why. They called it a “pause” and a “hiatus”. There was no question that global warming had stopped.
But then the talking point changed, and eco-lemmings like Horne immediately jumped on that bandwagon. He adopted the fake new narrative, pretending that global warming never stopped, even though the real world made the “pause” clear.
This has happened before. beginning in the 1940’s there was a long “hiatus”, when global temperatures declined.
That long term decline happened at the same time that CO2 began to ramp up.
The alarmist crowd can’t come up with any suppporting evidence for their belief. All they have are baseless assertions, and logical fallacies.
No wonder they lost the science debate.
dbstealey May 15, 2016 at 8:05 am
Global warming stopped for close to twenty years.
No, it did not. It was nothing more than the difficulty of measurement, not surprising giving the complexity.
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6242/1469
Every part of the Earth’s climate system has continued warming since 1998, with 2015 shattering temperature records. All datasets show it (including the satellite) … but you know that already!
This recent graph shows no slow down, it’s a myth. But you know that too…
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/recent-global-surface-warming-hiatus
If it takes more
courageevidence to admit you’re wrong, look at this:http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
Tell me, why do you persist in believing the myth? Oh, I think I answered that already!
Another of Horne’s baseless assertions: “No, it did not. “
The facts prove that it did:
http://l.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/u.i.A9hIbX2Ql7L7LC5_jg–/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9Njk5O3E9OTU7dz0xMDE1/http://notrickszone.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/73-climate-models_reality.gif
Next, measuring temperature is not “complex”. Science is simply parroting the new Narrative: “global warming never stopped”. That is contradicted by many years of agreement that global temperatures were in a “hiatus”; AKA: the “pause”.
Next:
Every part of the Earth’s climate system has continued warming since 1998…
That is pure bunkum.
Next, NOAA has been caught repeatedly fabricating the temperature record:
There are more examples of NOAA shenanigans. Just ask, and I’ll post them.
GISS is even more dishonest, if that’s possible:
Tell me, why do you persist in believing fabricated temperatures? Oh, right: you’re a True Believer, so any factoid that feeds yoyr confirmation bias is accepted uncritically, while actual temperatures are rejected.
Aren’t eco-loons amusing? They’ll believe anything government bureaucrats tell them.
dbstealey. The best you can do is steal fake graphs? Goodness.
Next, measuring temperature is not “complex”.
Oh, you’re so funny. Or are you serious?
Sometimes it hard to tell whether you’re a wit or perhaps don’t quite make a full wit!
You’re a lot of fun, dbstealey. Thank you!
As usual, Horne has noting but his baseless opinion, and as usual he refuses to answer questions:
why do you persist in believing fabricated temperatures?
I post verifiable facts, empirical evidence, and data-based measurements. But all Horne does is post his anti-science opinions.
Horne has no credible science, only his constant logical fallacies. That’s why he lost the debate.
A visitor might leave this site thinking Americans are a waste of space. I have to keep reminding myself America is full of wonderful people. Ordinary wonderful people, like Lonnie Thompson:
[Snip. You can post a video titled “Denial” elsewhere. Not here. -mod]
You’d have to have a really warped mind the believe here is anything but a humble and honourable American telling it as it is.
A visitor might leave this site thinking Americans are a waste of space.
A skeptic would find Horne is a waste of pixels.
Don’t kid yourself, dbstealey, you’re not a skeptic. Sucker!
Horne, who elected you to pass judgement? You’re just being a whiny juvenile loser again, with nothing worthwhile to add to the conversation.
I’ve pointed out for years that no climate alarmist can be a scientific skeptic. If they were, they couldn’t be a climate alarmist. There are far too many contradictions falsifying the ‘carbon’ scare.
Alarmists just don’t understand what Planet Earth is saying — and she sure isn’t agreeing with people like Horne.
“Steal”? And “fake” graphics? Horne, you are truly a Dunning-Kreuger nutcase. Re-posting a chart is hardly “stealing”, and you have produced no evidence whatever to show anything I’ve posted is “fake”. But I suppose that’s the best argument you’ve got. That’s why your arguments always fail.
And you say:
… you’re a wit
And you’re a halfwitl…
Skeptics enjoy posting facts, evidence, and measurements — and pointing out when a know-nothing like Horne has nothin’.
And to repeat: there are no scientific skeptics in the climate alarmist crowd. Not a single one. Skeptics are all in the skeptics crowd. Right here. But you’re no skeptic. You’re only a True Believer.
Occasionally a clueless nincompoop posts here, but it’s without facts, or evidence, or measurements. Those folks are never scientific skeptics. They’re simply True Believers; eco-religionists, who don’t understand skepticism, the Null Hypothesis, or even basic science.
That’s why they can never win a science-based argument.
Agreed. But I notice Horne, like all loyal climateers, avoids answering the question about the so-called “tipping point”. Funny how, despite the billions spent on playing with supercomputers and climate models, no one can give even a rough estimate on what atmospheric CO2 level in ppm will trigger it. Why is that I wonder? Answer: they know it’s a load of bollocks. Yet it’s a simple question. They bleat about CO2 levels increasing from a vanishingly small 0.0385% to a vanishingly small 0.04% and claim how significant that is and how close we are to “the point of no return”, yet they refuse to specify when and what that point will be.
So Mr. Horne: The ‘Tipping Point’ (ie., the “point of no return” for planet earth’s climate system) => CO2 at …ppm.
Please fill in the blank. Al Gore might know. Or Prince Charles. Or maybe even Leonardo deCaprio. They must know because they’re always bleating about it.
Earth is retaining more energy due to more greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, that is, man’s emission of CO2 (and methane). That means warming and loss of ice. It was predicted and it is happening.
