Jump to content
Thunder?
Local
Radar
Pollen
IGNORED

Believing in clean oilsands like believing in ‘magic fairies,’


knocker

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Camborne
  • Location: Camborne

    OTTAWA — Claims that Alberta’s oilsands are environmentally harmless are “lies†and won’t convince anyone in Washington, one of this country’s most famous ecologists said Friday.

     

    Political leaders in Alberta and Ottawa “seem to think that Americans believe in magic fairies — just shut your eyes and say the oilsands are clean four times and it happens,†said David Schindler of the University of Alberta.

     

    He said this reflects the current federal ideology — not anti-science, but “anti-some kinds of science. Anything with ‘environmental’ in it seems to be anathema.â€

     

     

    http://www.ottawacitizen.com/business/Believing+clean+oilsands+like+believing+magic+fairies+scientist+says/8234297/story.html

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    • Replies 20
    • Created
    • Last Reply
    Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl

    Oilsands environmentally harmless? Who are they trying to kid? They're probably one of the most, if not the most environmentally damaging activities in the world today. Won't stop it happening though, it's the second largest oil reserve in the world. WAY too much money involved to let a tiny thing like environmental damage get in the way.

    Try putting oilsands or tarsands into Google image, guaranteed to shock.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Camborne
  • Location: Camborne
    Posted · Hidden by Ed Stone, April 16, 2013 - tripe!
    Hidden by Ed Stone, April 16, 2013 - tripe!

    . WAY too much money involved to let a tiny thing like environmental damage get in the way.

     

     

    Quite, The major reasons for the AGW deniers.

    Link to comment
    Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl

    Quite, The major reasons for the AGW deniers.

    How arrogant.

    I stand to make no financial gain from either the validity or invalidity of the AGW theory and yet I can use my brain to see the huge questions still to be answered, the gaping flaws in the assumptions and the questionable credibility of some of the science.

    Blaming oil money is the biggest of the straw man arguments, made even more flimsy when you follow the trail of money behind Al Gore, the green energy industry and the original founders of the IPCC drive for alternative energy.

    Personally, I prefer to stick to the science.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary
  • Weather Preferences: Cold, Snow, Windstorms and Thunderstorms
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary

    How arrogant.

    I stand to make no financial gain from either the validity or invalidity of the AGW theory and yet I can use my brain to see the huge questions still to be answered, the gaping flaws in the assumptions and the questionable credibility of some of the science.

    Blaming oil money is the biggest of the straw man arguments, made even more flimsy when you follow the trail of money behind Al Gore, the green energy industry and the original founders of the IPCC drive for alternative energy.

    Personally, I prefer to stick to the science.

     

    No need to jump down his throat.

     

    Knocker did not in anyway insinuate that you would make money from AGW, so that's quite a silly argument, and we probably shouldn't get into these gaping flaws that you perceive in AGW, in this thread at least.

     

    It requires at least a large dose of wilful ignorance to think that oil funded propaganda is not the primary reason why we have so many plain, simple, deniers of AGW (and probably most sciences that aren't in support of fossil fuels).

    If more people stuck to and kept up to data with the science, things would likely be much improved. As it is though, too many get their "science" from oil funded, emotive and manipulative denier blogs and websites.

     

    Anywho, tell me more of these dodgy workings between the green energy industry and the IPCC. I didn't even know there was much of a green energy industry when the IPCC was founded!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl
  • Weather Preferences: Snow and lots of it or warm and sunny, no mediocre dross
  • Location: Cheddar Valley, 20mtrs asl

    No need to jump down his throat.

     

    Knocker did not in anyway insinuate that you would make money from AGW, so that's quite a silly argument, and we probably shouldn't get into these gaping flaws that you perceive in AGW, in this thread at least.

     

    It requires at least a large dose of wilful ignorance to think that oil funded propaganda is not the primary reason why we have so many plain, simple, deniers of AGW (and probably most sciences that aren't in support of fossil fuels).

    If more people stuck to and kept up to data with the science, things would likely be much improved. As it is though, too many get their "science" from oil funded, emotive and manipulative denier blogs and websites.

     

    Anywho, tell me more of these dodgy workings between the green energy industry and the IPCC. I didn't even know there was much of a green energy industry when the IPCC was founded!

    My reply was to Knocker, both he and I are long enough in the tooth to be able to disagree on a subject without needing someone else to step in on our behalf. But thank you anyway.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Swallownest, Sheffield 83m ASL
  • Location: Swallownest, Sheffield 83m ASL

    I like the oilsands.  It's about the only way my pension can keep growing these days..........

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: South Yorkshire
  • Location: South Yorkshire

    Quite, The major reasons for the AGW deniers.

     

    Sigh. Another post deleted (in response to this garbage) but this one stays. Why? Absolutely ridiculous. Like Jethro I have no financial interest in anything whatsoever to do with climate change - I 'deny' AGW for no other reason than it is utter,total cobblers. Which part of that assertion is so difficult for CO2-bashers to grasp?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

    It's gone now, barrie...So now you can tell us all just how obtaining gas/oil from oil-sands is 'greener' than, say, wave power?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: South Yorkshire
  • Location: South Yorkshire

    It's gone now, barrie...So now you can tell us all just how obtaining gas/oil from oil-sands is 'greener' than, say, wave power?

