Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is a
scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful in
persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by CO2.
That is all the big oil and coal companies need - doubt - to prevent there
being an upswell from the public to persuade the govenrment to act. Here is
a message from Greenpeace for those of you who have not been fooled by
Lawrence, and his sock puppet Dawlish, into believing that AGW is just a
childish argument.

Dear All,

The devastating floods spreading across the country are causing havoc for
everyone caught in their path, and arguments about who's to blame for the
current crisis are dragging on.

Yet very few politicians or journalists are talking about what's really
causing the extremes of weather we've experienced in recent years: climate
change.

What I find particularly absurd is that environment secretary Owen
Paterson - who is a key player in shaping the government's policies on
climate change, including tackling the floods - refuses to accept climate
change is part of the problem. It doesn't make sense.

We can't afford to have a denier like Paterson in a position responsible for
climate change, so tell David Cameron to replace him with an Environment
Secretary who's serious about climate change.

A few days ago, the chief scientist at the Met Office said the evidence
suggests the floods are consistent with climate change predictions. She
knows a thing or two about climate, as do other scientific advisors, yet
Paterson has been ignoring them since he became environment secretary 18
months ago.

The evidence keeps stacking up. He hasn't had a single briefing on climate
change since he took up the job, and we've heard he won't even look at a
document that so much as mentions it.

He's made statements in public about climate change which are factually
incorrect, and also said that "people get very emotional about [climate
change] and I think we should just accept that the climate has been changing
for centuries." If your house or business is currently underwater, you'd be
emotional, and understandably so.

This all explains why climate change spending in Paterson's department has
been cut almost in half since he took charge and staff working on it have
been slashed from 38 to just six.

It's insane. How can Cameron claim his government is serious about climate
change when he has a denier like Paterson is in such a crucial role?

Please sign the petition. Cameron has to get Paterson away from anything to
do with climate change - he's a complete liability who's undermining any
attempts to get a grip on the situation.

In exasperation,

Jamie

PS Very few people are making the link between climate change and the
floods. Carbon Brief analysed newspaper stories on the floods and found that
in over 3000 published since the beginning of December, only 206 mentioned
climate change. If the media aren't talking about it, it's up to us - sign
and share the petition telling David Cameron to get serious about the
impacts of climate change.

On Saturday, 15 February 2014 23:04:03 UTC, Alastair wrote:
Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is a

scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful in

persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by CO2.

That is all the big oil and coal companies need - doubt - to prevent there

being an upswell from the public to persuade the govenrment to act. Here is

a message from Greenpeace for those of you who have not been fooled by

Lawrence, and his sock puppet Dawlish, into believing that AGW is just a

childish argument.



Dear All,



The devastating floods spreading across the country are causing havoc for

everyone caught in their path, and arguments about who's to blame for the

current crisis are dragging on.



Yet very few politicians or journalists are talking about what's really

causing the extremes of weather we've experienced in recent years: climate

change.



What I find particularly absurd is that environment secretary Owen

Paterson - who is a key player in shaping the government's policies on

climate change, including tackling the floods - refuses to accept climate

change is part of the problem. It doesn't make sense.



We can't afford to have a denier like Paterson in a position responsible for

climate change, so tell David Cameron to replace him with an Environment

Secretary who's serious about climate change.



A few days ago, the chief scientist at the Met Office said the evidence

suggests the floods are consistent with climate change predictions. She

knows a thing or two about climate, as do other scientific advisors, yet

Paterson has been ignoring them since he became environment secretary 18

months ago.



The evidence keeps stacking up. He hasn't had a single briefing on climate

change since he took up the job, and we've heard he won't even look at a

document that so much as mentions it.



He's made statements in public about climate change which are factually

incorrect, and also said that "people get very emotional about [climate

change] and I think we should just accept that the climate has been changing

for centuries." If your house or business is currently underwater, you'd be

emotional, and understandably so.



This all explains why climate change spending in Paterson's department has

been cut almost in half since he took charge and staff working on it have

been slashed from 38 to just six.



It's insane. How can Cameron claim his government is serious about climate

change when he has a denier like Paterson is in such a crucial role?



Please sign the petition. Cameron has to get Paterson away from anything to

do with climate change - he's a complete liability who's undermining any

attempts to get a grip on the situation.



In exasperation,



Jamie



PS Very few people are making the link between climate change and the

floods. Carbon Brief analysed newspaper stories on the floods and found that

in over 3000 published since the beginning of December, only 206 mentioned

climate change. If the media aren't talking about it, it's up to us - sign

and share the petition telling David Cameron to get serious about the

impacts of climate change.


Alastair

I'm not saying climate change is a scam, I truly believe that climate is changing as it always has done and I believe that humans have had some influence. I'm not in the pay, as you suggest of big oil and to be honest I'm flattered you think my arguments are that persuasive. But really I'm an idiot but an honest idiot.

On Sunday, 16 February 2014 00:07:04 UTC, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:
On Saturday, 15 February 2014 23:04:03 UTC, Alastair wrote:

He's made statements in public about climate change which are factually
incorrect
Please sign the petition. Cameron has to get Paterson away from anything to
do with climate change.

Oh dear; somebody on the Internet is wrong.
Where do I sign?

I'm flattered you think my arguments are that persuasive. But really I'm an idiot but an honest idiot.

I doubt anyone cares what you think. You are a bollock brain for mugging up to a troll that isn't even a good troll. Your endless repetition about something that only had to be said once marks you as very dawlish.

There is nothing you can do about that nor is there anything to be done for you. One or two regulars respond to you now and again but only because they exhibit a slightly less virulent infection.

Incapable of stopping responding altogether, it doesn't necessarily mean they are more immune than you. Just less reactive to the same conditions than your symptoms on that subject.

On Saturday, 15 February 2014 23:04:03 UTC, Alastair wrote:
Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is a scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful in persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by CO2. That is all the big oil and coal companies need - doubt - to prevent there being an upswell from the public to persuade the govenrment to act. Here is a message from Greenpeace for those of you who have not been fooled by Lawrence, and his sock puppet Dawlish, into believing that AGW is just a childish argument. Dear All, The devastating floods spreading across the country are causing havoc for everyone caught in their path, and arguments about who's to blame for the current crisis are dragging on. Yet very few politicians or journalists are talking about what's really causing the extremes of weather we've experienced in recent years: climate change. What I find particularly absurd is that environment secretary Owen Paterson - who is a key player in shaping the government's policies on climate change, including tackling the floods - refuses to accept climate change is part of the problem. It doesn't make sense. We can't afford to have a denier like Paterson in a position responsible for climate change, so tell David Cameron to replace him with an Environment Secretary who's serious about climate change. A few days ago, the chief scientist at the Met Office said the evidence suggests the floods are consistent with climate change predictions. She knows a thing or two about climate, as do other scientific advisors, yet Paterson has been ignoring them since he became environment secretary 18 months ago. The evidence keeps stacking up. He hasn't had a single briefing on climate change since he took up the job, and we've heard he won't even look at a document that so much as mentions it. He's made statements in public about climate change which are factually incorrect, and also said that "people get very emotional about [climate change] and I think we should just accept that the climate has been changing for centuries." If your house or business is currently underwater, you'd be emotional, and understandably so. This all explains why climate change spending in Paterson's department has been cut almost in half since he took charge and staff working on it have been slashed from 38 to just six. It's insane. How can Cameron claim his government is serious about climate change when he has a denier like Paterson is in such a crucial role? Please sign the petition. Cameron has to get Paterson away from anything to do with climate change - he's a complete liability who's undermining any attempts to get a grip on the situation. In exasperation, Jamie PS Very few people are making the link between climate change and the floods. Carbon Brief analysed newspaper stories on the floods and found that in over 3000 published since the beginning of December, only 206 mentioned climate change. If the media aren't talking about it, it's up to us - sign and share the petition telling David Cameron to get serious about the impacts of climate change.

Since when has Dawlish been Lawrence's sock puppet and even more inexplicably, since when has he been an AGW denier. You may not like his style but on this subject he talks sense.
The fundamentalists are not all on one side, you know. While the deniers cannot be argued with because it's a religion for them, or at least a convenience, there are those of the Green persuasion who will unjustifiably attribute every episode of bad weather to AGW. I have had experience of this from a friend who stood as a Green candidate in a council election. He now "owns" the weather but actually knows very little and seemingly doesn't want to. My views were rubbished as were the Met Office and the Royal Met Soc. At this point I gave up, obviously.
I think Graham Easterling may have something to say on this. From his own measurements over a long period he has stated that storminess in the last 20 years has been quite low. This has to be set against the current episode. So has AGW had a hand in this latest stuff? Maybe. Maybe not.
I'm not an AGW denier, BTW. There is a strong human contribution to the warming. But does it cause stormy weather? May do. I've no idea.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

On 15/02/2014 23:04, Alastair McDonald wrote:
Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is a
scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful in
persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by CO2.

Don't look at me - I've blocked his posts...

--

Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

"Vidcapper" wrote in message
...
On 15/02/2014 23:04, Alastair McDonald wrote:
Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is a
scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful in
persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by CO2.

Don't look at me - I've blocked his posts...


Same here, along with a number of others. The group is so much
more civilised without them!
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg

Tudor Hughes wrote:
On Saturday, 15 February 2014 23:04:03 UTC, Alastair wrote:
Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is a scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful in persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by CO2. That is all the big oil and coal companies need - doubt - to prevent there being an upswell from the public to persuade the govenrment to act. Here is a message from Greenpeace for those of you who have not been fooled by Lawrence, and his sock puppet Dawlish, into believing that AGW is just a childish argument. Dear All, The devastating floods spreading across the country are causing havoc for everyone caught in their path, and arguments about who's to blame for the current crisis are dragging on. Yet very few politicians or journalists are talking about what's really causing the extremes of weather we've experienced in recent years: climate change. What I find particularly absurd is that environment secretary Owen Paterson - who is a key player in shaping
the government's policies on climate change, including tackling the floods - refuses to accept climate change is part of the problem. It doesn't make sense. We can't afford to have a denier like Paterson in a position responsible for climate change, so tell David Cameron to replace him with an Environment Secretary who's serious about climate change. A few days ago, the chief scientist at the Met Office said the evidence suggests the floods are consistent with climate change predictions. She knows a thing or two about climate, as do other scientific advisors, yet Paterson has been ignoring them since he became environment secretary 18 months ago. The evidence keeps stacking up. He hasn't had a single briefing on climate change since he took up the job, and we've heard he won't even look at a document that so much as mentions it. He's made statements in public about climate change which are factually incorrect, and also said that "people get very emotional about [climate chan
ge] and I think we should just accept that the climate has been changing for centuries." If your house or business is currently underwater, you'd be emotional, and understandably so. This all explains why climate change spending in Paterson's department has been cut almost in half since he took charge and staff working on it have been slashed from 38 to just six. It's insane. How can Cameron claim his government is serious about climate change when he has a denier like Paterson is in such a crucial role? Please sign the petition. Cameron has to get Paterson away from anything to do with climate change - he's a complete liability who's undermining any attempts to get a grip on the situation. In exasperation, Jamie PS Very few people are making the link between climate change and the floods. Carbon Brief analysed newspaper stories on the floods and found that in over 3000 published since the beginning of December, only 206 mentioned climate change. If the media aren't talking a
bout it, it's up to us - sign and share the petition telling David Cameron to get serious about the impacts of climate change.

Since when has Dawlish been Lawrence's sock puppet and even more inexplicably, since when has he been an AGW denier. You may not like his style but on this subject he talks sense.
The fundamentalists are not all on one side, you know. While the deniers cannot be argued with because it's a religion for them, or at least a convenience, there are those of the Green persuasion who will unjustifiably attribute every episode of bad weather to AGW. I have had experience of this from a friend who stood as a Green candidate in a council election. He now "owns" the weather but actually knows very little and seemingly doesn't want to. My views were rubbished as were the Met Office and the Royal Met Soc. At this point I gave up, obviously.
I think Graham Easterling may have something to say on this. From his own measurements over a long period he has stated that storminess in the last 20 years has been quite low. This has to be set against the current episode. So has AGW had a hand in this latest stuff? Maybe. Maybe not.
I'm not an AGW denier, BTW. There is a strong human contribution to the warming. But does it cause stormy weather? May do. I've no idea.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

----------------------------------------
A voice of reason. Pretty much what I think. We have had few storms in
the last 10 years here and I've posted about the lack of strong
westerlies many times in recent years. On the other hand having been
watching Nature for decades I see evidence of earlier Springs and birds
coming to stay from warmer climates. It is the changes and extent of
change in weather that climate change causes that is the biggest
question for me.
Dave

On Sun, 16 Feb 2014 07:43:15 +0000, Vidcapper wrote:

On 15/02/2014 23:04, Alastair McDonald wrote:
Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is
a scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful
in persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by
CO2.

Don't look at me - I've blocked his posts...

Me too! And any follow ups that include a google-group reference; now I
don't see him at all, and the group is quite pleasant again.

On 2014-02-16 05:11:06 +0000, Tudor Hughes said:

On Saturday, 15 February 2014 23:04:03 UTC, Alastair wrote:
Every day we get a post from Lawrence explaining how climate change is
a scam. It seems that his drip drip approach has been fairly successful
in persuading people that there is doubt about whether it is caused by
CO2. That is all the big oil and coal companies need - doubt - to
prevent there being an upswell from the public to persuade the
govenrment to act. Here is a message from Greenpeace for those of you
who have not been fooled by Lawrence, and his sock puppet Dawlish, into
believing that AGW is just a childish argument. Dear All, The
devastating floods spreading across the country are causing havoc for
everyone caught in their path, and arguments about who's to blame for
the current crisis are dragging on. Yet very few politicians or
journalists are talking about what's really causing the extremes of
weather we've experienced in recent years: climate change. What I find
particularly absurd is that environment secretary Owen Paterson - who
is a key player in shaping the government's policies on climate change,
including tackling the floods - refuses to accept climate change is
part of the problem. It doesn't make sense. We can't afford to have a
denier like Paterson in a position responsible for climate change, so
tell David Cameron to replace him with an Environment Secretary who's
serious about climate change. A few days ago, the chief scientist at
the Met Office said the evidence suggests the floods are consistent
with climate change predictions. She knows a thing or two about
climate, as do other scientific advisors, yet Paterson has been
ignoring them since he became environment secretary 18 months ago. The
evidence keeps stacking up. He hasn't had a single briefing on climate
change since he took up the job, and we've heard he won't even look at
a document that so much as mentions it. He's made statements in public
about climate change which are factually incorrect, and also said that
"people get very emotional about [climate change] and I think we should
just accept that the climate has been changing for centuries." If your
house or business is currently underwater, you'd be emotional, and
understandably so. This all explains why climate change spending in
Paterson's department has been cut almost in half since he took charge
and staff working on it have been slashed from 38 to just six. It's
insane. How can Cameron claim his government is serious about climate
change when he has a denier like Paterson is in such a crucial role?
Please sign the petition. Cameron has to get Paterson away from
anything to do with climate change - he's a complete liability who's
undermining any attempts to get a grip on the situation. In
exasperation, Jamie PS Very few people are making the link between
climate change and the floods. Carbon Brief analysed newspaper stories
on the floods and found that in over 3000 published since the beginning
of December, only 206 mentioned climate change. If the media aren't
talking about it, it's up to us - sign and share the petition telling
David Cameron to get serious about the impacts of climate change.

Since when has Dawlish been Lawrence's sock puppet and even
more inexplicably, since when has he been an AGW denier. You may not
like his style but on this subject he talks sense.
The fundamentalists are not all on one side, you know. While
the deniers cannot be argued with because it's a religion for them, or
at least a convenience, there are those of the Green persuasion who
will unjustifiably attribute every episode of bad weather to AGW. I
have had experience of this from a friend who stood as a Green
candidate in a council election. He now "owns" the weather but
actually knows very little and seemingly doesn't want to. My views were
rubbished as were the Met Office and the Royal Met Soc. At this point
I gave up, obviously.
I think Graham Easterling may have something to say on this.
From his own measurements over a long period he has stated that
storminess in the last 20 years has been quite low. This has to be set
against the current episode. So has AGW had a hand in this latest
stuff? Maybe. Maybe not.
I'm not an AGW denier, BTW. There is a strong human contribution
to the warming. But does it cause stormy weather? May do. I've no
idea.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.


I think that the problem is always going to be increase CO2 = AGW =
Climate change is always going to be a reasoned association, rather
than a direct proof. And for the deniers, this is always going to be a
case of "ah, but where is the proof?", when you challenge their
religion.

Even with the benefit of hindsight, people can look back and still be
unsure of whether certain extreme events were just that - or were the
results of the planet heating up.

It does seem interesting that in advance of every major ice age
(according to the frozen core samples that seem to be used as evidence
of our miniscule effect on planetary climate) there has been a
relatively short period of rapid warming. But who can say, without
guessing, that our current period is part of this trend, or wholly due
to human activity?

It is no good relying on the politicians to do anything responsible,
unless they believe there are votes in it. So, maybe these severe
weather events will serve to make the public vote for those who have
disaster prevention high on their agenda? Only then will the senior
politicians ignore their vested interest corporate lobby groups and
take notice of the people.

On Sunday, 16 February 2014 03:51:43 UTC, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Sunday, 16 February 2014 00:07:04 UTC, Lawrence Jenkins wrote:

On Saturday, 15 February 2014 23:04:03 UTC, Alastair wrote:



He's made statements in public about climate change which are factually

incorrect

Please sign the petition. Cameron has to get Paterson away from anything to

do with climate change.



Oh dear; somebody on the Internet is wrong.

Where do I sign?



I'm flattered you think my arguments are that persuasive. But really I'm an idiot but an honest idiot.



I doubt anyone cares what you think. You are a bollock brain for mugging up to a troll that isn't even a good troll. Your endless repetition about something that only had to be said once marks you as very dawlish.



There is nothing you can do about that nor is there anything to be done for you. One or two regulars respond to you now and again but only because they exhibit a slightly less virulent infection.



Incapable of stopping responding altogether, it doesn't necessarily mean they are more immune than you. Just less reactive to the same conditions than your symptoms on that subject.



Why are you responding then, you sad moonbat