Man-made climate change is a simple fact, that no internationally-recognised scientific institution or society rejects. No government rejects it. No informed scientist refutes it. Nobody thinking rationally spurns it. Because a strong consensus is our best view of reality. Always was … always will be.
Just how bad the changes will be is not known. Depends on how well we control what we can and adapt to what we can’t.
The science is settled and the nay-sayers are barking at the moon. Woof-woof…
Horne is still spouting his logical fallacy. He can’t learn.
And dogboi, the planet has hardly warmed at all for the past twenty years. That debunks your belief system. Everyone here sees it but you.
And still Horne refuses to answer the question.
Why?
Because he has no answer.
But he’s VERY good at repeating a mantra like a robot, a loyal “yes!” man, tapping his finger at the chapter and verse from holy writ… “But it says here in the sacred texts of the IPCC . . . !”, he says again. But no one is listening to his religious hype except other obedient and loyal believers. Tap, tap tap, goes his finger on the page of the sacred text of the Received Wisdom. . . “It’s all in here!” he says.
So then, answer the question: The ‘Tipping Point’ (ie., the “point of no return” for planet earth’s climate system) => CO2 at …ppm.
Fill in the blank Mr. Horne. You should be able to locate it in the Received Wisdom, the book of holy writ.
Not the Royal Society, US National Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Physical Society, American Chemical Society, American Meteorological Society, or any other scientific society or institution on the planet.
Never mind. Science advances one funeral at a time (Planck). Still time for you yet…
Horne, you’re slipping. You left out lots of other professional organizations that were bought and paid for, to buy into the “man-made global warming” scare:
The Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences, the Palestine Academy, the Sudan Academy of Sciences, the Ecological Society, the Natural Environment Research Council, the Nigerian Academy, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Canadian Society of Zoologists, the Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada, the American Anthropological Association, the Association of Wildlife Veterinarians, the American Fisheries Society, the Romanian Academy, the Royal Irish Academy, the Society of American Foresters, the The Wildlife Society (international), the Society of Systematic Biologists, the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, the National Association of State Foresters, the Islamic World Academy of Sciences, the Crop Science Society of America, the Australian Medical Association… and dozens more.
That’s your stupid logical fallacy. Those organizations can be bought, cheap. But what does a Pediatric Association or a Vetrinary Association know about climate science? Answer: Not as much as the average reader here.
But I understand that’s about the only argument you have, so you run with it. But it’s still a logical fallacy, and you still lose the science debate.
Still can’t see the difference between an appeal to an authority or one expert person and accepting a strong scientific consensus — the whole basis of our reality? (Unless you have a religious vision?)
Why would anyone think a group of self-styled experts with nary a published paper between them were more expert and likely to be right than the global community of informed scientists — with tens of thousands of peer-reviewed papers?
Better Plead The Third on that one!
https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/496:_Secretary:_Part_3
Karl, get a clue. Your “97%” nonsense has been so thoroughly debunked that rational folks laugh at people who try to use it as an argument. Do a search for ‘97%’ here, and get educated.
Horne’s “experts” are bought and paid for shills, as the Climategate emails proved. And they’re heavily outnumbered by honest scientists.
[Note: ‘Karl’ is an impostor. His comments have been deleted. -mod]
Wishing your opponents dead. Nice. Maybe that could be labeled the Mean Girls Fallacy.
OK I listened to the podcast. I can understand why the Guardian reader types are angry.
The interview was a bit soft as if the interviewer was James’s friend, yet that is the type of interview we get for alarmists all the time.
The volcano point was not critical to the discussion, he was just pointing out that they do produce a lot of varying CO2, so you can’t just ignore them.
The main thing was that climate was 25% of the interview
Other areas were about the PM and smoking dope, and and his love of fox hunting.
– There is a direct mp3 download of the podcast without using iTunes On the Podbean page
How much do you suppose it would cost to buy the US Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Physical Society, American Chemical Society, American Meteorological Society … ?
And who is paying them? Must be the same lot that blew up the WTC and faked the moon landing.
And why? Must be about control. Like trying to stop gun massacres in the US. That sort of thing. Stopping Americans burning
nearly alltheir fair share of the world’s supply of oil … Or something.Horne asks:
How much do you suppose it would cost to buy the US Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Physical Society, American Chemical Society, American Meteorological Society … ?
Not very much. In many cases they do it free, out of Leftist ideology. Lindzen explains how it works, and he names names. I’d post the link, but your mind is closed so tight you wouldn’t read it.
And:
Must be the same lot that blew up the WTC and faked the moon landing.
It’s your side that believes the moon landings were faked. But what does the WTC have to do with all those professional orgs issuing ‘authoratative’ statements about global warming? You know — groups like the Association of Pediatrics, Veterinarians, etc. Only a fool would believe there’s only selfless altruism behind their actions.
It’s about control and payola, it’s not about science. And I am happily burning my share of fossil fuels — and your share, too. You are a hypocrite to complain about it, because you use fossil fuels just like anyone else.
dbstealey: “your side”
You should have stuck with playing cowboys and Indians. Or are you in your second childhood?
“it’s not about science”
Who would take your word against that of the US National Academy of Sciences and the American Society for the Advancement of Science?
Only a wee daftie. (You’ve got quite a following here!)
“Your side” is the climate alarmist side. Planet Earth disagrees with you. Therefore, rational folks reject your beliefs.
And of course, you’re fixated on your logical fallacy. It’s clear that you cannot help yourself. That logical fallacy is your psychological fixation. It controls you.
And:
You’ve got quite a following here!
You don’t.
So now let’s hear your ‘consensus’ argument.
It is evident that the rats are fleeing their sinking ship now that they have been found out.
Pass me the shotgun.
PS: nice one DBS !
Regards,
WL