Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

noggin

The Great Green Smoke Screen

Recommended Posts

Channel 4 (Dispatches) 8 o'clock tonight. Science correspondent Tom Clarke investigates "solutions" to GW such as tree planting, carbon offsetting and green energy tariffs, amongst others.

Looks interesting. :wallbash:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After being canned in favour of a special program about the almost godlike Tony Blair (spot the sarcasm), this show is back on again tonight at 8.00 on Channel 4. Might be worth a look...

:D

CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's with Channel 4 and their anti-agw documentaries these days? I thought Channel 4 were very liberal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's with Channel 4 and their anti-agw documentaries these days? I thought Channel 4 were very liberal.

Nope just putting out TV progs that appeal to the majority, if you want minority TV shows try 'Songs of Praise' or an IPCC press conference :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's with Channel 4 and their anti-agw documentaries these days? I thought Channel 4 were very liberal.

Did you actually watch it? The programme itself had nothing to do with AGW and whether the hypothesis (theory) was right or wrong - it was about Carbon Offsets, how they work, and how (in)effective they are (or not).

I think that, essentially, this programme answered the question "Is there money to be made out of AGW" with an unequivocal "Yes".

:)

CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you actually watch it? The programme itself had nothing to do with AGW and whether the hypothesis (theory) was right or wrong - it was about Carbon Offsets, how they work, and how (in)effective they are (or not).

I think that, essentially, this programme answered the question "Is there money to be made out of AGW" with an unequivocal "Yes".

:)

CB

No I didn't watch it, just caught a bit, is the sort of thing I hear from anti-gwers though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No I didn't watch it, just caught a bit, is the sort of thing I hear from anti-gwers though.

But if we ignore the AGW debate entirely for a moment...

If you were to purchase carbon offsets from a company, presumably you would want that money to be used actually offsetting your carbon footprint. You wouldn't want that money to just go to a company that performs no actual offsetting but gives some (and only some) of your money to a company in a different country which was doing its job anyway, regardless of whether anyone pays a carbon offsetting company or not.

It sounds suspiciously like (some) carbon offsetting companies are basically fleecing people.

Hmmmm... :)

CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if we ignore the AGW debate entirely for a moment...

If you were to purchase carbon offsets from a company, presumably you would want that money to be used actually offsetting your carbon footprint. You wouldn't want that money to just go to a company that performs no actual offsetting but gives some (and only some) of your money to a company in a different country which was doing its job anyway, regardless of whether anyone pays a carbon offsetting company or not.

It sounds suspiciously like (some) carbon offsetting companies are basically fleecing people.

Hmmmm... :)

CB

Yes, I do the get the feeling that a lot of people and companies, some dodgy, are jumping on the current "green" bandwagon in order to make money. There's been a huge explosion of it in the last year or 2. Some people definitely are using AGW as a way to, well, con people. It's the same with any other "big thing", someone will always exploit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I do the get the feeling that a lot of people and companies, some dodgy, are jumping on the current "green" bandwagon in order to make money. There's been a huge explosion of it in the last year or 2. Some people definitely are using AGW as a way to, well, con people. It's the same with any other "big thing", someone will always exploit it.

Sadly all too true - if you get a chance it might be worth watching the rerun (not sure when that is...later in the week).

As with most things that ask you to part with money, it's worth being careful and checking it out first, I suppose...

:)

CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sadly all too true - if you get a chance it might be worth watching the rerun (not sure when that is...later in the week).

As with most things that ask you to part with money, it's worth being careful and checking it out first, I suppose...

:)

CB

Indeedy. I remember a recent news item about this new fad of having solar panels and wind turbines fitted to one's house. They were found to be virtually worthless. They took decades to repay their initial cost and broke down a lot. People are jumping on the bandwagon no doubt to appear to caring, and hip and liberal and cool. It's a caring contest, "i care more than you about the environment, so I'm better!". Similar to Madeleine or whatever else comes across, so people can say they care about it to seem cool. Recreational grief I call it. It's a fad that will fade eventually and people will start up their 4x4's again. Improving efficiency doesn't help to reduce resources anyway, due to jevon's paradox.

Sadly, many people see this hysteria and recreational caring and feel animosity to the idea of AGW as a result, therefore becoming hostile and sceptical towards it. Also the more government tells us AGW is bad and real, the more people will react to that too because there is so much distrust of the government. This is why there seems to be so much scepticism and hostility to the idea. Most sceptics of AGW seem to be highly emotionally hostile to the theory of AGW, suggesting their scepticism is a result of distrust and emotional reasons rather than on the basis of science. Environmentalism may actually have shot itself in the foot, by forcing it on people causing them to reject their messages. Ah well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tesco are reducing the number of carrier bags they are producing reason:

Officially: environmental.

Internally: to save some money.

This will be repeated at company after company where the opportunity allows!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesco are reducing the number of carrier bags they are producing reason:

Officially: environmental.

Internally: to save some money.

This will be repeated at company after company where the opportunity allows!

