Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Sammy Wilson Right Or Wrong!


Solar Cycles

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
Well said and couldnt agree more. I recall 30 - 40yrs ago the US science community had us heading into another mini ice age and now within the last 20yrs its global warming. Ive aired my views many times over this issue and for me Sammy Wilson is 100% correct in what he has done. He is one of our politicians and its about time someone stood up to be counted. Too many are going with the status quo instead of taking a step back and assessing all the evidence and then making an informed decision. For me there is alot of evidence emerging now against global warming (man made) and i wonder for just how long it will remain the topic on everyones lips ! The earths weather patterns run in cycles and so much is still unknown about all the factors that drive our weather/climate. It amazes me how so many claim to know so much about the climate yet our experienced met office can barely get the weather right passed 2 or 3 days ! I know many may disagree with me but this is my view and has been from the outset. However i do agree with conserving energy as the worlds population continues to grow then energy resources will become strained with greater demand so yes this does require better management.

Good on ya Sammy wish there were more like you !!!

I agree with all of those points, seems there are far to many politicians who just tow the party line. How refreshing it is to see someone stand up for what they believe in!

How much of a problem will it be for these people then?
Good on them, it seems that far to many people, consider being a Christain a crime against common sense. Nice to see that science and Christanity can go in hand in hand!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: South Yorkshire
  • Location: South Yorkshire
I agree with all of those points, seems there are far to many politicians who just tow the party line. How refreshing it is to see someone stand up for what they believe in!......

Or even possibly have the slightest inkling of what they're actually on about! I mean,go ask Gordon Brown (or practically anyone else in government for that matter) what they think of the recent PDO shift,the origins of ENSO,current rather peculiar solar behaviour,the physical properties of the CO2 molecule etc etc,and I'd like to bet you'd be met with a glazed-over expression. Now I know governments have myriad expect advisors for policy makers and that you can't expect ministers to be 'world experts' in everything. But the climate debate is so totally fractured and a million miles from concensus that you have to wonder why governments are so utterly taken in by it apparently, and are quick off the draw to silence dissent :lol: . The 'experts' need the government,and government needs the 'experts' (partners in crime?) for the ongoing scam of CO2/climate in their never-ending war on 'carbon',whether that includes the 'dioxide' component or not.

I can't help feeling that if I was a Nu Labuh politician I wouldn't last long in the current climate (pun intended!) Nah - too honest for my own good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey
I agree with all of those points, seems there are far to many politicians who just tow the party line. How refreshing it is to see someone stand up for what they believe in!

Good on them, it seems that far to many people, consider being a Christain a crime against common sense. Nice to see that science and Christanity can go in hand in hand!

It's worth also noting (at the risk of going too far off topic) that being a Christian does not automatically make you a Creationist. It is possible to be a Christian who believes in Evolution (I assure you! :) ).

This line from the link above particularly bothered me:

"I am indebted to the Answers in Genesis organization for the following list of scientists who have doctorates in a variety of fields and who have examined the evidence for themselves and come to the conclusion that creationism is a much better explanation for the origin of the universe and the origin of life than the lifeless theory of evolution. "

The thing is that Creationism isn't an explanation at all - it's a way of sidestepping the issue by deferring to a higher authority (in this case, God). I don't understand how a scientist can feel comfortable sidestepping an important issue like that, especially if that scientist is in the field of biology (as many of the listed scientists are).

I'll stop now, before the Sammy Wilson discussion gets lost!

:)

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cockermouth, Cumbria - 47m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: Winter - snow
  • Location: Cockermouth, Cumbria - 47m ASL
Good on them, it seems that far to many people, consider being a Christain a crime against common sense. Nice to see that science and Christanity can go in hand in hand!

Isn't it a crime? Well maybe crime is too big a word but surely it does break the fundamental rule of science; that is to continually question and verify the thesis (what ever it may be). And at the moment the weight of evidence falls clearly on the side of evolutuion and suggests that creationism is some very simple fictional story to make the complexities of life a little more understandable.

I for one would question the ability of a scientist if they believed in creationism. Science should be the product of a rational mind.

Edit

Bobski got in just before me but I do agree with his concerns.

On the Sammy issue - no he should not have banned the ad. It's censorship and an example of how dictatorship can so easily creep into the democratic process and be excused as democratic because some people voted for him. They voted for him to do the right thing within a framework of whatever political colour he comes not ti impose some personally held belief.

