Thank you Auden, you absolutely personify the green nonsense. Long words "end of pipe technology"! Then say it's all still end of the world. You forgot give us more money. You did remember how the scientists, with peer review, had to admit it was not as bad (tree die back) as they said. Of course it was not because it was the usual fake science. You also said the Germans went to natural gas ignoring completely that the Germans are building more coal plants including brown coal now.
I have to say that we need to cull our science community of all this fake science. It makes stuff up, lies and then denies it does it.
Auden read the speech of President Eisenhaur, right after warning of the military industrial complex he warned of this sort of research.

JBowyer,
"End of pipe technology" is an engineering term, not "green nonsense", and certainly not "end of the world". I added a simplified version of what it involved (filters in chimneys) to minimise the risk of you misunderstanding me, but it evidently wasn't enough.

I did not specifically say the Germans went to natural gas; I said the Europeans did. AIUI the biggest shift to gas occurred in Britain. However if you look at the graphs on http://euanmearns.com/energiewende-germany-uk-france-and-spain/ you'll see there has also been a substantial reduction in coal use in Germany since the mid '80s when people began to take the problem seriously.

I told you what I knew about it, which is clearly more than you knew, and did not give you a load of irrelevant trivia. You seem to be criticising me for not discussing the content of scientific papers that neither of us have read! And you make accusations of "fake science" even though you're the one with no evidence.

I really don't want to get into the whole acid rain quagmire other than to add a voice saying it was just another of those myriad climate scares based on minimum science and maximum assertion. The US ten year acid rain study ultimately reported that they had “turned up no smoking gun; that the problem is far more complicated than it been thought; that other factors combine to harm trees; and that sorting out the cause-and-effect was difficult and in some cases impossible". They reported that they found only one species of tree mildly affected and all acid lakes had natural causes.

As to Aidan's assertion that "there has also been a substantial reduction in coal use in Germany since the mid '80s when people began to take the problem seriously". Well the reason there was a significant reduction in coal use had nothing to do with concerns about acid rain or another other of the various scares but was a result of the reunification of Germany. The old east Germany factories were hopeless inefficient and when they closed down and were replaced by new Western plants, there was an automatic reduction in coal use. That all stopped around the mid 1990s when the process had played out.

That's why Germany has always been anxious to calculate reductions in emissions from 1990 - because they were able to get credit for doing nothing other than close old decrepit Soviet style factories which they'd have done anyway. Its also why Britain wanted to use the 1990 date - because they got the benefit of converting to the North Sea gas.

Belly,

Tell me, please, where I insulted you. I did make a comment about the difficulty you have expressing yourself. Can facts insult? I don't think that I've called you names or deliberately insulted you . If you feel insulted, let me know about it.

I was called a liar in this thread. Should I feel insulted? What about the old mot: 'sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me’? I hadn't taken you for pansy.

As for my being right, I do believe I am right. You may believe that I'm wrong if you wish. But, remember, we are expressing opinions here. You don't like my opinions because they don't accord with yours. I feel exactly the same about yours.

mhaze,
The reunification of Germany certainly had a lot to do with it, but the big reduction started to occur before then, and (as can be seen on the third graph) there was also a substantial increase in gas use.

_______________________________________________________________________________

ttbn,
Though I pointed out you were lying when you made the false and absurd claim that "Simple record checking showed those interested in truth rather than bodgie science that there had been no warming for decades", it was only after you'd made many false accusations about my motives and said " Calling me a liar confirms your lack of certainly" (another lie) that I told you I certainly couldn't escape the conclusion that you're a liar.

If someone unironically posted "Simple record checking showed those interested in truth rather than bodgie science that the moon is made of green cheese" would you dispute that person is a liar?

The official NASA global temperatures show a 0.56 C COOLING from Feb 2016 to 2018.

No interest to MSM and kept very quiet by alarmists.

Anyone who actually believes in the global warming scam is very short in math, research ability, or has an investment in using the scam for some other purpose. There is real proof that CO2 can not cause anything like the effect claimed by the IPPC, & none to prove it does.

You Foxy in particular should have done the research, & know this is fact.

That you haven't probably means you don't want to know the answer, as it proves the immoral attitude of academia & the left.