Seriously OT - primarily for Bill

Bill, and fellow climate change sceptics,

Did you watch the Andrew Marr programme this morning? Nigel Lawson has
written a book questioning the science and politics of global warming. I
mention this because I know that Bill, myself and several others here are
sceptical about the issue ("bad science and hysteria", to quote Bill).

Bearing in mind Lawson has had other books published already, and is a high
profile figure, he couldn't find ONE publisher in the UK to publish the
book! In the end he had to find a publisher in America to take it on.

I went to WHSmith this morning, but there's no sign of it there (although
they are famously selective about what they will carry).

They didn't mention the title but a quick search on Amazon brings it up....

An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming

I've pre-ordered it. In fact there are quite a few other
interesting-looking books questioning the science and politics of global
warming - they are listed in Amazon in the "other readers also bought..."
section.

SteveT

Steve Thackery wrote:

I've pre-ordered it. In fact there are quite a few other

As opposed to just ordering it no doubt. :-)

--
Chris Green

On 06 Apr 2008 13:44:35 GMT, wrote:

Steve Thackery wrote:

I've pre-ordered it. In fact there are quite a few other

As opposed to just ordering it no doubt. :-)

I assume this was Amazon-speak along shipping by road etc.

I've pre-ordered it. In fact there are quite a few other

As opposed to just ordering it no doubt. :-)

Amazon-speak for saying it's not in stock yet, and they'll ship it when it
is.


SteveT

The review in the Times is disappointed that he doesn't really tackle the
underlying premise very much. Instead, he tackles all the stuff that sits
on top of it.

Still, might well be worth reading. I don't like the bloke much, but he is
undoubtedly intelligent and well-informed.

SteveT

"Steve Thackery" wrote in message
...
The review in the Times is disappointed that he doesn't really
tackle the underlying premise very much. Instead, he tackles all
the stuff that sits on top of it.

Still, might well be worth reading. I don't like the bloke much,
but he is undoubtedly intelligent and well-informed.


Or being in the pay of the polluters of course...

Grins, ducks and runs for his life

I have serious miss giving about how "Climate Change" has had so many
'do-gooders' jumping on the bandwagon (to the extent that it is now
becoming the 'new Socialism') rather than allowing the scientists to
do their work in a calm and collected way. "Climate Change" is real
and happening, the only question is why, as for pollution - that's not
good for anyone and should be reduced regardless if it's a cause of CC
or not.

In my view, global warming is a bad choice,of phrase. What has happened many
times in the past has been warming and cooling, but fairly slowly, not like
now. Normally, even a couple of generations would only notice short term
trends, but now we see large trends and I think its the severe weather
swings and quicker changes in sea level and currents we need to be aware of
from our input.


Of course there have been volcanic episodes and space borne rocks, but I
think this is the first time the actual activity of a so called intelligent
organism has caused a problem. If it is us, it makes sense to do something,
if we do something and its not us, then we tried, if we don't and it was us,
then we only have ourselves to blame for the consequences.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Steve Thackery" wrote in message
...
Bill, and fellow climate change sceptics,

Did you watch the Andrew Marr programme this morning? Nigel Lawson has
written a book questioning the science and politics of global warming. I
mention this because I know that Bill, myself and several others here are
sceptical about the issue ("bad science and hysteria", to quote Bill).

Bearing in mind Lawson has had other books published already, and is a
high profile figure, he couldn't find ONE publisher in the UK to publish
the book! In the end he had to find a publisher in America to take it on.

I went to WHSmith this morning, but there's no sign of it there (although
they are famously selective about what they will carry).

They didn't mention the title but a quick search on Amazon brings it
up....

An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming

I've pre-ordered it. In fact there are quite a few other
interesting-looking books questioning the science and politics of global
warming - they are listed in Amazon in the "other readers also bought..."
section.

SteveT

"Steve Thackery" wrote in message
...
Bill, and fellow climate change sceptics,

Did you watch the Andrew Marr programme this morning? Nigel Lawson has
written a book questioning the science and politics of global warming. I
mention this because I know that Bill, myself and several others here are
sceptical about the issue ("bad science and hysteria", to quote Bill).

I'm surprised the BBC would broadcast anything that challenged the Global
Warming faith. It's not PC.

They'll broadcast jokes about C of E vicars and RC priests but not about
Muslim religous men.

An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming

I think I'll buy it.

Bill

On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 14:42:21 +0100, "Steve Thackery"
wrote:
(in the interests of logic, original quotes out of order)

Nigel Lawson has
written a book questioning the science and politics of global warming.

Perhaps he needs some money to keep himself in the style to which he
has become accustomed?

he couldn't find ONE publisher in the UK to publish the
book!

Perhaps in contrast to the author, UK publishers thought it might lose
money rather than make any?

Bill, myself and several others here are
sceptical about the issue ("bad science [snip]", to quote Bill).

Neither Nigel Lawson, nor Bill, nor others here, are a climate
scientists, so none are qualified to speak on such issues.

In this group there have been frequent complaints that the BBC is run
by "bean counters" rather than "technical people" - etc, etc - with
few, if any, voicing disagreement with such posts. How strange,
therefore, that certain members of the group should rush to buy a book
on a scientific topic written by someone whose training was not that
of a scientist, not even that of a bean counter, but, even worse, a
bean counter journalist!

(And let's not forget that he was the Chancellor who, when Britain was
raking it in from North Sea oil revenues, squandered it all away by
paying over 3 million people to rot unemployed on the dole!)

"hysteria"

Global warming, like Princess Diana's death, Big Brother, corrupt TV
shows, and every other goddamn thing that finds its way into the media
headlines, is subject to hysteria, because that is the way the media
work. It's not the fault of any of those issues; it's arguably not
even the fault of the media; it's our, that is the public's, fault for
not demanding from them decent, sober, accurate, balanced standards of
reporting.

I've pre-ordered it.

Of course people determined to take a biased position on an issue will
always ignore the body of evidence, however large, that contradicts
their views, and select only that evidence that seems to support it -
like those who deny The Holocaust read mainly Nazi propaganda, or
racists selectively quote some of the work of Hans Eysenck out of
context. This thread seems to be a case in point.

"Java Jive" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 14:42:21 +0100, "Steve Thackery"
Neither Nigel Lawson, nor Bill, nor others here, are a climate
scientists, so none are qualified to speak on such issues.
We are all entitled to discuss this, because the way the alleged climate
change is being allowed to degrade our lives and affluence owes more to
politics, band-wagoning, and career-building than it does to science.

Of course people determined to take a biased position on an issue will
always ignore the body of evidence, however large, that contradicts
their views, and select only that evidence that seems to support it -
like those who deny The Holocaust read mainly Nazi propaganda, or
racists selectively quote some of the work of Hans Eysenck out of
context. This thread seems to be a case in point.
In fact, it's quite hard to find anything to read that takes an even-handed
view of the alleged climate change because everyone in the media is ****
scared that if they are seen to be backing something that goes against the
pseudo-religious orthodoxy their career will be affected adversely.

I've seen this all before. A few years ago you couldn't get a sensible
discussion about immigration because the media collectively found the topic
too hot to handle, in case someone said they were being racist. It's still a
bit touchy in that respect.

In the 70s and 80s we all sat watching endless programmes about global
cooling -- how the world was going to end up in a big lump of ice.

What you lot in your twenties and thirties need to know is that my
generation have been around long enough to have heard so much bull**** from
the media and from the powers-that-be that we are total cynics. All the
media people do is keep their noses clean and look forward to their
pensions. And I've been privvy to many indiscretions from members of the de
facto ruling class that would really open your eyes. Basically they're all
looking after No. 1, and ******** to the rest of us, who most of them have
the greatest contempt for.

As long as global warming fears can be used to give spurious
'respectability' to commercial concerns they'll all shout how green they
are. Look, the other day I was in M & S at York, in the café. There were
huge notices boasting about how green M & S is, all about how they recycle
their bags and so forth. We had a simple meal for two (just sandwiches and a
bun) and at the end we had a tray absolutely full of plastic wrappers. In
other words, they pay lip service but that's all, because they know that if
they wrap things less well people will eat elsewhere. I took some pictures
of the rubbish and the notices, and there were quite a few other people of
my age around, so we ended up talking about it. We all agreed that the
greeny craze is just a con on the public to tax us more and reduce our
standard of living. The concensus was that it's a craze that fools younger
people because they are so naive.

My generation were brought up in the spirit of the Beveridge Report. We were
brainwashed to be bolshie! By God we're going to be a problem in the years
to come! For one thing we all think we're middle class, so we aren't going
to be kicked around the way our parents were. We won't lay on a trolley in a
hospital corridor for hours without kicking up some ****! And we won't let
any government **** up our retirement years by using greeny ******** as an
excuse to take away our hard-earned standard of living. And don't forget,
there are a hell of a lot of us. In the elections of 2010-2030 the retired
vote will be massive. Of course in the elections of 2030-2050 the Muslim
vote will be very significant. So after that there most likely won't be
elections. Thank God I'll be dead.

Bill