The 21st centruays biggest scam, and we willingly pay for it

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
An interesting article, worth reading certainly but again it is another vote against the global warming theory from someone within the oil business.

Now, if someone were to publish a similar view point and represented Greenpeace, or Friends of the Earth, then I might take a bit more notice.

Meanwhile i remain open minded and willing to listen to both sides.

Word for today is ...anthropogenic
 
But it does use a reasoned argument which a lot of hysterical friends of the earth types don't.

Its actually a preofessor of Geology, not an oil execs speil, so it comes from an Academic who really knows his stuff. Many academics by nature are quite left field in their views (from my experience with them) and he has gone with facts and scientifc evidence (not an emotive view point).

Well worth a read, and backs up a lot of my posts in other threads.
 
Upto a point, but still more of a man with a scientific back ground rather than a suit at the top of the corporate ladder sort but thats debatable. Clearly though he is a man of intelligence and intellect so its worth hearing what he has to say.

I take the point, but many articles that write about the opposite come from people with a very defined view. I would say that "green is the new red".
 
I listened with interest to some eskimoes on BBC1 breakfast news yesterday or day before, they were talking about herding reindeers each year, something that they've done for hundreds of years. They reckoned that this winter was one of the coldest they've ever had. Interesting.
 
That article is from 2004.

I've seen other reports in the last couple of weeks saying the same thing though. And isn't this year forecast to be cooler than last?
 
And it would all happen whether we were taxed to oblvion or not, actually the weather would be exactly the same whether we were here or not....
 
So if it were proved that "climate change" is not a man made thing will Ken refund our CO2 charges and will the CO2 linked VED reduce accordingly?

If increased taxation can be introduced retrospectively, then surely refunds must follow suit. Its only right and fair after all.
 
Last edited:
VED would have to cease being based on CO2. I'd rather have cars taxed per mass, as its heavier cars that ware down road surfaces quicker. VED could be £10/100kg of dry mass. Therefore an A class may pay £140/year but a heavy S class would be £220/year.

Thats fair, as it directly links VED to the wear and tear you put on the roads. Petrol fuel duty is a joke. even vat + 10% Still represents a bum deal to motorists considering how much is spent on the roads relative to what they put in.

Duty derived from VED and fuel should only be spent on the roads.

Sadly Ken will have spent all your money so you can't get it back, probably wastefuly.
 
Like many I suspect your title is wrong:rolleyes:

I do not WILLINGLY pay ;)
 
Some actually said they'd pay more for a greener car and would be fine with paying more tax if it went on green incentives, hence the use of the word willing.

I'd sooner flush my money down the toilet than let NU labour waste it on green incentives
 
The climate change issue is a diversion of the real problem the wold faces.

Overpopulation!

But no politician (and many of us) will not dare approach the subject because of the uncomfortable problems in tackling this matter.

Preaching the unproven theories of climate change they miss one crucial point... The earth will not be able to withstand the growth in population as it is at the moment - simple as.

.
 
hard to tax teenage breeders who cannot take care of themselves but are breeding like houseflies.
One said on the radio news yesterday. it is the poorest people in the poorest continents and the poorest areas that breed the most so that hardworking people will forever be takin care of other peoples problems.
Karen mathews comes to mind.
 
hard to tax teenage breeders who cannot take care of themselves but are breeding like houseflies.
One said on the radio news yesterday. it is the poorest people in the poorest continents and the poorest areas that breed the most so that hardworking people will forever be takin care of other peoples problems.
Karen mathews comes to mind.

There is a simple solution to that, don't give aid. Buy up their land and grow bio fuel in the developing world, that will keep their populations at bay.

If we didn't give benefits out so readily, the have 3 kids then get a nicer council house approach didn't work. China operated a one child policy, I am not advocating a police state system like that, but one where the first child gets a state education. If you have 2 you have to pay the cost back, it would be deducted from your PAYE or deducted from the (vastly reduced benefits that I'd want). In other words, if you have children you can't afford, you are virtually impoverished.
 
Difficult problem. Something like that can only be effectively dealt with by draconian measures.
Incentives for either sex undergoing sterilisation perhaps. Worldwide.
It will eventually have to come to something as drastic as that.
On the news last night there was film from a few third world countries where distribution of food is by armed guard as its in such short supply. Rice crops this year have only been a half of what is required to sustain some counties nutritional needs. That will affect prices everywhere. And probably be yet more widespread famines.
I hope that doesn't sound uncaring, because its not. Just stating facts.
I am as guilty as many. I have fathered 3 children and as lovely as they all are, the world cant keep going on down this road forever.
Some say nature takes care of itself and something will happen which will reduce worldwide population considerably. If so, that will be an event I hope I miss.
 
I listened with interest to some eskimoes on BBC1 breakfast news yesterday or day before, they were talking about herding reindeers each year, something that they've done for hundreds of years. They reckoned that this winter was one of the coldest they've ever had. Interesting.


I saw that too, the BBC guy asked what changes they had noticed over the years due to global warming and they replied, none. Regular viewers of the BBC would have assumed they spent their time sunbathing due to our CO2 emissions.

Russ
 
If you look at climate change over several million years we are actually in an Ice Age now when you compare our current climate to the historical average.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom