The political case for environmentalism weakens

Hysteria

and not even a sentence, a passing reference, a nod in the direction of the CRU data release....? I find that interesting.

Diane C - London

The young people of today are terrified at the very real fear that they will be financially much worse than almost any other generation. It is becoming more and more difficult to get on the housing ladder, to hold down jobs, to pay for university, to educate their (future) children and most worrying of all - to find enough spare money each month to squirrel away into a pension so that after they have been forced to work until they almost drop, they won't spend what is left of their lives in penury . Yet all they hear about is the daily threat of ever more ubiquitous taxes to "save the planet" and more and more people haranguing them if they dare think about getting onto an aeroplane or buying a car. Most galling of us is the utter hypocrisy of 16,000+ people from 160+ countries - most of them flying - traveling to Copenhagen to a no expenses spared talking shop at the end of which they will self righteously announce that their fudged deals will save the planet (with Gordon Brown, assuring us it is "the right thing to do") and, oh incidentally, guess who will be paying for it? Meanwhile China and India and other emerging countries will do nothing and will overtake the West in a few years time. One day history will show that the global warming scam was the biggest scientific hoax the planet has ever seen. What fools these vested interests must think we all are.

Micky D

Simple , the lie that MMGW / Apocalypse now is just around the corner is a busted flush .
Plus people dont like the Authoritarian instincts of the Greens. Mainstream parties take note , i dont want to be taxed anymore than i already am , in fact i want my taxes to fall . We could start by abolishing ID cards, Trident and the BBC .

Verity

It was so glaringly obvious that it was a self-serving scam from Day One that I found it astonishing that so many people were buying into it.

When the Romans were occupying Britain, they used to have vineyards north of York, for God's sake! It was like the Languedoc. That was 2,000 years ago. Then temperatures began declining until it reached the point where the Thames was freezing over in the winter and people could drive a coach and horses across the ice and ice skating on it.

If it is slowly, slowly warming up again, so what? Can't they catch the clues that it's part of a cycle? When was the weather ever stable?

Today, we even have the advantage of knowing that Mars heats and cools at the same rate as the earth, despite their being no SUVs or aeroplanes on Mars. There's your clue, right there.

Dennis Churchill

Man Made Global Warming is filed with :“Mass deaths from Mad Cow Disease” “Flesh Eating Ebola epidemics” and AIDS wiping the population out.

Fergus Pickering

Do these children vote? I know they HAVE a vote - ridiculous nonsense in my view, Good God they're still at school (uni being school really). But do they actually vote? Can they find their several ways to polling stations? Perhaps they nmeed to be able to text a vote in. Labour would fix it iof they thought the kids would vote for them but HALLELUJAH it seem they won't.
Tory BNP or Green all the ones that I know, the last of which is surely equivalent to burning the ballot paper.

egh

"As the great Copenhagen shindig draws near, and ever more ludicrous soothsayings about the world ending next Tuesday are made, the political consensus seems out of touch."

Yes, Mr. Blackburn. However, we also know that the young are brain-washed; they are not educated to think for themselves -- and thus to access and assess information about the marxist-euro viewpoint that has been thrust upon them as 'reality.' Thus they don't know how much they don't know (something that a really good education teaches a person).

Someone needs to avail them of the facts about why their economic situation is where it is. Understanding the cause, and the nature of the enemy, might help them to start pulling themselves out of the pit. And to disempower the people who intend to bury them in it.

Until the People start supporting someone who'll do that - it's all a no-hoper, isn't it?

Watt Tyler

From Yahoo news (via SKY), regarding potential BNP prescence at Copenhagen:

'But Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband said Mr Griffin "cannot and does not represent the views of the people of the UK or of Europe.

"He will not be part of the formal Copenhagen negotiations and rightly he will not be listened to by anyone with any credibility who is part of these negotiations."

Shadow climate change secretary Greg Clark told Sky News it was "ridiculous" that Europe would be represented at Copenhagen by someone who questions the existence of climate change.'

And so, warped by their Islington insulated arrogance which actually renders them the ridiculous, the main parties desert the grounds of reality, and it is left for the BNP to speak about the concerns of the majority.

How long can the "Westminster Disconnect" deny that the Emporer is in fact completely naked?

Snowman

Somewhere in a full-page spread on the AGW scandal in today’s ST there’s a para that says that ‘tucked away on its website (Real Climate, the site for scientists who share Prof. Jones’s belief in man-made climate change) is this statement: ‘Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites….We. therefore, do not hold the original raw data, but only the value added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data.

Has anybody told Lawson to pack what he started only few days ago? How could anyone check whether the value added excercise wasn’t performed in a manner that the derived data series support the value adding scientists’ view?

It may seem cruelly defeatist to say it, but it seems we’re truly stuck. The global bandwagon cannot but rolled on.

MaxSceptic

The reason is quite simple: People have, at last, awoken to the scale of this scam.

Number7

May I make a suggestion that may apply some sensibility to the AGW debate.

It appears to me that CRU have no scientific "control" with which to compare their findings. Perhaps, if they compared these with, say, the temperature on Mars over a corresponding period they could then prove that AGW is genuine hypothesis as there is no evidence of 4WDs on Mars.

It is in the public domain that climate change is occurring o other planets in the solar system - do they also have an incease in CO2 levels?

Verity

"Shadow climate change secretary Greg Clark ..."

Say what?

There's a fictitious "climate change" secretary? And that waste of oxygen has a shadow?

TGF UKIP

Hysteria, bleedin obvious innit! Dave and the Mekon simply told their house mag it was not a suitable subject for coverage.

Rather like Neather in fact.

Verity

Al Gore has gone into overdrive lecturing the ever-growing army of sceptics. The inconvenient truth is, Gore has an undergraduate arts degree from Harvard and now he is the unlikely expert of the world in climate science?

How does that work? I might like to try it myself. Might be a few bob in it.

denis cooper

I'm afraid it's far too late now for British voters to start getting sceptical about the reality or importance of climate change.

It's already been agreed that the relevant decisions will be taken through the EU, and none of the 27 heads of government will go back on that.

In fact I doubt if any of them will even dare to question whether the theory provides a sufficiently reliable basis for formulating a set of new policies with such immense economic, social and political implications - not without the prior permission of the Franco-German axis, if eventually they start to have doubts.

Apparently neither Brown nor Cameron have any such doubts, and if they did neither of them would stand up to Merkel and Sarkozy, and certainly neither of them would ever say: "This is one daft EU law which we're just not going to accept".

So basically we're sunk; our lives will be forcibly and radically reshaped on the grounds of a theory or rather a quasi-religious dogma which has never been convincing and which now looks increasingly questionable; once again our political class will deploy "Pacta sunt servanda" to trump "No Parliament may bind its successors"; and there'll be little we can do about it until we find a way to rid ourselves of those treacherous, deceitful politicians, of left right and centre, and replace them with people who actually care about our national interests.

Hysteria

TGF - you may be right.

Spectator dudes - so - do you have an explanation for the lack of coverage of the CRU data release? Especially in an article purporting to be on increasing disenchantment with the AGW agenda.

2trueblue

Cheer up chaps, there are some other people that know it is all a scam. At least we know the facts and now those who had some doubts now have more doubts and might give it some thought.
Timing is everyting and this scam will be outed, you can fool some of the people some of the time........
The public are beginning to wake up to the fact that this is just a tax raising issue....worldwide.

Naomi Muse

Climate change is a good feed into what Gordon Brown calls 'fiscal prudence'.

Many more people are sceptical.

Verity has it right.

As bankers are busy devising financial instruments that are a long way from the real money, and the government favour carbon trading, it is all about tax and funding bigger governments.

'Service to the country, with Honour', should be the core that all MPs swear to, and then some of this nonsense and gobbledegook can be put in context. It would stop all this fudge.

And let's grow lemon trees by Hadrian's wall again too. No wonder the Romans were able to wear short tunics, it's like postmen in shorts!

Morgan Stanley

Climate change is a total scam so why would young people be more easily duped than others when they are more likely to be in touch with the web. That's where real news is after all. Economic progress (JOBS), is the main worry for people with meeting education costs abd entry to universities coming a close second.

As for politicians they have all staked their personal integrity on a global scam but then attempted to con us with it too. They are going to look pretty silly if they make manifesto's which want to take us back to the stone age I think, and where do they go from here? What future do the Greens have here? What about all the people who jumped on the let's get rich from global warming band wagon? I can't see them walking away without a fight.

Rick Hamilton

Global warming is the perfect scam. It can't be proved that it's happening, or that it's caused by human activity, or that there is anything we can realistically do to reverse it. Ignorant politicians have allowed credit to get massively out of control causing a global financial crisis. This was caused 100% by human activity and they haven't a clue how to reverse that either. So now they are desperate for some excuse to tax us all to death to get out of the mess thay have caused, especially the arch hypocrite and world-class incompetent Gordon Brown. If they can convince the little people that AGW is all our fault then the opportunity for needless taxation is unlimited. The greatest threat we all face in the 21st century is not AGW or even Islamofascism but the tax burdens and bureaucracy imposed by these sanctimonious parasites.

alex popplewell

another dialogue of the deaf-too many here are people who are anti science(good article from hugo rifkind- and can't own up to the obvious-which is that they don't know any more than i do what they are talking about when it comes to climatology.there is too much shrill name calling to characterise this as a debate.
but the point about teenage voters-on a straw poll of two in my house-who are well able to find their way to the polling booth-is that its taken as a given that our generation has been profligate with resources and carelss of the environment.hard to argue.second they are a bit fascisitic about recycling.but they dont pretend they have all the answers..and they have been delighted to discover the electoral presence of the monster raving loony party which is clearly the home of most of the irrationalists on both "sides" of the climate change policy agenda.

Frank P

Don't miss Melanie's latest post on the subject.

Frank P

Naomi Muse

Romans could wear short tunics because they weren't very well hung (judging by their statues). Something to do with that fudge packing you want to stop, I suspect.