     

     

    Who said anything about 'greener'? I'm referring to CO2-inspired climate change / financial gain for 'deniers' etc. No need to cloud the issue.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Camborne
  • Location: Camborne

    Sigh. Another post deleted (in response to this garbage) but this one stays. Why? Absolutely ridiculous. Like Jethro I have no financial interest in anything whatsoever to do with climate change - I 'deny' AGW for no other reason than it is utter,total cobblers. Which part of that assertion is so difficult for CO2-bashers to grasp?

     

    I object very strongly that my deleted post can be interpreted as in anyway inferring that you or or Jethro had any financial interest in climate change. In fact I find the reaction  quite bizarre. It was merely a reference to the fact that the the fossil fuel industry have a vested interest in attacking the 'myth' of AGW and spend huge amounts of money protecting these interests. I have no problem whatsoever with people disagreeing with something I did say, but I have with something I didn't.. A great example of bulverism.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

    Who said anything about 'greener'? I'm referring to CO2-inspired climate change / financial gain for 'deniers' etc. No need to cloud the issue.

     

    I guess I was having difficulty in seeing quite what y'all were arguing about?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: South Yorkshire
  • Location: South Yorkshire

    I object very strongly that my deleted post can be interpreted as in anyway inferring that you or or Jethro had any financial interest in climate change. In fact I find the reaction  quite bizarre. It was merely a reference to the fact that the the fossil fuel industry have a vested interest in attacking the 'myth' of AGW and spend huge amounts of money protecting these interests. I have no problem whatsoever with people disagreeing with something I did say, but I have with something I didn't.. A great example of bulverism.

     

     

    I'm dismayed that you think your deleted post could have been interpreted in any other way than to imply that Jethro and myself have a financial interest. Oh well. Bulverism - one of those obscure words which has recently gained popularity, a buzzword if you will, amongst the armoury of responses used by the AGW fraternity to browbeat those intellectually deficient 'deniers'....

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary
  • Weather Preferences: Cold, Snow, Windstorms and Thunderstorms
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary

    How is it that the responses to knockers post (all completely misinterpreting it, then using it as an excuse to insult and go on anti-AGW rants) are allowed to remain, yet knockers original post has been deleted? 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

    I guess I was having difficulty in seeing quite what y'all were arguing about?

    I'm still having the same problem...Why are so many folks, who seem perfectly prepared to rant themsleves, so sensitive when on the receiving-end of others' rants? Stick and stones...?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary
  • Weather Preferences: Cold, Snow, Windstorms and Thunderstorms
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary

    I'm still having the same problem...Why are so many folks, who seem perfectly prepared to rant themsleves, so sensitive when on the receiving-end of others' rants? Stick and stones...?

     

    Not sure I'm following you RP?

    Seems to me the whole thread just got derailed over a bizarre misinterpretation...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

    Not sure I'm following you RP?

    Seems to me the whole thread just got derailed over a bizarre misinterpretation...

    I think that that must be what I mean, then?drinks.gif 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: South Yorkshire
  • Location: South Yorkshire

    How is it that the responses to knockers post (all completely misinterpreting it, then using it as an excuse to insult and go on anti-AGW rants) are allowed to remain, yet knockers original post has been deleted? 

     

    How can "Quite,the major reasons for the AGW deniers" be interpreted any other way? And my post was also deleted FWIW - but nothing new there. Whilst we're at it,and as I'm,er,not welcome in the climate area, it's good to see that the preaching of such rot is about to be removed from the national curriculum. It's gonna be a long,long haul but y'all will come around to my way of thinking in the end. Give it up guys, y'know it's for the best.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary
  • Weather Preferences: Cold, Snow, Windstorms and Thunderstorms
  • Location: Ireland, probably South Tipperary

    How can "Quite,the major reasons for the AGW deniers" be interpreted any other way? And my post was also deleted FWIW - but nothing new there. Whilst we're at it,and as I'm,er,not welcome in the climate area, it's good to see that the preaching of such rot is about to be removed from the national curriculum. It's gonna be a long,long haul but y'all will come around to my way of thinking in the end. Give it up guys, y'know it's for the best.

     

    Yep, and he explained what he meant by it. If you weren't so wound up in the emotionally driven rhetoric that is such a common part of the climate denial attitude, then you might have seen what he meant too, instead of just jumping to the wrong conclusions. Sparing that, simply accept you got it wrong and move on?

     

    Was climate change part of the curriculum already?

    Do you think evolution and plate tectonics should be removed? You know there are a minority out there that think they're both nonsense too.

     

    Jeez, if the world comes round to thinking that taunts, dismissals and flippancy, in any way, trumps evidence and understanding in science, it will have become a very sorry place indeed.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Posted
  • Location: Camborne
  • Location: Camborne

    How can "Quite,the major reasons for the AGW deniers" be interpreted any other way? And my post was also deleted FWIW - but nothing new there. Whilst we're at it,and as I'm,er,not welcome in the climate area, it's good to see that the preaching of such rot is about to be removed from the national curriculum. It's gonna be a long,long haul but y'all will come around to my way of thinking in the end. Give it up guys, y'know it's for the best.

     

     

    Because it was linked to the first two posts that concerned the fossil fuel industries and the environment. It takes a bizarre jump to think I'd suddenly changed tack and was attacking a couple of people in the forum as I explained in post #11.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Archived

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

    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    ×
    ×
    • Create New...