Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 08 Dec '15 22:59 / 2 edits
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/french-weatherman-fired-for-promoting-book-sceptical-of-climate-change

    A weather forecaster for French state television has been fired after releasing and promoting a book criticising politicians, scientists and others for what he calls an exaggerated view of climate change.

    Philippe Verdier’s dismissal from France 2 comes a month before Paris hosts a UN conference aiming for the most ambitious worldwide agreement yet to limit global warming. He announced his dismissal in an online video over the weekend in which he described it as an attack on media freedom.




    French weatherman taken off air after questioning climate change


    France Televisions, which owns France 2, would not comment on Monday. French media reported that the network said Verdier had violated ethical rules. Many media organisations have guidelines about journalists publicly expressing personal opinions on subjects they cover.

    Verdier was initially suspended a month ago, after his book, Climat Investigation (Climate Investigation), came out and he sent an open letter to François Hollande, the French president, saying the climate conference “won’t solve anything”.

    In an online video he released at the time, Verdier criticises the “complete hype on the climate” by scientists, politicians, business lobbies and environmental and religious groups. “You are dramatising things to underline your will to gather the world’s powerful and defuse a pending cataclysm,” he wrote to Hollande.

    Verdier questioned the president’s sincerity in promising to help the environment and asks him to plant a tree in the Élysée Palace to prove his “green” credentials.




    The conference from 30 November to 11 December is based on the results of more than 100 years of climate science, and top officials from 196 countries, including President Barack Obama, will arrive in Paris to talk about ways to slow climate change.

    Most climate scientists agree that the planet’s climate is changing largely because of human action. Though some public officials and a few climate scientists disagree, the world’s scientific organisations say changes such as increasingly extreme weather and rising sea levels are a result of the buildup of heat-trapping gases, especially carbon dioxide, from the burning of coal, oil and gas.

    Some weather forecasters in the US have faced similar issues. Donald Wuebbles, a climate scientist at the University of Illinois, notes the difference between television weather forecasters who look at daily weather and scientists who study long-term change over periods of at least 20 to 30 years. Often television weathermen do not study the long-term effects and statistics.

    Wuebbles said on Monday that Verdier’s claims that temperatures have levelled out are contradicted by data. Wuebbles added that temperatures may go up and down from year to year but that the overall long-term trend was upward
  2. 08 Dec '15 23:03
    Heretic!

    Burn him at the stake!

    Unbeliever!!

    It's like a modern day Spanish Inquisition.

    Some things just never change.
  3. 08 Dec '15 23:04
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/french-weatherman-fired-for-promoting-book-sceptical-of-climate-change

    A weather forecaster for French state television has been fired after releasing and promoting a book criticising politicians, scientists and others for what he calls an exaggerated view of climate change.

    Philippe Verdier’s dismissal from ...[text shortened]... emperatures may go up and down from year to year but that the overall long-term trend was upward
    The liberals here are trying to limit the 1st amendment on the subject too.
  4. 08 Dec '15 23:08 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by joe beyser
    The liberals here are trying to limit the 1st amendment on the subject too.
    There are trillions of dollars at stake.

    Notice these talks on climate change have very little if nothing to do with alternatives to energy. All it is about is taxation on current energy sources that will generate huge pots of money for governments all around the world.

    It's like a world wide government stimulus plan.

    I'm surprised they just don't have people like this killed considering all the money that is at stake.
  5. 08 Dec '15 23:10
    Originally posted by whodey
    There are trillions of dollars at stake.

    Notice these talks on climate change have very little if nothing to do with alternatives to energy. All it is about is taxation on current energy sources that will generate huge pots of money for governments all around the world.

    It's like another government stimulus plan.
    I agree there is a lot of money at stake, but the globalists want to reduce our standard of living as well.
  6. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    08 Dec '15 23:15
    Originally posted by whodey
    There are trillions of dollars at stake.

    Notice these talks on climate change have very little if nothing to do with alternatives to energy. All it is about is taxation on current energy sources that will generate huge pots of money for governments all around the world.

    It's like a world wide government stimulus plan.

    I'm surprised they just don't have people like this killed considering all the money that is at stake.
    I'm not surprised you keep posting such obvious lies. It is what you do as the commercial says.
  7. 08 Dec '15 23:36
    Originally posted by joe beyser
    I agree there is a lot of money at stake, but the globalists want to reduce our standard of living as well.
    It's a win/win.

    They empower themselves, while disempowering any opposition.
  8. 08 Dec '15 23:37
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    I'm not surprised you keep posting such obvious lies. It is what you do as the commercial says.
    Your name calling grows tiresome.

    Again, if you would like to participate in the thread by contributing in a constructive manner then feel free.
  9. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    08 Dec '15 23:39
    Originally posted by whodey
    Your name calling grows tiresome.

    Again, if you would like to participate in the thread by contributing in a constructive manner then feel free.
    If you want to stop spouting grotesque and obvious lies maybe I would respond in some manner besides pointing out that you were a despicable liar.

    Issues regarding changes in what energy sources are used are at the very forefront of climate change solutions. And you know it.
  10. 09 Dec '15 00:09
    Originally posted by whodey
    Your name calling grows tiresome.

    Again, if you would like to participate in the thread by contributing in a constructive manner then feel free.
    . . . if you would like to participate in the thread by contributing in a constructive manner then feel free.

