Comments on: Coincidence? http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html Challenging Climate Orthodoxy Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:47:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Alex Cull http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-897 Alex Cull Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:25:39 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-897 Re the Steve Webb article in the Guardian, the commentator batz put it succinctly: "So, you freely admit that you don't get people turning up at your surgery to talk about climate change so you've come up with an ingenious wheeze to give the impression to other MPs that there is such a groundswell of public concern. I'm assuming that if a pro-life, anti-immigration, or pro-BNP group used the same mechanism that you are proposing then you'd be happy with that?" Batz is correct in my opinion: there is not much sign of a groundswell of popular concern re costly CO2 cutting measures. House repossessions: yes. Carbon dioxide: no. Re the Steve Webb article in the Guardian, the commentator batz put it succinctly:

“So, you freely admit that you don’t get people turning up at your surgery to talk about climate change so you’ve come up with an ingenious wheeze to give the impression to other MPs that there is such a groundswell of public concern.

I’m assuming that if a pro-life, anti-immigration, or pro-BNP group used the same mechanism that you are proposing then you’d be happy with that?”

Batz is correct in my opinion: there is not much sign of a groundswell of popular concern re costly CO2 cutting measures. House repossessions: yes. Carbon dioxide: no.

]]> By: geoff chambers http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-896 geoff chambers Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:03:36 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-896 I followed up Dave Gardner’s reference to the article by LibDem MP Steve Webb. He gives links to several of his Ten Green Bloggers who helped organise the campaign to persuade MPs to vote for the 80%. One is cartoonist Tom Fishburne, who has an article on HIS blog, which elicited just one response: Tom Hi ! The EU and Stavros Dimas want to make it known that we fully support this brilliant idea of rallying support for slashing Climate Change and reversing it by as much as possible as soon as possible! We're with you all the way !! Come visit Commissioner Dimas' Blog soon and let him know what you think as well ! http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/dimas/ Cheers Bye for now and best of luck :)) Isn’t there something a bit odd about a Euro Commissioner (apolitical civil servant, and all that) supporting an internal political campaign to influence a vote in the British Parliament? Just asking. I followed up Dave Gardner’s reference to the article by LibDem MP Steve Webb. He gives links to several of his Ten Green Bloggers who helped organise the campaign to persuade MPs to vote for the 80%. One is cartoonist Tom Fishburne, who has an article on HIS blog, which elicited just one response:

Tom Hi !
The EU and Stavros Dimas want to make it known that we fully support this brilliant idea of rallying support for slashing Climate Change and reversing it by as much as possible as soon as possible! We’re with you all the way !!
Come visit Commissioner Dimas’ Blog soon and let him know what you think as well !
http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/dimas/
Cheers Bye for now and best of luck :) )

Isn’t there something a bit odd about a Euro Commissioner (apolitical civil servant, and all that) supporting an internal political campaign to influence a vote in the British Parliament? Just asking.

]]> By: Dave Gardner http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-895 Dave Gardner Wed, 03 Dec 2008 16:16:54 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-895 On the mystery of why MPs voted for an increase from a 60% cut to an 80% cut by 2050, that may have something to do with the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman, Steve Webb. About six months ago, Webb organised a campaign by Green bloggers to get people to turn up in MP constituency surgeries to cajole their MP into wanting an 80% cut. This Guardian article describes the campaign: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/18/climatechange.internet On the mystery of why MPs voted for an increase from a 60% cut to an 80% cut by 2050, that may have something to do with the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman, Steve Webb. About six months ago, Webb organised a campaign by Green bloggers to get people to turn up in MP constituency surgeries to cajole their MP into wanting an 80% cut. This Guardian article describes the campaign:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/18/climatechange.internet

]]> By: Eric Anderson http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-894 Eric Anderson Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:29:54 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-894 Great post. Thanks for keeping on top of this and getting the facts out. Great post. Thanks for keeping on top of this and getting the facts out.

]]> By: Alex Cull http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-893 Alex Cull Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:21:57 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-893 Last month I wrote a letter to my MP re the Climate Change Bill asking why there appears to have been only minimal debate before such a far-reaching commitment was made; no reply yet, but I'll be interested to read it when it comes. Re "green jobs", such as all the frantic decarbonisation work George is calling for - beyond a certain point, doesn't that fall prey to the "broken window" fallacy in economics? On another note - Poznan. For such an allegedly crucial, make-or-break event, the media are being rather quiet about it. I haven't seen anything about it on the TV news, or on the front page of any newspaper or news website. Anyone? Last month I wrote a letter to my MP re the Climate Change Bill asking why there appears to have been only minimal debate before such a far-reaching commitment was made; no reply yet, but I’ll be interested to read it when it comes.

Re “green jobs”, such as all the frantic decarbonisation work George is calling for – beyond a certain point, doesn’t that fall prey to the “broken window” fallacy in economics?

On another note – Poznan. For such an allegedly crucial, make-or-break event, the media are being rather quiet about it. I haven’t seen anything about it on the TV news, or on the front page of any newspaper or news website. Anyone?

]]> By: snowdon http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-892 snowdon Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:06:16 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-892 George "total decarbonisation of the planet" Monbiot is crying out for a fisking today: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/12/02/whistling-in-the-wind/ How long before they carry this loon away? George “total decarbonisation of the planet” Monbiot is crying out for a fisking today:

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2008/12/02/whistling-in-the-wind/

How long before they carry this loon away?

]]> By: Editors http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-891 Editors Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:21:25 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-891 George, Our criticism isn't about taxes, nor the public sector as such. The Climate change bill doesn't - as far as our criticism of it is concerned so far - create taxes. It creates a market, which is exploited by (parts of) the private sector. It is frequently a criticism of the environmental movement that it represents a continuation of the Left, but the market is a substantial part of the UK Government's approach to 'solving the climate crisis'. That's not consistent with much of the Left. As we argue elsewhere, (link forthcoming) the UK Government's strategy is a <i>de facto</i> privatisation of the atmosphere. The Government are well aware that the public is cynical of Green taxes. Regarding your point about public sector workers angling for more tax. Whilst this may have a ring of truth about it, there is a far more fundamental issue here. That is that environmentalism doesn't merely provide the public sector with a ruse for more sustenance in the form of taxes, it also provides them with a <i>raison d'etre</i>. That is to say that the vacuity of the Government (and the same goes for the opposition parties) is hidden behind the urgency of environmental panic. It gives otherwise directionless institutions moral purpose and legitimacy. George,

Our criticism isn’t about taxes, nor the public sector as such.

The Climate change bill doesn’t – as far as our criticism of it is concerned so far – create taxes. It creates a market, which is exploited by (parts of) the private sector. It is frequently a criticism of the environmental movement that it represents a continuation of the Left, but the market is a substantial part of the UK Government’s approach to ‘solving the climate crisis’. That’s not consistent with much of the Left. As we argue elsewhere, (link forthcoming) the UK Government’s strategy is a de facto privatisation of the atmosphere.

The Government are well aware that the public is cynical of Green taxes.

Regarding your point about public sector workers angling for more tax. Whilst this may have a ring of truth about it, there is a far more fundamental issue here. That is that environmentalism doesn’t merely provide the public sector with a ruse for more sustenance in the form of taxes, it also provides them with a raison d’etre. That is to say that the vacuity of the Government (and the same goes for the opposition parties) is hidden behind the urgency of environmental panic. It gives otherwise directionless institutions moral purpose and legitimacy.

]]> By: George Carty http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-890 George Carty Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:32:24 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-890 Is environmentalism so popular with the public-sector middle-class chattering classes, because they can use it to generate more tax revenue to augment their salaries? That's why they support AGW theory (as a pretext for carbon taxes), while opposing nuclear power (in order to ensure that the actual effect of said carbon taxes is to raise revenue rather than to actually reduce CO2 emissions)? Is environmentalism so popular with the public-sector middle-class chattering classes, because they can use it to generate more tax revenue to augment their salaries?

That’s why they support AGW theory (as a pretext for carbon taxes), while opposing nuclear power (in order to ensure that the actual effect of said carbon taxes is to raise revenue rather than to actually reduce CO2 emissions)?

]]> By: Carbon Pride http://www.climate-resistance.org/2008/12/coincidence.html#comment-889 Carbon Pride Tue, 02 Dec 2008 11:41:18 +0000 http://www.climate-resistance.org/?p=243#comment-889 On Radio 4 I was listening to them 'admitting' the fuel bills would be going up as they try to power the country on farts - enter the superhero of the greens... Loft insulation to the rescue! Now putting in Loft insulation is great of course, but, it was already a cure for the recession I thought? My point is you can't magic away problems with yet more Loft insulation - you can't keep adding more insulation to your loft every time heating goes up - I mean aren't Lofts "finite" and insulation a "limited resource" and won't it get stuffy what was temperatures escalating??? On Radio 4 I was listening to them ‘admitting’ the fuel bills would be going up as they try to power the country on farts – enter the superhero of the greens… Loft insulation to the rescue!
Now putting in Loft insulation is great of course, but, it was already a cure for the recession I thought? My point is you can’t magic away problems with yet more Loft insulation – you can’t keep adding more insulation to your loft every time heating goes up – I mean aren’t Lofts “finite” and insulation a “limited resource” and won’t it get stuffy what was temperatures escalating???

]]>