| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Why do climate alarmists so vehemently attack anyone who questions Kyoto science? Please pick the answer that you consider most important |
| They are afraid people will see the vast uncertainty in the field and so question today's climate hysteria |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| They are hysterical and can't even consider that there may be an alternative viewpoint to their own |
|
8% |
[ 3 ] |
| They believe it is the end of the world and so those who dare to question are anti-environmental and deserve to be punished |
|
5% |
[ 2 ] |
| They are funded by vested interests who stand to make vast fortunes in a carbon constrained world |
|
16% |
[ 6 ] |
| All of the above |
|
64% |
[ 24 ] |
| Other - please explain |
|
5% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 37 |
|
| Author |
Message |
 Mark FournierMember
Joined: 06 Jan 2001 Total posts: 15602 Location: Kingston, ON Gender: Male
|
 Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 11:48 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | Even if one were one to agree that the scientific case for potentially catastrophic man-made climate change was closed, which it is not, there would still be three unavoidable facts about the pretensions of climate policy. Each of these facts is assiduously avoided by fans of draconian action. The first is that Canada could not meet its obligations under the Kyoto Accord without decimating the economy. The second is that if it were to achieve this suicidal goal, the impact on global climate would be zero. Finally, even if all the signatories to Kyoto were to meet their targets (which they won't), the impact on global temperatures would be minimal. Kyoto was just one draconian step towards a much more draconian future.
It is hard to understand why the Conservatives do not hammer away at these facts. |
One has to hope it is base cowardice because if it is not the answer is much more sinister.
Seeing just one federal government step forward and thoroughly denounce Kyoto would be a thing of beauty. If the next Canadian election is run on the environment the Conservatives should take the challenge head on. They should treat the issue and those who promote it with the dripping contempt they deserve.
I would love to see Mr. Harper say to Dion, "OK, in simple terms explain to Canadians how sending billions of dollars to China will improve the climate. Before you can expect them to take such actions you should be able to very clearly explain why it would work."
If they try to cop out by starting with, "Scientists agree that...", stop them right there and say, "No, we are not interested in a so-called concensus, we are interested in plainspeak. Tell us how sending billions of dollars out of the country will alter the climate."
Don't let up for a second, everytime the Kyoto Kooks start spouting their logical fallacies hit them hard and hold them to an answer until they are left sputtering.
_________________
"If it takes force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with your ideas. If you are willing to use force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with you." - Entropy Squared |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sponsor
|
Use PayPal to make regular monthly $20 donations to the free speech cause - quit any time! Or make a one time donation!
|
 |
Less Ottawa
Joined: 15 Mar 2006 Total posts: 405 Location: Central Alberta Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Entropy Squared wrote: | | I would love to see Mr. Harper say to Dion, "OK, in simple terms explain to Canadians how sending billions of dollars to China will improve the climate ... |
It gets worse than that. I reproduced a story from Radio Netherlands in this thread, showing that some projects - including Chinese ones - that have been approved under Kyoto's Clean Development Mechanism are actually increasing global greenhouse gas emissions, and resulting in the emission of other toxic air pollution as well.
Under Kyoto, Western taxpayers are actually subsidizing an increase in emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollution into the atmosphere, while their governments lie to them that the Kyoto Accord will result in decreases. This isn't conjecture or a controversial theory, it is a fact.
The "environmentalists" have now put themselves in a position where they have to defend a mechanism that has resulted in the emission of hydrofluorocarbons into the atmosphere. It will be a joy to watch.
Part of the reason the "Kyoto kooks" are so angry these days is that even they are slowly coming to the realization that the leaders of this movement are fundamentally incompetent in everything they say and do. Unfortunately, they don't have the political skills or intelligence to figure out how to get out of the corner they are painting themselves in to - so they lash out at critics.
The Clean Development Mechanism will literally be a goldmine of information, as project after project turns out to be an absolute boondoggle of historic proportions. I am presently following another boondoggle in the making in South Africa, and will post some articles about it shortly.
ES, I do wish to respectfully part company with you on the issue of the Conservative Party. In my view, they have no more credibility on this issue than any of the other federal parties. In fact, they have been more inconsistent and dishonest about their environmental policies than the other parties. True conservatives should abandon them, in my view.