Yes, everything a company does is to make money, that's what they are for. They are businesses. They don't care about anything unless they can make money out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeedy...It's a fad that will fade eventually and people will start up their 4x4's again. Improving efficiency doesn't help to reduce resources anyway...Sadly, many people see this hysteria and recreational caring and feel animosity to the idea of AGW as a result, therefore becoming hostile and sceptical towards it. Also the more government tells us AGW is bad and real, the more people will react to that too because there is so much distrust of the government. This is why there seems to be so much scepticism and hostility to the idea. Most sceptics of AGW seem to be highly emotionally hostile to the theory of AGW, suggesting their scepticism is a result of distrust and emotional reasons rather than on the basis of science. Environmentalism may actually have shot itself in the foot, by forcing it on people causing them to reject their messages. Ah well.

I agree with a lot of what you say (though not everything, being a grumpy old skeptic myself! :) ) - I won't ruin this thread by talking about AGW at all, especially since I am rambling on about it at great length on other threads!

But I think we agree that people do some things with the best of intentions, while others are just after a quick buck, and others still are just jumping on the lastest bandwagon...

If the Kinks were to write "Dedicated Follower of Fashion" now rather than thirty-odd years ago, I wonder what the lyrics would be...?

:)

CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, everything a company does is to make money, that's what they are for. They are businesses. They don't care about anything unless they can make money out of it.

Its not necessarily a bad thing, its just that I wish many would open their eyes and realise that money rules, environment second. We may then actually be able to advance the cause with a little honesty and may achieve something meaningful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" They seek him here,

They seek him there,

under the ice,

and in the air.

It will make or break him but he really doesn't care,

for he's a dedicated skeptic of AGW......."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
" They seek him here,

They seek him there,

under the ice,

and in the air.

It will make or break him but he really doesn't care,

for he's a dedicated skeptic of AGW......."

I was thinking more along the lines of this:

They seek him here,

they seek him there.

The Eco-nut

With Greasy Hair.

He would never have a bath

Without offsetting it

'cause he's a dedicated follower of fashion...

:rolleyes:

CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you actually watch it? The programme itself had nothing to do with AGW and whether the hypothesis (theory) was right or wrong - it was about Carbon Offsets, how they work, and how (in)effective they are (or not).

I think that, essentially, this programme answered the question "Is there money to be made out of AGW" with an unequivocal "Yes".

:doh:

CB

The muppet who was peddling tree to offset your journey made me laugh. Surely the tree that you've just planted to ease your conscience, was already growing away merrily in another field before being uprooted and planted elsewhere.

Am I missing something ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got floored when daring to criticise tree planting over on the NW announcement thread so will refrain here.

There is money to be made from AGW, and I'll try my damnest to find out the best way of exploiting it ! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I got floored when daring to criticise tree planting over on the NW announcement thread so will refrain here.

There is money to be made from AGW, and I'll try my damnest to find out the best way of exploiting it ! :)

Are trees taboo on NW ??

I'm going to collect sack fulls of acorns, beechnuts, conkers etc this autumn, set up a website & sell them to gullible hippies who can plant them & ease their conscience for say....£10 a go. I might even throw in a plastic pot to put them in :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The muppet who was peddling tree to offset your journey made me laugh. Surely the tree that you've just planted to ease your conscience, was already growing away merrily in another field before being uprooted and planted elsewhere.

Am I missing something ??

What matter is numbers.

If rain forest is chopped and made in to kitchens or something clearly those trees stop taking in CO2 - and the forest soil releases CO2. If those trees are not chopped, are protected, they CO2 wont be released.

As to planting trees, I suspect for each one sold another one is grown - least wise I've not seen tree nurseries run out yet :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in the 70s they told us we would freeze,

but us AGW skeptics know what to believe,

because we are bright,

that we know it's the sunlight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in the 70s they told us we would freeze,

but us AGW skeptics know what to believe,

because we are bright,

that we know it's the sunlight

Well, I don't like being insinuated I'm stupid because I believe in something you disagree with, and it's "sceptic", unless you're American.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I don't like being insinuated I'm stupid because I believe in something you disagree with, and it's "sceptic", unless you're American.

I agree wholeheartedly with your first point - the vast majority, on both sides of the debate, hold their beliefs (for want of a better word) for reasons which are entirely valid to them. I have seen intelligent people on both sides of the debate who have reached diametrically opposed viewpoints by each following their own path through the research. It really is that complicated a suibject.

However, on your second point - the nitpicky, pointless, semantic one (no offence intended, as I am being equally nitpicky, pointless and semantic by countering it! :unknw: ). It is equally valid to use "Sceptic" or "Skeptic" as one sees fit, regardless of whether one is British or American. The bottom line is that the word can be derived from the Latin, Scepticus, or from the Greek, Skeptikos.

Neither is more "correct" than the other. My reason for using "Skeptic", as I have said before, is because I invariably read the alternative as "Septic", which either makes me do a double-take or gives me a faint wave of nausea.

:unsure:

CB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, on your second point - the nitpicky, pointless, semantic one (no offence intended, as I am being equally nitpicky, pointless and semantic by countering it! wink.gif ). It is equally valid to use "Sceptic" or "Skeptic" as one sees fit, regardless of whether one is British or American. The bottom line is that the word can be derived from the Latin, Scepticus, or from the Greek, Skeptikos.

Neither is more "correct" than the other. My reason for using "Skeptic", as I have said before, is because I invariably read the alternative as "Septic", which either makes me do a double-take or gives me a faint wave of nausea.

Well, I always associate skeptic with Americans, though I'll trust you are right on that one, I am no linguist that's for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...