Naomi Muse

Verity - I love the idea of Al Gore being in overdrive - it would increase his carbon footprint.

And as for you, Frank P - I thought Romans had good legs, like Scotsmen!

And as for carbon etc, if we reduce it to burnt toast, and the whims and fancies of the tax gatherers, it will end up in the annals of history along with the land tax, window tax, tea tax et al.

The main thing is not to let it be taken seriously enough to spoil this lovely country with nonsensical regulations but to let us demolish some of the rubbish regulations we currently have, and police properly those which merit it.

Fergus Pickering

Frank P, I suspect Roman penises were much like ours sizewise. Petronius seems to think so and really he ought to know. But the Romans followed the Greeks in thinking small penises and smooth skin more beautiful and desirable. Hairy blokes with big balls were Barbarians. As indeed they are.

Swiss Bob

The Spectator's lost me. Call yourselves journalists?

Verity

Swiss Bob - Well, there was a gnomic little post ...

Publius

@TGF UKIP
"Hysteria, bleedin obvious innit! Dave and the Mekon simply told their house mag it was not a suitable subject for coverage.
Rather like Neather in fact."

Mr Nelson is not going to be offered a nice safe constituency or a plum quango job if he rocks the boat, now is he? It just isn't modern to put principle before promotion.

logdon

Fergus Pickering
November 30th, 2009 10:45am

So Biggus Dickus was just a figment of Frankie Howard's imagination?

That's the last time I watch Up Pompei.

logdon

Verity
November 30th, 2009 2:56pm

Not all bad. At least they voted to ban minarets.

Stuart Seacole Smith

Well, I'm pleased to hear that the young seem to be capable of making rational judgements prioritising what their greatest concerns should be. But frankly, I'm also absolutely gobsmacked.

When you stop to think for a moment of the relentless juggernaut of brainwashing that this generation has been exposed to by the mainstream media, greeny-liberal teachers and professors etc, it's really quite astonishing.

All their young lives they've been force-fed messages about how human development and construction are bad, food is routinely poisoning us, vaccinations kill, the west is responsible for all the ills of the world and must make amends, the environment is in a tailspin and that basically we're all going to die unless we adopt a wide variety of hair shirt "solutions" dreamed up by a gruesome bunch of left-wing society re-modellers and pyjama-trousered scraggly bearded sandle wearers.

I'd certainly like to think that the tide is turning, but I'm not so sure. I think there's a long way to go yet - in large part because the eco-worriers and climate change ayatollahs are so deeply ensconced in places of influence - it'll take a generation or more to get rid of them, and even that process can only really begin once the tide has genuinely turned in society as a whole. Not just on a Speccie blog.

And there's still barely any real debate on the subject of climate change in mainstream politics, in the way that there is for example in Australia. Incidentally, heard the BBC world-service presenter attempting to administer a good old kicking on the ETS (which the opposition now reject) to the Aus opposition party representative that they'd invited on the show this morning. Apparently there are some Australians with the temerity so suggest that they don't want to be cast into poverty and stymie their future development prospects.

There's also the insidious reality that "climate change concerns" are now routinely tacked onto debates about virtually anything you care to mention - whether it be on public transport, the NHS, food production, light bulbs, your local cake-baking contest etc etc.

And here's the problem: a spokesman tasked with arguing for one policy option or another on any of these topics will be tasked with achieving certain objectives, and getting into an "oh no it isn't/ oh yes it is" debate about climate change with your typical on-message BBC reporter is definitely not one of those objectives. For that reason, climate change is used as a supporting argument if it's helpful to the points being made, and if it's not helpful it's either ignored or tacitly acknowledged in order to avoid getting into a side-argument.

The Conservatives have adopted much the same line in the run-up to the next election, and depressing as it may be, for the time being it's probably the only option open to them.

There are just so many vested interests -

- government (tax opportunity);
- media (scare story - the best!);
- industry (money to be made - viz carbon credits fiasco);
- academia (include climate in a grant application; receive dosh by return post);
- NGOs (scare story, bumped up subscriptions mean more mullah for mischief, and increasingly fat director salaries);
- developing countries (you can't put a price on climate change - oh, just a minute, yes we can!)
- The UN, christian church, sundry other coat-tail hangers on (get involved in something "topical", try to appear remotely relevant)

Like I said - a long, long, way to go!

Patricia Shaw

Ah this is why all you right wing fundamentalists hate Zac so much - wondered why the armed militia of the Telegraph had turned its lick spittle on him.

Eco - climatology. Of course. A traitor in your camp. A wet patch in the bone dry fundamentalism of your creative, climatic conspiracy.

Another set of minority bigots trying to impose your views on the rational majority.

Somebody is obviously paying you. Wonder who.

Guy Cruls

Readers of The Spectator are very simple forms of life that believe in a flat earth that can bear hundreds of billions of people and withstand any level of pollution. Further, that flat earth is not subject to normal physical laws: the greenhouse effect is an impossibility.
And the thousands of top notch scientist that have and continue to contribute to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change are all frauds.
And of course, man never went to the moon and pigs can fly.
Why didn't I see that before?