At some point, the Kyoto bubble is going burst, and when it does, it's going to be beautiful baby. That will be a good time to be on the right side of the issue, and in a party that has taken a principled stand against the complicated scam known as Kyoto.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Striking Thoughts Joined: 24 Nov 2004 Total posts: 950 Age: 41 Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Without reading the thread contents, I selected "Other" because I feel it is a pretty even split between choices 1 and 4. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Mark Fournier Member
Joined: 06 Jan 2001 Total posts: 15602 Location: Kingston, ON Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Less Ottawa wrote: | | ES, I do wish to respectfully part company with you on the issue of the Conservative Party. In my view, they have no more credibility on this issue than any of the other federal parties. |
We don't part company on that issue, Less Ottawa. It appears the CPC has partaken of the Kyoto Koolaid. As long as they are saying, "We should do this..." within the framework of Kyoto they cannot be trusted to actually deal with the problems Kyoto creates.
_________________
"If it takes force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with your ideas. If you are willing to use force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with you." - Entropy Squared |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fourhorses
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The answer (or mantra) should be:
The science no longer supports the assumptions of the Kyoto Accord. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Tom Harris Joined: 12 Oct 2006 Total posts: 341 Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 2:20 pm Post subject: If the science is wrong, then nothing else matters |
|
|
I completely agree with fourhorses that the ultimate aim is to create a situation where the CPC can say assertively, "The science no longer supports the assumptions of the Kyoto Accord."
However, politically this cannot be done overnight without the Conservatives taking what they consider to be an unacceptable hit (do people think they would really lose votes with this statement (from Canadians who would otherwise vote for them, that is?).
So, the solution put on this site a little while ago by Tina is one I would support as well - namely, they don't take sides at all and admit they don't know and so are holding unbiased, public hearings in which scientists from both sides are invited to testify. The resulting chaos, with claims all over the map, will do enough to thoroughly confuse everyone (which is appropriate, actually, since the science is so immature and, frankly, confusing) and take the wind out of the sails of the "we are causing a climate disaster and must stop it" camp entirely, and the CPC can quietly turn to important issues without really having had to say much at all.
What's wrong with this approach?
Sincerely,
Tom Harris, Executive Director, Natural Resources Stewardship Project
Web: www.nrsp.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fourhorses
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 2:41 pm Post subject: Re: If the science is wrong, then nothing else matters |
|
|
| Tom Harris wrote: | I completely agree with fourhorses that the ultimate aim is to create a situation where the CPC can say assertively, "The science no longer supports the assumptions of the Kyoto Accord."
However, politically this cannot be done overnight without the Conservatives taking what they consider to be an unacceptable hit (do people think they would really lose votes with this statement (from Canadians who would otherwise vote for them, that is?).
So, the solution put on this site a little while ago by Tina is one I would support as well - namely, they don't take sides at all and admit they don't know and so are holding unbiased, public hearings in which scientists from both sides are invited to testify. The resulting chaos, with claims all over the map, will do enough to thoroughly confuse everyone (which is appropriate, actually, since the science is so immature and, frankly, confusing) and take the wind out of the sails of the "we are causing a climate disaster and must stop it" camp entirely, and the CPC can quietly turn to important issues without really having had to say much at all.
What's wrong with this approach?
Sincerely,
Tom Harris, Executive Director, Natural Resources Stewardship Project
Web: www.nrsp.com |
Tom
I believe it is both scientifically sound and politically accurate to say
"The science no longer supports the assumptions of the Kyoto Accord."
The science is confusing as one must peel back the layers and look at the assumtions, models, controls / control points, data measurements, etc. Being in the science realm, you know very well how easy it is to "push results" from data to even a sophisticated science audience, let alone to Johnny Six-Pack.
Tina's point has focus that that the politicians can say
"We are not the experts and admit we do not know, so we are seeking more clarification through consultations, however, the science no loger supports the assumptions that led to the Kyoto Protocols "
I do not believe this is a vote loser. It should reflect the consensus of the common Canadian who is totally confused by the issues. It should also appease those who believe there could be something which warrants further considerations.
It's time for Harper to fish or cut bait. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grig
Joined: 15 Jan 2001 Total posts: 14141
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Entropy Squared wrote: | | Quote: |
It is hard to understand why the Conservatives do not hammer away at these facts. |
One has to hope it is base cowardice because if it is not the answer is much more sinister. |
Nothing sinister about it, it is a natural result of the nature of politics and people.
If public opinion is a point B and the truth is at point A and there is a big distance between them, no political party will succeed by coming out as strong advocates of the truth (point A). They might be able to lead public opinion in that direction, but only a bit at a time, by being not too far off from B. People resist change and won't made a big change unless there is big pain for not changing. No matter how strong a facutal case you have for A, people are swayed more by their appetites, fears and guilt than by logic, facts and truth.