Edited by Red Raven
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
Isn't it a crime? Well maybe crime is too big a word but surely it does break the fundamental rule of science; that is to continually question and verify the thesis (what ever it may be). And at the moment the weight of evidence falls clearly on the side of evolutuion and suggests that creationism is some very simple fictional story to make the complexities of life a little more understandable.

I for one would question the ability of a scientist if they believed in creationism. Science should be the product of a rational mind.

Edit

Bobski got in just before me but I do agree with his concerns.

On the Sammy issue - no he should not have banned the ad. It's censorship and an example of how dictatorship can so easily creep into the democratic process and be excused as democratic because some people voted for him. They voted for him to do the right thing within a framework of whatever political colour he comes not ti impose some personally held belief.

Some interesting views being aired, don't agree with either of these though Red, but that does't make my opinion right or wrong. Your view on the Sammy Wilson case intrigues me, why is it wrong for him to express his views? Surely if most people don't approve, then he will be shown the door come the next Election!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Cockermouth, Cumbria - 47m ASL
  • Weather Preferences: Winter - snow
  • Location: Cockermouth, Cumbria - 47m ASL
Some interesting views being aired, don't agree with either of these though Red, but that does't make my opinion right or wrong. Your view on the Sammy Wilson case intrigues me, why is it wrong for him to express his views? Surely if most people don't approve, then he will be shown the door come the next Election!

If he was simple expressing his views and taking part in a debate fine, but he has imposed his views that he cannot verify and has made no attempt to verify. It's like me saying Marmite should be banned because I don't like it - shouldn't we expect a little more rigorous intelligence from those that lead us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey
  • Location: A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Guildford, Surrey
If he was simple expressing his views and taking part in a debate fine, but he has imposed his views that he cannot verify and has made no attempt to verify. It's like me saying Marmite should be banned because I don't like it - shouldn't we expect a little more rigorous intelligence from those that lead us?

On the flip side, though, if the argument that the advertising is brainwashing people is spurious, and adverts should be allowed to run even if you don't agree with them, then they should - by that same token - allow advertising of tobacco products.

So I say we should either ban both cigarette ads and global warming ads, or else they should both be allowed!

:D

CB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
On the flip side, though, if the argument that the advertising is brainwashing people is spurious, and adverts should be allowed to run even if you don't agree with them, then they should - by that same token - allow advertising of tobacco products.

So I say we should either ban both cigarette ads and global warming ads, or else they should both be allowed!

:)

CB

Hmmm, could there be a link between tobacco advertising and Al Gore's, An inconvienent truth! :D

If he was simple expressing his views and taking part in a debate fine, but he has imposed his views that he cannot verify and has made no attempt to verify. It's like me saying Marmite should be banned because I don't like it - shouldn't we expect a little more rigorous intelligence from those that lead us?

Red that would be a first, intelligence from those that lead us. How many politicians do you know that are blessed with this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Putney, SW London. A miserable 14m asl....but nevertheless the lucky recipient of c 20cm of snow in 12 hours 1-2 Feb 2009!
  • Location: Putney, SW London. A miserable 14m asl....but nevertheless the lucky recipient of c 20cm of snow in 12 hours 1-2 Feb 2009!
Red that would be a first, intelligence from those that lead us. How many politicians do you know that are blessed with this!

Probably about the same number of politicians you know in total. The fact that you disagree with - presumably - all of these people, none of whom I suspect you know, does not make them all unintelligent. And blaming the mistakes they make - oh, so easy with hindsight - on their lack of brainpower really doesn't help the process of trying to get better government. It's like shouting "You stupid w*nkers" from the terraces, and expecting a football team's performance to improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Lincoln, Lincolnshire
  • Weather Preferences: Sunshine, convective precipitation, snow, thunderstorms, "episodic" months.
  • Location: Lincoln, Lincolnshire

All politicians have intelligence, but they are required to "follow the party line" to a large extent, and conform to whatever is expected of them within the political system (I don't think politicians are born out-and-out liars, there must be something within the system itself that encourages them to tell lies).

But in truth, most of the mistakes I see from politicians are the same mistakes as I see from authorities across the board- and the same failings can be detected among the general public in discussions and the like. Short termist thinking, reluctance to take on board more than one point of view on a subject, tendency to follow the crowd and blindly accept certain flawed conventional ways of thinking without question, for example. The difference is that when we have these discussions with those issues coming up, it doesn't matter how much we argue a point, it's unlikely to make much of a difference. Politicians, by contrast, are making decisions that will affect all of us. That's why we notice politicians making mistakes, but it's by no means just politicians who make them.

