I note in the Guardian there’s a piece finally grasping the reality that has been obvious to every sceptic: Paris was a failure and the Global warming scam is just a way for BIG OIL and other similar interests to either make massive amounts of money (from wind and oil price rises) and/or focus the silly gullible greens on a problem which effectively says: “it’s society’s fault” (Greens are just looking for someone to blame – and blaming other people is a great way to get them off BIG OIL’s back).
I’m in two minds whether this move to face reality is good or bad.
On the one hand, their attacks on the magnificent benefits of our fossil fuel powered economy are just pure evil, but because they are so gullible and because politicians run rings around the green idiots, the Greens have more or less stopped making any progress and to a large extent they are now more or less penned up as any further push to destroy our landscape with birdmincers will result in electoral suicide for greens (if it has not already done that).
So, for all practical purposes, the Green threat is now between a rock and a hardplace (caught in a trap of their own making that “CO2 is the biggest problem in the world” and electoral suicide if they continue pushing it). And with no where to go they are now fairly harmless.
On the other hand – once the Greens jump off the CO2 gravy boat (which is now not so much floating as bobbing along under the water and surfacing each year at cop), they could again start doing real damage to our society and economy … and yes also to the environment (they are one of the worst destroyers of our wilderness in Scotland).
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/20/climate-change-dirty-air-pollution-global-warming-save-lives
‘Climate change may give us a glimpse of the terrifying future we are heading towards if we don’t change our ways’
No surprise to see the Guardian still printing such barking mad assertions. As long as they are so far from sanity few except die-hard warmists will take them seriously.
Maybe as you suggest they realise that and are using legitimate pollution concerns to keep the outrage level up.
Maybe the windmills are a plot to blow away the Scots once and forever? I am joking, of course.
I long ago said the best play to put windmills would be in a circle around Holyrood – all the rising hot air would …
Thank you for pointing out that the “greens” are one of the worst destroyers of the Scottish wilderness (and Welsh and English – and Irish for all I know – wildernesses too, come to that).
I appreciate that I am something of a broken record on this point, but I am at a loss to understand why people who claim to love the environment seem so determined to destroy it. They will usually blether on ad nauseam about whether or not CO2 is causing climate change or global warming, and they are very happy to argue about that; but whenever I mention their destruction of the environment they go quiet and disappear.
It’s such a shame – a tragic irony, really – that people who seem to regard themselves as environmentalists have taken it upon themselves to destroy our environment. Why does a belief in CAGW have to go hand in hand with a desire to destroy our environment?
I joined the greens around 2000, and as an engineer I felt very isolated and alone because I was the only person who seemed to understand the effects of their policies. So, when I talked about “wind” – I meant hundreds or thousands of windmills the size of tower blocks. When they talked about “wind” most honestly thought it was something they could put in their garden.
The reality is that most “greens” know almost nothing about what they are advocating and as such it is extremely easy for greedy business people and those with a political agenda to use the gullible greens to create a push to either a) line their pockets b) push their politics.
And fundamentally, the viewpoint they have is this: despite knowing nothing about what they advocate – everyone who opposes it is wrong and therefore evil, because they oppose what some (business person/ political advocate) who they trust tells them is the “right” thing to do.
So, e.g. I used to make solar powered lights. Then I started working out just how much energy they were “saving” and I started realising that it was far better and more economical just to put in normal street lighting. However, you can’t sell solar powered lights – if you start looking too deeply – because it is simply just a gimmick (except in a very few isolated cases where there is no mains anywhere near).
That’s what it all comes down to! It’s all about selling a “gimmick” – something that superficially looks “good” but (in my experience) never passes the “does any good in practice for the environment” test.
And after long reflection I’ve decided that the main reason many of the most stupid/vicious/arrogant greens (e.g. WIlliam Connolley) are “green” is because they have a massively energy intensive consumer lifestyle – flying off to exotic holidays several thousand miles away to “view nature” … and they feel guilty that their own massive spending is actually killing the very environment they adore so much. So, basically they just want to “buy” some “inner peace” by joining some cheap environmental organisation, or buying some cheap “green” things which are totally useless in themselves but are a token of their “concern”.
So, “being green” is just a way to get other people to change their habits to atone for their own sins.
Some people have a conscience and you can manipulate by making them feel guilty. I don’t think you can say the same thing about the manipulators.
It seems to me that the smog pollution in China and India would open up room for cleaning the air of the real pollutants. It would help their economies too – wouldn’t it – a whole new industry?