    Best laugh I’ve had all day.
  11. 09 Dec '15 01:23
    Originally posted by whodey
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/french-weatherman-fired-for-promoting-book-sceptical-of-climate-change

    A weather forecaster for French state television has been fired after releasing and promoting a book criticising politicians, scientists and others for what he calls an exaggerated view of climate change.

    Philippe Verdier’s dismissal from ...[text shortened]... emperatures may go up and down from year to year but that the overall long-term trend was upward
    he is not a meteorologist. he is not there to offer opinions. he is there to present the weather.

    you're damn right he was fired.
  12. 09 Dec '15 02:11 / 5 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    If you want to stop spouting grotesque and obvious lies maybe I would respond in some manner besides pointing out that you were a despicable liar.

    Issues regarding changes in what energy sources are used are at the very forefront of climate change solutions. And you know it.
    They are not lies at all

    I submit that although they talk about other means of energy or even removing CO2 directly from the atmosphere, they are not really interested in it.

    https://www.yahoo.com/politics/saving-the-world-may-be-1310073531105334.html

    . The EPA website’s climate-change page discusses carbon capture from flue gas as one approach, but doesn’t mention ambient-air carbon removal. Most of the mainstream environmental organizations avoid discussing it. “We’re happy to see research on these approaches,” Hawkins says, “but they’re not the first order of business, which is to deploy the techniques we have today to reduce and eliminate emissions.” Lackner, for his part, considers that a head-in-the-sand position: “This is a disruptive technology in many ways,” he says, “so it’s hard to gain traction. Many in the environmental community are not aiming at solving the climate change problem as such, but stopping fossil fuels. They see any discussion about getting carbon out as a distraction from those goals. They hate the oil companies, so they don’t want carbon-neutral gasoline.” They want bicycles.

    So of course they discuss such things, in fact, they have to in order to have some image of credibility and honesty, but they are not at all interested in it.

    That is why many oppose the one viable source of energy that is needed if these folks are really serious, which is nuclear power.

    Now lets see, what is worse? A melt down or the destruction of the earth?

    Now off you go and buy a bicycle.
  13. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    09 Dec '15 02:19 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by whodey
    They are not lies at all

    I submit that although they talk about other means of energy or even removing CO2 directly from the atmosphere, they are not really interested in it.

    https://www.yahoo.com/politics/saving-the-world-may-be-1310073531105334.html

    . The EPA website’s climate-change page discusses carbon capture from flue gas as one approach, but ...[text shortened]... is nuclear power.

    Now lets see, what is worse? A melt down or the destruction of the earth?
    You've quoted and extensively cut and pasted from this article before but I fail to see how it proves your claim. Certainly responsible solutions to the climate change problem have to principally rely on technologies that are effective NOW not things that may or may not be effective at some point in the future. Research into such things is fine, but does not change the fact that there are low emission technologies available today which can reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. Your claim that people who want to do something about climate change aren't interested in other energy sources is a pathetic lie.

    EDIT: I see you edited another cut and paste that you have already cut and pasted before. Ho-hum.

    Nuclear power is not a viable or cost effective option; it's a very dangerous way to boil water that creates large amounts of waste that are toxic for tens of thousands of years.
  14. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    09 Dec '15 02:32
    Originally posted by whodey
    They are not lies at all

    I submit that although they talk about other means of energy or even removing CO2 directly from the atmosphere, they are not really interested in it.

    https://www.yahoo.com/politics/saving-the-world-may-be-1310073531105334.html

    . The EPA website’s climate-change page discusses carbon capture from flue gas as one approach, but ...[text shortened]... hat is worse? A melt down or the destruction of the earth?

    Now off you go and buy a bicycle.
    BTW, according to that article the unproven technology that Lackner is espousing would require 100 MILLION machines and have costs in the multi-TRILLION range. Is that what you are supporting?
  15. 09 Dec '15 03:20 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    You've quoted and extensively cut and pasted from this article before but I fail to see how it proves your claim. Certainly responsible solutions to the climate change problem have to principally rely on technologies that are effective NOW not things that may or may not be effective at some point in the future. Research into such things is fine, but does ...[text shortened]... to boil water that creates large amounts of waste that are toxic for tens of thousands of years.
    Feel free to ignore the article, by all means. It was either that or attack the credibility of the author or attack me for misquoting it etc.

    How about this? John Beale is a former top-ranking EPA official in the Obama administration who told congressional investigators he was working on a "green economics" project to "modify the DNA of the capitalist system".

    Then there is Naomi Klein, a fanatical anticapitalist and climate activist who said, "Capitalism is increasingly a discredited system because it is seen as a system that venerates greed above all else. There is a benefit to climate discussion to name a system that lots of people already have problems with for other reasons. I don't know why it is so important to save capitalism It is a pretty battered brand. Just focusing on climate is getting us nowhere. Many, many, more people recognize the need to change our economy. If climate can be our lens to catalyze this economic transformation that so many people need for other even more pressing reasons then that may be a winning combination."

    French economist Serge Latouche asserts "We are currently witnessing the steady commercialization of everything in the world. Applied to every domain in this way, capitalism cannot help but destroy the planet much as it destroys society, since the very idea of the market depends on the unlimited excess and domination. A society based upon contraction cannot exist under capitalism".

    Extremist groups throughout the world endorsed a proclamation titled the Margarita Declaration on Climate Change, which calls for, among other things, an end to the capitalist hegemonic system.

    Need more?

    Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated. – Ottmar Edenhofer