Ed Miliband declares war on climate change sceptics.

[Derek]

Hi All,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20...scepticism

Excerpt,
" The danger of climate scepticism was that it would undermine public support for unpopular decisions needed
to curb carbon emissions, including the likelihood of higher energy bills for households, and
issues such as the visual impact of wind turbines, said Miliband, who is also energy secretary. "

Funny isn't it, he says " The danger of climate scepticism was "
Unusual use of the past tense, when declaring war, isn't it..

The comments following the article show the game is up however.
The public ain't as dumb, or as brainwashed, as the politicians / buroeaucrats had assumed.

" "There are a whole variety of people who are sceptical,
but who they are is less important than what they are saying, and
what they are saying is profoundly dangerous," he said.
"Every­thing we know about life is that we should obey the precautionary principle;
to take what the sceptics say seriously would be a profound risk." "

So, what they are sceptical about is irrelevant, ? the precautionary principle takes presidence. !
No, it does not - period.
The precautionary principle kills people, usually the poor and the young in their millions
when the same precautions are not applied to what is being cautioned against.
Bad science used with the "precautionary principle" has already killed millions in Africa with regard to DDT,
he / they have not learnt a thing.

This "war" Miliband espouses is plainly ideologically driven,
it has absolutely nothing to do with sense, reason, knowledge, honesty, the truth of the matter, for the good of the people, or science.

[Sunsettommy]

Ed writes:

Quote:"It's right that there's rigour applied to all the reports about climate change, but I think it would be wrong that when a mistake is made it's somehow used to undermine the overwhelming picture that's there," he said.

There have been a number of mistakes dear Ed,that have been discovered,and more expected to come.

What overwhelming picture is that Ed? Is it the fact that Global Warming ended in 1998 and that since at least 2003 the oceans are cooling,and that in recent years winters have turned colder and snowier of late,in the Northern Hemisphere.

Was that the "overwhelming picture" you were trying to forget?

Quote:"We know there's a physical effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leading to higher temperatures, that's a question of physics; we know CO2 concentrations are at their highest for 6,000 years; we know there are observed increases in temperatures; and we know there are observed effects that point to the existence of human-made climate change. That's what the vast majority of scientists tell us."

Sure Ed,and be sure to send your donations to Physics world.

Today's level of CO2 in the atmosphere are near the lowest levels ever recorded in the last 500 million years.You knew this did ya?

The "observed effects" is that we are in current recovery from the LIA,that ended about 1850.Thus it is no surprise that there is warming going on and has been for the last 150 years.

Your attempt of a consensus claim is devoid of facts and thus not impressive.There has been NOTHING out of the ordinary in the warming trend since 1850,and you must know it because there is nothing unusual to point out.

Quote:Mistakes and attempts to hide contradictory data had to be seen in the light of the thousands of pages of evidence in the IPCC's four-volume report in 2007, said Miliband. The most recent accusation about the panel's work is that its chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, may have known before the Copenhagen summit that its assessment report had seriously exaggerated the rate of melting of the Himalayan glaciers.

However, Miliband was adamant that the IPCC was on the right track. "It's worth saying that no doubt when the next report comes out it will suggest there have been areas where things have been happening more dramatically than the 2007 report implied," he said.

The mistakes that are incredible and never should have been allowed into the report in the first place, if there really were a robust effort to review everything they considered.

There are a whole bunch of unpublished or never reviewed papers in it!

How many serious mistakes are you going to apologize for until you realize that your effort in trying to explain them away will destroy what is left of your credibility you might have left.

YOU ARE THE CLIMATE SECRETARY DAM IT!

Quote:The danger of climate scepticism was that it would undermine public support for unpopular decisions needed to curb carbon emissions, including the likelihood of higher energy bills for households, and issues such as the visual impact of wind turbines, said Miliband, who is also energy secretary.

You sir are a joke by complaining that skepticism is hurting the entire process,when actually they are for OPEN discussion of the issues and based on real data and facts to base it on.Not by your stupid governments effort to shove it down the public's throat that you guys have been doing.

I am tired of the bullshit I hear from the likes of you who are so busy peddling your climate cures,that are based on too many uncertainties and contrived doomsday scares you bloodworms have been drenching us with.

The public are tired of being lied to,by the stupid media and alarmist enabler's,to care what new pap you have up your dirty sleeves anymore to beguile us with,and that is why you are being an ass in the article.

You know your days of easy AGW scamming is coming to an end,therefore the reason for your stupid attacks on people,who rationally chose to be skeptical,when you socialist dirtbags want to enact draconian lifestyle changes on us without good reason.

Stop whining about us and go fight for better science research,to provide better information for the purpose of making rational decisions,for the purpose of guiding us into the future.

Quote:Lord Smith, the Environment Agency chairman, said: "The [Himalayan] glaciers may not melt by 2035, but they are melting and there's a serious problem that's going to affect substantial parts of Asia over the course of the next 100 or more years."

Whoopie!

another misleading statement by a man who should know better than to be saying it to the public,who will later discover that he is a dog eared yellow bellied AGW supporting jerk.

Lord,why do you think there is a growing trend of skepticism of listening to people like you,who have a proven record of telling us part of the story in order to advance an agenda that is repellent to decent people?

I despise people like you.

[Questioning_Climate]

Richard North at EU Referendum sums up Ed:

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/02...sible.html

[JohnWho]

So, SST -

were you able to post your above response somewhere where Miliband might read it?

[HarpoSpoke]

The use of the precautionary principle irritates me as it is only ever considered in one direction.

How about the dire warnings of skeptics and the harm AGW measures could do to the world economy (causing suffering for millions)? Should we not heed those warnings "just in case"?

Yeah...I didn't think so.

[Sunsettommy]

(02-01-2010 04:12 AM)Questioning_Climate Wrote:  Richard North at EU Referendum sums up Ed:

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/02...sible.html

Quote:But that is Ed Miliband for you, a climate change secretary who manages to display a level of arrogance on the subject which can only stem from a man possessed of an uncharted void in place of a brain. Only one so handicapped could speak in a public forum without being mortally embarrassed by his own inadequacies.

and,

Quote:For a graduate in philosophy, politics and economics to presume to lecture us in basic physics is an arrogance beyond measure, but then to offer us a Janet and John version of the presumed behaviour of a trace gas in a complex, chaotic system that is poorly understood and even less well modelled, and to present it as the gospel truth, rises to the level of the surreal. The problem is that the man is so utterly stupid that he probably believes what he is saying – a very dangerous trait for a politician.

He he....

I wonder how he got to be the Climate Change Secretary,when he is obviously profoundly ignorant and stupid.

[Sunsettommy]

(02-01-2010 06:56 AM)JohnWho Wrote:  So, SST -

were you able to post your above response somewhere where Miliband might read it?

I doubt he has time to read my snarling post,since he is too busy writing more stupid unresearched pablums to irritate the human race with.