Skip to content


The current state of the debate on Climate Change

By Dark Politricks

I haven’t written on the subject of Climate Change for a while so when I got a comment on a recent post and started writing more than a couple hundred words as a reply I thought I might as well just put it on the blog. The commenter was reporting on an article by Lord Monckton who talks about the UN’s last push for world government under the guise of trying to solve man made climate change (AGW).

The commenter stated that Lord Monckton was lying about the science and politics and that the whole anti-AGW lobby was part of an organised campaign by polluters to undermine having their activities regulated by trying to create doubt about the science.

I don’t doubt that there are many on the anti man made warming side of the debate that are lobbying for selfish motives but then that is true in all debates and it also doesn’t mean that all the arguments they put forth are meaningless and without merit.

Just like the fact that every pro AGW supporter isn’t a tree hugger who wants to ban cars, give trees human rights and only eats veg & fruit, not every critic of AGW is in cahoots with big oil. In fact quite a lot of the major supporters of ideas that would supposedly help cut CO2 like carbon credits or carbon trading are those same big polluting industries that the warmers claim are backing the other side. Just visit the websites of Shell or BP to read articles professing their love of low carbon fuels and carbon trading schemes.

Therefore the debate is like most not a black and white fight between good and bad and we need to have a grown up debate without each side just calling the other names or saying we won’t listen to you because you support X and know Y.

A lot of people, myself included, have no problem with trying to make this world a better place to live and agree with lots of “pro green” ideas such as any attempt to stop deforestation, prevent overfishing, criminalise big industry who like to offshore their polluting industries to the developing world because its cheaper for them to dump their waste materials. I also whole heartedly agree with moves to stop the pollution of our seas and rivers, I agree with organic farming and most importantly believe we should be putting lots of time and resources into coming up with a cheap efficent renewable energy source that we can use to replace oil and gas.

However I do believe that the public is being scared into supporting ideas such as carbon caps, limits and trading that

Also as the raw data that is used for determining the earths climate which is then used by all climate change scientists is only collected by four agencies it means that if there is flaws in that data any projections based on it are also flawed. So far its been revealed one way or another that three of these four datasets contain issues of some sort or another.

We have also seen major issues with one of these agencies, the CRU, in terms of them not wanting to release their underlying data to researchers which doesn’t inspire trust from those of us who wonder why if they have nothing to hide.

The reason becomes clear on those occasions when freedom of information requests have managed to get the underlying data as detailed analysis of the raw statistics often proves problems in the methodology of these agencies. Most notably in how they collect the data from weather stations which are often moved or replaced and then averages of the remaining nearby stations are then taken and adjustments applied to as replacements.

This often leaves great scope for bias to be applied by those doing the adjustments and this is most clearly seen by the detailed analysis of the core data taken from the weather station at Darwin Zoo. The core unadjusted data from this station shows a clear cooling trend but the actual data used in the reports which had been adjusted showed a clear rising trend. Obviously this is just one example but it shows that major flaws in the underlying data from these four agencies cannot be relied upon as gospel.

So its not because I don’t want a planet for future generations to live in or believe that we shouldn’t look after our planet that I question “some” of the data and reports. It is however because I am a natural sceptic and the debate is being framed in a “we know whats best for you, just do what we say and don’t ask questions” context that naturally raises mine and others suspicions.

The debate has become so politicised that it is very hard to know whether someone is speaking with an agenda or because they have seen the data. If the data is flawed then it’s only fair and right to criticise it.

To de-politicise the debate now is going to be very hard to do but a start would be to make all underlying climate data collected by the four agencies freely available to those that wish to analyse it. Only when all the drama and emotional imagery of drowning polar bears and ice free Himalayas that is seen by many as propaganda is removed and the debate is reduced back to science alone can we resolve this question and come up with a solution.

  • Do I want to live in extreme conditions, with little food or water > No.
  • Do I want to pay £5 a litre for petrol > No
  • Do I want clean, affordable, renewable energy sources > Yes
  • Do I want the debate on climate change to be settled purely on the science with no political consideration (on either side) > Yes
Related Posts with Thumbnails

Posted in Analysis & Review, Climate Change, Dark Politricks Articles, Science.

Tagged with , , , , , .

Support #altnews & keep Dark Politricks alive

Remember I told you over 5 years ago that they would be trying to shut down sites and YouTube channels that are not promoting the "Official" view. Well it's happening big time. Peoples Channels get no money from YouTube any more and Google is being fishy with their AdSense giving money for some clicks but not others. The time is here, it's not "Obama's Internet Cut Off Switch" it's "Trumps Sell Everyones Internet Dirty Laundry Garage Sale".

