On 23 Oct, 09:59, Alastair wrote:
On 22 Oct, 21:36, "lawrence jenkins" wrote:
"Alan Gardiner" wrote in message
...
Scott W wrote:
The botanist has added his two penneth to the debate in a rather
interesting piece in the comment section of today's (Monday) Times...
It starts:
"Am I worried about man-made global warming? The answer is "no" and
"yes".
No, because the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction has come up
against an "inconvenient truth". Its research shows that since 1998
the average temperature of the planet has not risen, even though the
concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has continued to
increase.
Yes, because the self-proclaimed consensus among scientists has
detached itself from the questioning rigours of hard science and
become a political cause. Those of us who dare to question the dogma
of the global-warming doomsters who claim that C not only stands for
carbon but also for climate catastrophe are vilified as heretics or
worse as deniers..."
The full article is at
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...st_contributor...
The following appears on the Met Office Hadley centre website. It does not
support the assertion that the Hadley Centre has come up against an
"inconvenient truth".
The graphs of global temperature have always shown a marked fluctaution
from year to year as there are many factors affecting global temperatures.
Alan
11 October 2007
Following the High Court ruling on the climate change film An Inconvenient
Truth - by Al Gore, the Met Office today welcomes the outcome.
The Met Office advised the Department for Children Schools and Families
(DCSF) on the guidance that will now go with the film, and also helped all
those involved in the case gain a complete understanding of what is known
about climate change and where uncertainties remain.
Director Climate Science John Mitchell said: "The Met Office is pleased
that the evidence for climate change had been accepted in a British court
of law in line with the IPCC findings that warming our planet is
unequivocal, and that it is very likely that most of this warming is
caused by man-made greenhouse gases.
"We welcome the fact that such an accessible film is being shown to
schools so that young people will be informed on climate change and
encouraged to engage with the issues that will affect their future."
The Met Office continuously works closely with DCSF, providing educational
aids on both weather and climate change.
I believe the Met Office has increasinhgly become a tool for this present
Governments propaganda wagon. That would explain all the rubbish that's been
on the MO website the last several years about working with NHS PCT's to
possibly save the the odd life once in a blue moon. It's Smoke & Mirrors
stuff; you exagerate a problem here that really needs no solving and yet
ignore major problems over there like MRSA C-Diff and violent crime in our
major cities to name a few
I wouldn't be surprised if major appointments at the Met Office over the
recent years have had a GW agenda with those favourable to the IPCC stance
selected it happens all the time know in state run indistries and the
private sector that's funded by tax payers money.
I thought the UKMO's web site congratulations to that total hypocrite Al
Gore was a disgrace and politically motivated from above and Labour Party
appointments over recent years.
There are some here that can confirm one way or another.
Well Lawrence, it seems that your wish is coming true.
Today the the Guardian is reporting that
"According to the [leaked] papers, John Hutton, the secretary of state
for business, will tell Mr Brown that Britain should work with Poland
and other governments sceptical about climate change to "help
persuade" German chancellor Angela Merkel and others to set lower
renewable targets, before binding commitments are framed in December."
The full article is hehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...eenergy.energy
Does that mean that you will be voting Labour at the next electon or
are you still going to support that greenie David Cameron?
Cheers, Alastair.
There is another article in today's Guardian Unlimited which is
related the one just posted.
"Steep decline in oil production brings risk of war and unrest, says
new study"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,,2196435,00.html
It is about a report which 'presents a bleak view of the future unless
a radically different approach is adopted. It quotes the British
energy economist David Fleming as saying: "Anticipated supply
shortages could lead easily to disturbing scenes of mass unrest as
witnessed in Burma this month. For government, industry and the wider
public, just muddling through is not an option any more as this
situation could spin out of control and turn into a complete meltdown
of society."'
But there is no need to panic. 'Yesterday, a spokesman for the
Department of Business and Enterprise said: "Over the next few years
global oil production and refining capacity is expected to increase
faster than demand. The world's oil resources are sufficient to
sustain economic growth for the foreseeable future. The challenge will
be to bring these resources to market in a way that ensures
sustainable, timely, reliable and affordable supplies of energy."'
Cheers, Alastair.
M