Winning over the public support needed to get the right things done has be done outside the political realm. It is pudits and activists and regulare people that have the freedom to take an ideologically pure position and build support for it. Same applies to abortion, gay marriage etc. etc.
We don't want an liberal activist government, we shouldn't want a conservative activist government either. What we should want is to win over the hearts and minds of the public, then the right thing will be done no matter which party is in power, and that is why right now we might have the wrong thing done no matter what party is in power.
_________________
Watch the Victory Video!!!
http://www.freedominion.ca/grig/theatre.htm
Comment on video at: http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=53779 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fourhorses
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This country is looking for leadership and what we need is our leader to come out and unequivocally say:
"The right thing to do is ..... "
No hedging
No buts,
No umhs, awhs,
No dithering,
No wringing of the hands
The right thing to do is .....
Go ahead and keep repeating it until you are comfortable.
The right thing to do is .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| bulldog905 Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2001 Total posts: 16304 Gender: Unknown
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grig, we are not asking the Government. to undo anything with Kyoto and Global warming.
We are asking them not to start it.(As opposed to reversing SSM and abortion).
Sometimes political leadership require courage: Winston Churchill did not wait for public opinion to come around to his side.
Kyoto is the biggest single economic burden that the Government actually has control over.
It would be a combination of cowardice, negligence and malfeseance for a Government to impose it on this country, whether a MSM brainwashed electorate wants it or not.
Kyoto is economic treason, designed so, by the enemies of this country and The West. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| rwebb Joined: 05 Mar 2001 Total posts: 3388 Location: Winnipeg MB Canada Gender: Male
|
| Posted: 01/ 10/ 07 9:42 pm Post subject: Re: I have to wade in here |
|
|
| Tina wrote: | | Absolute increases in temperature are what the greens usually go on about, always citing the high end of the range of computer forcasts of course. |
If that's what you think, then you haven't been listening.
| Quote: | | There have been many times in Earth's history where far faster and larger changes in climate have occured, most of them long before the arrival of humans to the scene. |
Larger, yes. Faster, well, that's open to debate, but it's irrelevant anyway because humans were not around, as you say.
| Quote: | | No question climate change can be, and has in the past frequently been, tough on human settlements. This in no way implies we are contributing to these changes. |
Who said it did? But it doesn't imply the contrary either.
| Quote: | | Instead of the rather silly goal of trying to stop global climate change, we should be focusing on helping people adapt (or in some cases, relocate). Until now, nearly all the funding has been spent on propaganda encouraging people to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to somehow magically "stop climate change". This is a rather huge mistake that even lefties are starting to admit just might be a misguided. |
The mistake was not on trying to stop climate change decades ago, when it may have been possible. The mistake was in dithering about the issue until at this point it may well be unstoppable. But at least we may still be able to slow it down enough.
| Quote: | | many climate experts don't believe humans have even remotely the power to "mess around with climate". Climate can certainly mess with us, though and changes naturally all the time. I doubt we can affect it anymore than sunrise or gravity. |
We have already damaged the ozone layer. We have already created acid rain. We have already increased the atmospheric concentration of CO2 by about 25%. How can you possible say we can't affect it?
| Quote: | | PS: I just sent a small donation to NRSP - look for it soon, Tom! |
The oil industry already provides ample funding for Tom Harris and the NRSP. Why not direct your donation to FD instead? (I'm surprised that FD even allows such blatant fundraising by other groups on its site.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hatrock
Joined: 31 Jan 2002 Total posts: 1303 Gender: Unknown
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grig
Joined: 15 Jan 2001 Total posts: 14141
|
| Posted: 01/ 11/ 07 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bulldog905 wrote: | | Sometimes political leadership require courage: Winston Churchill did not wait for public opinion to come around to his side. |
True, but for a time it kept him out of power until events changed peoples minds. In this situation, if you have the Liberals in power they will rob us blind, then claim credit for averting a disaster that wasn't going to happen in the first place, and forever tar the Conservatives as ignorant, dangerous etc. etc..
_________________
Watch the Victory Video!!!
http://www.freedominion.ca/grig/theatre.htm
Comment on video at: http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=53779 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Grig
Joined: 15 Jan 2001 Total posts: 14141
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fourhorses
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sponsor
|
Use PayPal to make regular monthly $20 donations to the free speech cause - quit any time! Or make a one time donation!
|
|
|
|
