Saltpetre,

"What I say to you is, Forget the Science!"

Please, please, whatever you do, DO NOT FORGET THE SCIENCE. The last thing this world is more ignorant hippies who don't have a damn clue what they're talking about because they'd rather trust their so-called common sense and their received wisdom (received from other ignorant hippies).

"The Earth is experiencing a fantastic extended inter-glacial... "

Oh, turns out it's all right after all. Saltpetre doesn't isn't really advocating we turn our backs on science, or he wouldn't have mentioned inter-glacial periods - a phenomenon we are only aware of because of the tireless work of the noble greybeards (scientists).

Either that, or he's the sort of hypocrite who relies on scientific knowledge when it supports his ideological agenda, but ignores or disparages it when it gets in the way of his emotive arguments in support of said agenda. I certainly hope that not's the case, because that sort of hypocrisy would definitely qualify him as an anti-mensch.

oh jeez, I've ended in the weird zone of OLO again.

Saltpetre
You talk about me forgetting science as if you had just refuted my arguments showing that the whole belief system is neither rational nor scientific, and vindicated the case for AGW . But you haven't, have you? But thank you for your candid exhibition of the anti-human elitism that is behind the whole state-worshipping belief system.

The latest revelations of the top climate scientists bodging up their work for "the cause" should sicken any true scientist. That is not science; it is religious fetishism.

Reciting the ecological disasters happening under common ownership of natural resources is an argument against, not in favour of more of the same. All you're proving is that government has no way of managing its resources in a way that is rational from the point of view of the evaluations of the intended consumers of its services.

If you, or anyone, were able to speak for values over and above human values, you might be onto something. But you can't. You're not God's representative on earth. All you can do is speak for your own (anti-human) values. But that doesn't mean you aren't implicated in conflict over resource use.

The issue is not about climate, it's about power in a cause that regards human beings as a plague or a cancer. The real issue cannot be sterilised of its normative content by the captious incantation of "science", as if this talisman magically resolves all issues in favour of the state.

The real issue is whether the conflict of values is to be settled by peaceable and truthful means based on the principles of self-ownership and private property; or by coercive and fraudulent means based on the principles of serfdom and tragedy of the commons.

You and all the state-worshippers just happen to be in favour of the latter, that is all.

AGW is a scam from top to bottom.

New scientist carries a piece on attempts to sue energy companies for events that, so litigants claim, may be attributed to global warming.

Playing the climate blame game 11 November 2011 by Fred Pearce

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228384.200-playing-the-climate-blame-game.html

>>BLAMING climate change for extreme weather events, like the 2010 heatwave that set the Moscow region of Russia alight in 2010 or the floods that have ravaged the UK since the 1970s (see "Atmospheric rivers cause the UK's worst floods"), is one of the hottest topics in climate science. The Russian fires are currently the subject of debate, and the stakes are high. Solving the issue could bring closer the day when disaster victims can successfully sue oil and coal companies.>>

This will be interesting.

From the scientific perspective I doubt it will ever be possible to pin the blame for a specific event on anthropogenic global warming. But, let's face it, judges have been known to use their positions to peddle an ideological agenda. A single win in a significant jurisdiction would be a game changer.

The climate issue has been politicised on BOTH side of the debate with many protagonists relying more on ideology than science. Looks like the lawyers are going to add their tuppeny ha'porth to the mix.

My feeling is this could make a lot of lawyers very rich.

Well Saltpetre, thanks. However, it’s not about the science is it? It’s about money, power and control (FUD if you like). Sheesh, even Sir David Attenborough’s series ‘Frozen Planet’ has been censored – the last episode being gagged in the US.

http://tinyurl.com/6voyze2

Given the state of ideological rhetoric, both here and in the US, I am not surprised with the US reaction – at least we had the chance to make up our own minds when it was aired here last night.

Thing is Saltpetre, over in the States, the Republicans have control of the Lower House and the Democrats have control of the Senate – much different to our state of affairs. President Obama is trying to weave the US between a rock and a hard place – very difficult when the religious right (stirred by an increasingly popular Tea Party) are letting off smoke bombs at every policy making decision that goes through the houses. For example, funding for NASA and NOAA climate research has been drastically cut right at a time when results and observations now coming in are indeed showing the impact humanity is having on the planet.

What is relevant is that continuing research, and dissemination of that research, is essential. What I find repulsive, extremely disturbing and very offensive is that media moguls have decided what is fit and what is not fit for viewing – akin to what a communist or fascist state might do, imho.

I do find it intriguing and of no coincidence that 'climategate 2' (out now in a blog near you) is being 'released' a week before the talks in Durban - not too dissimilar to 'climategate 1' being 'released' before the talks in Copenhagen. Yes, obviously done to ambush and torpedo the next round.

Anyway, censoring science in the way the US media has done is no different to what the Catholic Church did to Galileo 400 years ago. What next, burn all texts that even allude to humanity having an impact on the planet?

Steven, you cannot even post on topic, now. I will attempt to bring you back.
What Michael Ashley says in his disingenuous criticism, of Plimer, to which you refer in your article, is: “If Plimer can do what he claims, and can prove that human emissions of CO2 have no effect on the climate, then he owes it to the scientific community and, in fact, humanity, to publish his arguments in a refereed journal.”
Plimer, of course, claims no such thing.
What Ian Plimer says, on page 12 of my copy of “Heaven and Earth” is:
“To argue that human emissions of CO2 are forcing global warming requires all the known, and possibly chaotic, mechanisms of natural global warming to be critically analysed and dismissed. This has not even been attempted.”
Human emissions cannot be scientifically shown to have any effect on climate. I invited Steven to produce the science which demonstrates otherwise. As I said, I have seen this invitation issued many times, and it has never had a response, because there is no such science. So Steven ignored it.
There is refereed science which shows that climate is governed by established natural cycles. The warmists attempted to show that there was now a difference, attributable to human emissions. This failed attempt caused them then to unsuccessfully attack the established science of natural cycles.
Steven adopted the well worn alarmist ploy of pretending to be open minded, as a basis to appear objective in his unforgiveable sliming of an accomplished scientist, Ian Plimer, whose able exposition of the unsupportable AGW hypothesis is a tangible obstacle to alarmists misinforming the public on the AGW myth.
Plimer’s book is so comprehensive and clear in its presentation, that it is no wonder it is a world wide best seller, and a constant target of the dishonest, frustrated warmists.
It is obvious that neither Steven nor Michael Ashley have read it.
It is encouraging to see a fresh posting of Climategate emails, yesterday, showing that the miscreants have not improved in the slightest. Their dishonest activities in the AGW scam continue unabated.