For example, take the politicians banning all sorts of things. That is certainly a problem, but it's symptomatic of a wider social problem. Did the Government ban snowball fights in schools, or ban conkers, or prohibit men from going near kids without risk of being branded "child-molesters"? No, other areas of society did, and probably by extension of the same arguments as the politicians use for their bans. Look at any debate on fireworks, airguns or pleasure driving, and you'll see Joe Public using the same arguments for banning those.

More on topic, personally, as a general rule, I would not support ads being banned unless they were actively encouraging hate. Most people are intelligent enough to realise that if an ad is spouting nonsense, it should be rejected- and those who don't are simply failing to utilise common sense. As for AGW ads, as there is quite a lot of evidence for AGW, banning them is ridiculous, it's as bad as saying "ban anti-AGW ads", surely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
Red that would be a first, intelligence from those that lead us. How many politicians do you know that are blessed with this!

SC...Are you afraid of people whom you fear may be your betters in knowledge and intelligence? Simply denigrating all-and-sundry is not too clever; maybe try posting some alternative thoughts of your own instead? At least that way, you'd be backing-up your rather sweeping statement... :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Coalpit Heath, South Gloucestershire
  • Location: Coalpit Heath, South Gloucestershire
He's right that the adverts are nonsense and a waste of time.

He's wrong about the science though, his position is extremely illogical.

You sound like Mr Spock!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
Probably about the same number of politicians you know in total. The fact that you disagree with - presumably - all of these people, none of whom I suspect you know, does not make them all unintelligent. And blaming the mistakes they make - oh, so easy with hindsight - on their lack of brainpower really doesn't help the process of trying to get better government. It's like shouting "You stupid w*nkers" from the terraces, and expecting a football team's performance to improve.

Who rattled your cage? On a personal level I know 2 MP's, one is a bright, intelligent, and witty guy.The other a complete W****r, guess which party he represents! Politicians are mostly a bunch of lying, cheating, corrupt bunch of imbociles, ever to grace our wonderful planet. Off course you disagree, no suprises there!!!!!

SC...Are you afraid of people whom you fear may be your betters in knowledge and intelligence? Simply denigrating all-and-sundry is not too clever; maybe try posting some alternative thoughts of your own instead? At least that way, you'd be backing-up your rather sweeping statement... :D
Pete, I'm not the one standing for office, if I was I wouldn't make promises I couldn't keep!

Don't think I would win any popularity contest on here would I. Good job I'm thick skinned. Any how, feel free to have a knock, I await the usual suspects!

Edited by Solar Cycles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Putney, SW London. A miserable 14m asl....but nevertheless the lucky recipient of c 20cm of snow in 12 hours 1-2 Feb 2009!
  • Location: Putney, SW London. A miserable 14m asl....but nevertheless the lucky recipient of c 20cm of snow in 12 hours 1-2 Feb 2009!
Don't think I would win any popularity contest on here would I. Good job I'm thick skinned. Any how, feel free to have a knock, I await the usual suspects!

No, I'd prefer to discuss the thread subject rather than have a slanging match. And not that you care - in fact I suspect you enjoy winding people up - but your popularity rating would soar if you tried to be not quite so offensive to quite so many people quite so often. It really doesn't achieve anything useful for the rest of us - though doubtless it helps you get your frustrations off your chest. Personally, what I like are calmer, less aggressive, more intelligent discussions about matters in hand, preferably based on something more than factually-unsupported opinions and prejudices. You can pop off down to the pub if you want one of those, they're two a penny: personally, I have a higher opinion of Netweather.

Mods, perhaps time to lock this thread? It's turned into a slanging match about party politics and politicians in general - and yes, I have been half-rising to the bait, too. I'm not sure it's saying anything useful about the thread subject any more, let alone about climate change.

Ossie

Edited by osmposm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
  • Location: Blackburn, Lancs
No, you wouldn't, Solar. Perhaps you could try and be a little less offensive to quite so many people quite so often. It really doesn't achieve anything useful for the rest of us - though doubtless it helps you get your frustrations off your chest. Personally I prefer calmer, more intelligent discussions about matters in hand, preferably based on something more than factually-unsupported opinions and prejudices. You can pop off down to the pub if you want one of those, they're two a penny: personally, I have a higher opinion of Netweather.

