Duplicitous bas***d

[Julie noted]

I'm not given to swearing easily but my blood boiled when I read that MP Tim Yeo is being paid in the region of £140,000 a year by climate change companies.
Those that make useless windfarms, roof panels etc. etc.). 

He is also chairman of the Energy and Climate Change Select Committee!!
What a clash of responsibilities that is.
How can he be a protagonist for all of these expensive 'climate change' rules we are forced to live under (car emissions, jet travel fees, fuel price increases etc. etc.). 
HE is in the pay of the companies and people trying to convince us of the world collapse due to 'climate change' (unless we buy their goods and pay more 'climate change' taxes). 
There are so many on the make in politics, both locally and nationally..it is an outrage. Why isn't someone taking him to task?

[Julie noted]

What a load of unadulterated tosh from p.
The Queen doesn't sit on committees singing the praises of 'climate change' taxes and proliferation. She is the 'lucky' recipient of collateral finances, thanks to the money grubbing politians working on both sides of the 'climate change' fence.

They are being paid, by us, to provide unbiased assesment of 'climate change'...and at the same time are in the employ of companies providing the infrastructure to combat the alleged 'climate change'.
It stinks to high heaven. 

And p, do me a favour. I have no interest in any further discourse with someone that indicates his dislike of our royal family, but loves the european 'royal family'.

[Lucy Lass-Tick]

You come up with an interesting comment there Kipperdip, when you state 'Climate change has been an ongoing fact of life for countless millenia - the earth cools, the earth heats up.  The fiction that you and your cohorts call a 'science' is that all of a sudden this is a "MAN-MADE".  Cue endless new taxes, KERCHING !!'

Maybe I'm being a bit of an old hippy, but it's interesting to consider James Lovelock's Gaia theory when it comes to 'climate change'. In a nutshell he believes that the earth is a self-regulating 'entity' with natural checks, cycles and balances. The attached article gives a bit more info. (by the way,  I've used an article from the Guardian lest Mr. P. (our Perce) totally self combusts) ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/28/scienceofclimatechange.biodiversity

James Lovelock has recently modified his earlier findings, considering them to be a tad alarmist, particularly regarding time scales.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/23/11144098-gaia-scientist-james-lovelock-i-was-alarmist-about-climate-change?lite

[mk1]

Why would this man fall for the lies?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jul/29/climate-change-sceptics-change-mind


The Earth's land has warmed by 1.5C over the past 250 years and "humans are almost entirely the cause", according to a scientific study set up to address climate change sceptics' concerns about whether human-induced global warming is occurring.

Prof Richard Muller, a physicist and climate change sceptic who founded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (Best) project, said he was surprised by the findings. "We were not expecting this, but as scientists, it is our duty to let the evidence change our minds." He added that he now considers himself a "converted sceptic" and his views had undergone a "total turnaround" in a short space of time.

"Our results show that the average temperature of the Earth's land has risen by 2.5F over the past 250 years, including an increase of 1.5 degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases," Muller wrote in an opinion piece for the New York Times.

And an interesting article here on the link between 'Conspiracy Theorists' and the Climate Change Deniers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/jul/27/climate-sceptics-conspiracy-theorists?intcmp=239

Note that though the article is hosted on a 'Green' site the information is lifted  from a respected Scientific Journal:


Psychological Science, the flagship journal of the Association for Psychological Science, publishes cutting-edge research articles, short reports, and research reports spanning the entire spectrum of the science of psychology. Psychological Science is the highest ranked empirical journal in psychology.

[Julie noted]

KD; you don't know me and I sure as hell don't know you.
That said, we do appear to agree on some aspects of what is going on in this world of ours.
p really does think he knows best and if anyone has a problem 'upstairs', it's him. Why not do as I do and totally disregard his inane ramblings and purile pontifications. 
Like most of the labour party when they were in power, THEY WERE RIGHT...and voluably berated those that argued against them.
Now listen to them; harman stating the relaxed betting rules were wrong;
most of them stating brown was unhinged and a bully;
vet cooper stating their immigration policies were wrong;
the sainted tony was all spin and no substance etc. etc.
p is just like them..he WILL be right...so don't bother with him.
Carl Jung would have had a field day with him! 

[brassed off monkey]

I really can`t be ars** to get involved in the constant attacks by Mr P on anyone who disagrees with his point of view.

I know the theory of attack is the best form of defence, but not when it stifles sensible & reasoned response, i think he should make the effort & stop reading Wiki, then at least he wouldn`t bore the t*ts of us all.

[Micksmate]

I really can`t be ars** to get involved in the constant attacks by Mr P on anyone who disagrees with his point of view.

I know the theory of attack is the best form of defence, but not when it stifles sensible & reasoned response, i think he should make the effort & stop reading Wiki, then at least he wouldn`t bore the t*ts of us all.

Glad to hear i am not the only one who thinks this way, he is the reason why i and a couple more i know of have stopped posting on this site, we are all fed up with the puerile crap he comes out with, his constant copy and paste of nonsense to the post in question trying to make out he is cleverer than he is, along with his use of quotes from the past.  Perhaps if he had one or two more certificates he wouldn't be so bad, sad really.

[mk1]

And I will repeat the advice I have given to many here.
Never ever get bogged down defending yourself against baseless claims.
Let the other persons comments stand and attack his weak points.
Attack him and he has less time to spend attacking you.
Simples really, attack is the best form of defense and nobody ever reads I-said-you-said tit-for-tat arguments.
A good insult livens up the post and if you can make fun of your adversary even better.

[Micksmate]

Are you actually a real person? or just someone Mr K logs on as when he's looking to make a point? This topic was started about pro euro politicians who have made good money out of the climate change issue. All i did was point out that another person who has done very well out of it is the Queen. I don't make constant attacks on anyone either. I defend my position.

Yes i am actually a real person and as usual you have replied without reading the post properly, it has nothing to do with this post in general but about all your posts, for me it all started when you said to another poster "how you pitied them because they were of lower intelligence than you"  how crass is that, then when I asked you to explain something in your own words you put an equation on as an answer, that for me says it all, unable to give an answer so you copy and paste something.  How sad.

[mk1]

Can any of the forelock tuggers answer me a question?
Suppose a high profile figure (Mandelson?) was  at a party and he stripped off bollock naked in the presence of several others.
Suppose said photos were widely available in every other country in the world.
Suppose the UK  newspapers all refused to print the photos.
Furthermore the whole of the UK media was warned off ever reproducing the photos.

Would I be right in think the shrieks of 'censorship' would be in the 100 decibel range?

[Micksmate]

You didn't understand the equation. That's not my fault. It answered the question I was asked. I don't pity people less intelligent than me. I do pity people who don't understand some of the fundamental problems within their own character though. For example, racists who don't even realise they are racist. I pity people like that.

On the contrary I fully understood the equation which was a simple Keynesian model showing total autonomous spending giving the MPC and MPS, but as I said you were not able to give an answer to a question so you threw that one in trying to cloud the issue.  As for you saying "I don't pity people less intelligent than me."  You actualy typed those words here on this site, as I said totally crass.  End of.