"newshound" wrote in message
news
On 23/08/2018 14:56, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
charles wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/08/18 09:59, Andy Burns wrote:
newshound wrote:

I wonder if there is any possibility that GW models might start to
show that decarbonisation is not quite so "essential". I suspect that
the Juggernaut is unstoppable on the decadal timescale.

'They' seem to have decided to emphasise the hothouse earth model
recently, probably it sounds more urgent so something must be done?

Somehow it has become relatively obvious that a naked all out battle
of the bull****ters is under way - Climate change, Renewable energy,
Brexit, Donald Trump....there is a naked power struggle going on and
the myth that politicians and people in power, in the media and in
authority do not deliberately lie, but are merely 'just mistaken' has
been blown right out of the water.

We are being deliberately lied to, on a massive and unprecedented
scale.

By some very very scary people.

or lizards

So good the likes of Turnip comes clean and wants to go back to the law
of
the jungle. Forgetting that he wouldn't survive five minutes.

One of the things I find amusing is that I'm on the same side as TNP for
energy but the opposite side for Brexit. And yet I completely agree with
his analysis that public debate in so many areas is increasingly dominated
by loonies

Not convinced about that increasingly bit, given
how rabid they were in the runup to ww2 etc.

and that politicians hardly ever show signs of proper critical thought.

Its arguable that anyone into that would ever want to be a politician.

We have had a couple who were, but they were certainly very rare.

Guess you could argue that Attlee was one of those.

I suppose I would have to concede that I can understand some parts of the
Brexit logic even though I am pretty sure that, overall, the downsides are
worse.

Bet you will find that in reality they arent.

Whereas the renewables argument doesn't hold water at all, once you look
at it more closely. Unless, of course, people agree to live with the loss
of standard of living associated with energy prices quadrupling in real
terms over two or three decades.