Mods, perhaps time to lock this thread? It's turned into a slanging match about party politics and politicians in general - and yes, I have been half-rising to the bait, too. I'm not sure it's saying anything useful about the thread subject any more, let alone about climate change.

Ossie

Well maybe if you hadn't been as condescending in the first place, you would get a more civilised response.

Sorry but I'm fed up of this, I enjoy TWS and Iceberg's posts, but the rest are just like a red flag to me. Doesn't help being on so much pain relief, makes me even more grumpy!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Putney, SW London. A miserable 14m asl....but nevertheless the lucky recipient of c 20cm of snow in 12 hours 1-2 Feb 2009!
  • Location: Putney, SW London. A miserable 14m asl....but nevertheless the lucky recipient of c 20cm of snow in 12 hours 1-2 Feb 2009!
Who rattled your cage? On a personal level I know 2 MP's, one is a bright, intelligent, and witty guy.The other a complete W****r, guess which party he represents! Politicians are mostly a bunch of lying, cheating, corrupt bunch of imbociles, ever to grace our wonderful planet.

If you write stuff like this you can hardly be surprised if some of us take offence. It is - as I guess it's designed to be - offensive.....or maybe it's meant to be funny, I'm not quite sure. I'm sorry about your state of health, but you've used it any number of times as an excuse for your edginess.

I suggested you knew very few politicians, and implied that if you knew more you would realise that a lack of intelligence was not generally their problem. Why is that condescending? Because I may know more politicians, senior civil servants and the like than you? I certainly don't think that makes me superior, it just means that because I know some as people (and just listen to them on Radio 4, for god's sake), I know that relatively few are imbeciles or corrupt, and I'm exasperated at your unhelpful blanket dismissal of them all. And why would you care if I did know more, anyway? You despise most of them as a species, and presumably wouldn't want to know any more. Oddly, though, you tell us you do know two MPs, and one of them you seem to like, even admire. That's a 50% approval rating on a very small sample. How on earth does that translate into the view expressed in your last sentence above?

I have no idea of your background, education, profession or tastes, SC, and I don't care. I don't dismiss or reject the views of anyone on the basis of what I believe them to be, I could not have survived in my profession for 35 years if I did. All I am interested in is what you have to say, and to a degree in the manner - or at least the manners - in which you say it. But you often seem to have an instinctive loathing for anyone who takes the time and trouble to write a long (often too long, OK), cogent, decently-argued post that points out the flaws in what you have written.

It's not personal, mate - or wouldn't be if you didn't feel the need to add your trademark touch of needle into the equation so often.

Ossie

Edited by osmposm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
Pete, I'm not the one standing for office, if I was I wouldn't make promises I couldn't keep!

Don't think I would win any popularity contest on here would I. Good job I'm thick skinned. Any how, feel free to have a knock, I await the usual suspects!

Why not treat others with the same degree of respect that you expect for yourself? That's all anyone need ask. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, SC; and if you adopt a softer tone with those with whom you disagree, you'll be answered in a softer tone in response...No one wants a spat - it won't achieve anything! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Swallownest, Sheffield 83m ASL
  • Location: Swallownest, Sheffield 83m ASL
Mods, perhaps time to lock this thread? It's turned into a slanging match about party politics and politicians in general - and yes, I have been half-rising to the bait, too. I'm not sure it's saying anything useful about the thread subject any more, let alone about climate change.

Ossie

Yes. I agree. We already have a politics thread and we are returning to general stuff again..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-29 07:13:16 Valid: 29/03/2024 0600 - 30/03/2024 0600 THUNDERSTORM WATCH - FRI 29 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    Difficult travel conditions as the Easter break begins

    Low Nelson is throwing wind and rain at the UK before it impacts mainland Spain at Easter. Wild condtions in the English Channel, and more rain and lightning here on Thursday. Read the full update here

    Netweather forecasts
    Netweather forecasts
    Latest weather updates from Netweather

    UK Storm and Severe Convective Forecast

    UK Severe Convective & Storm Forecast - Issued 2024-03-28 09:16:06 Valid: 28/03/2024 0800 - 29/03/2024 0600 SEVERE THUNDERSTORM WATCH - THURS 28 MARCH 2024 Click here for the full forecast

    Nick F
    Nick F
    Latest weather updates from Netweather
×
×
  • Create New...