It's not just Google/YouTube defunding altenative chanels (mine was shut), but Facebook is also removing content, shutting pages, profiles and groups and removing funds from #altnews that way as well. I was recently kicked off FB and had a page "unpublished" with no reason given. If you don't know already all Facebooks Private Messages and Secret Groups are still analysed and checked for words related to drugs, sex, war etc against their own TOS. Personally IU know there are undercover Irish police moving from group to group cloning peoples accounts and getting people booted. Worse than that I know people in court at the moment for the content they had on their secret private group. Use Telegrams secret chat mode to chat on, or if you prefer if you need to or buy a dumb phone with nothing for the NSA to hack into if you are that paranoid.

So if your not supporting this site already which brings you news from the Left to the Right (really the same war mongering bollox) then I could do with some. Even if it's just £5 or tick the monthly subscription box it will be much appreciated. Read on to find out why/

Why?

Any support to keep this site would be appreciated. You could set up a monthly subscription for £2 like some people do or you could pay a one off donation as a gift.
I am not asking you to pay me for other people's articles, this is a clearing house as well as place to put my own views out into the world. I am asking for help to write more articles like my recent
false flag gas attack to get WWIII started in Syria, and Trump away from Putin. Hopefully a few missiles won't mean a WikiLeaks release of that infamous video Trump apparently made in a Russian bedroom with Prostitutes. Also please note that this article was written just an hour after the papers came out, and I always come back and update them.

If you want to read JUST my own articles then use the top menu I have written hundreds of articles for this site and I host numerous amounts of material that has seen me the victim of hacks, DOS plus I have been kicked off multiple hosting companies, free blogging sites, and I have even had threats to cease and desist from the US armed forces. Therefore I have to pay for my own server which is NOT cheap. The more people who read these article on this site the more it costs me so some support would be much appreciated.

I have backups of removed reports shown, then taken down after pressure, that show collusion between nations and the media. I have the full redacted 28/29 pages from the 9.11 commission on the site which seems to have been forgotten about as we help Saudi Arabia bomb Yemeni kids hiding in the rubble with white phosphorus, an illegal weaapon. One that the Israeli's even used when they bombed the UN compound in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead. We complain about Syrian troops (US Controlled ISIS) using chemical weapons to kill "beautiful babies". I suppose all those babies we kill in Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and Syria are just not beautiful enough for Trumps beautiful baby ratio. Plus we kill about 100 times as many as ISIS or the Syrian army have managed by a factor of about 1000 to 1.

I also have a backup of the FOX News series that looked into Israeli connections to 9.11. Obviously FOX removed that as soon as AIPAC, ADL and the rest of the Hasbra brigade protested.

I also have a copy of the the original Liberal Democrats Freedom Bill which was quickly and quietly removed from their site once they enacted and replaced with some watered down rubbish instead once they got into power. No change to police tactics, protesting or our unfair extradition treaty with the USA but we did get a stop to being clamped on private land instead of the mny great ideas in the original.

So ANY support to keep this site running would be much appreciated! I don't have much money after leaving my job and it is a choice between shutting the server or selling the domain or paying a lot of money just so I can show this material. Material like the FSB Bombings that put Putin in power or the Google no 1 spot when you search for protecting yourself from UK Police with "how to give a no comment interview". If you see any adverts that interest you then please visit them as it helps me without you even needing to give me any money. A few clicks per visit is all it takes to help keep the servers running and #altnews alive!

However if you don't want to use the very obvious and cost free ways (to you) to help the site and keep me writing for it then please consider making a small donation. Especially if you have a few quid sitting in your PayPal account doing nothing useful. Why not do a monthly subscription for less money instead. Will you really notice £5 a month?


One Response

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Peter Roe says

    To say that the whole ‘climate debate’ has become politicised is the understatement of the decade. Since the Al Gore (he of Occidental Oil and a string of personal palaces) fantasy film and the ‘hockey stick’ graph, politicians the word over have seized on this scare story in order to rip us off mightily, force the reintroduction of previously dying deadly nuclear fission technologies, allow themselves and their friends to enrich themselves through the derivative ‘carbon trading’ scheme and to generally screw us.

    In reality all the genuine untampered-with data available indicates a natural period of warming that ended in the ’90s, and a current cooling period that is probably associated with the ‘quiet sun’ cycle we now appear to be in. But the facts have never interfered with the self-aggrandizing, self enriching behaviour of politicians, and they won’t do so now.

    ‘AGW’ is a fantasy, but the dangers of dependency on oil originating in unstable parts of the globe are not. There is almost certainly less of the stuff left than is claimed by the ‘producers’, and it will become more and more technically challenging to obtain fossil fuels as time goes by. If the global warming fantasy helps get us off oil, then I guess the end my justify the means to some extent, One way or another we MUST find alternatives – and quickly. Of all the possibilities, so-called Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, in particular the possibility of nickel-hydrogen ‘fusion’ seems the most hopeful (cave-dwellers please please Google”Rossi e-cat” if this means nothing to them) and we had better start praying that this, or something similar, pans out within the very near future.



Some HTML is OK

or, reply to this post via trackback.



css.php