"Green" policies are destroying this country

It's been proven in study after study they if you want to have a sustainable population and care about the climate then you need to take as many people out of poverty as possible. The only way to do this is cheap reliable energy. So here's the conundrum we face, to get to the point where enough of the world's population actually care about the climate we are going to need a lot more energy. Wind and solar ain't gonna cut it so what then?

As I said earlier, the Malthusian undercurrent prevalent is for all too see. Too many poor people, hmmm how do we combat that? It's either population reduction through force or through economic growth.

A billionaire, Jeremy Grantham via his tax efficient foundation is the person underwriting weather attribution studies. I have outlined previously the activities of Friederike Otto and World Weather Attribution that is often cited after various weather events claiming said event using their computer model is caused by climate change. The goal is to put this "data" (sic) in front of a judge in the various lawfare actions the activists undertake against taxpayers.

All they are doing is confusing people. My elderly mother phoned me the other evening to tell me that there was a 30C heatwave on the way, it was on the evening news. I asked her who was saying that? George Lee, she replied. I would not worry about it says I, not going to happen, it's July and you have the heating on in the evening.

Essentially there are so many false claims that they have little credibility with the public. Those surveys we get are simply most people parroting the message and feeding the socially expected answer back to the agency gathering the details.

And have you considired how things have improved in the meantime. The world has managed to support a vastly increased population, life expentancy has increased, standards of living have improved, and all due to "fossil fuels" the very thing you despise.

Do you know how NOAA make their sausage? Do pay attention to the y axis and the units and scales used in your links, question are you actually looking at. Do you know the margin of error in output you look at?

Why are you using temperature as a proxy to measure climate change?

Why did you pick 1982? Why did you not pick 1962 or 1942 or any another year for that matter?

Take a look at how NASA adjusts Valentia in their dataset, why does the past become cooler?

Homogenization adjustments . . . what's that?

I don't disagree with your analysis. Spot on about China and Asia, but surely the massive deforestation and habitat loss consequent on the increase in population in Africa (doubling every 20 years since 1950) has to have an impact on weather patterns?

Absolutely. Where vegetation and especially forests are removed it's essentially changing the T-Shirt of the area affected. To understand what I mean by that, the next sunny day there is where you live, go out in a white T-Shirt during the afternoon and give it 5 minutes. Come back in and change it for a black T-Shirt and repeat another 5 minuted. Feel warmer? I bet you do.

Vegetation is vital in warm and dry areas, in particular trees if the landscape can support that in those warm and dry areas. Surfaces which are thin on vegetation and are dry will reflect the sun's energy more into the lower atmosphere, thus rising it's temperature.

Ireland's hottest ever temperature of 33.3°C in 1887 - was the same year that Ireland had it's driest ever year. Kilkenny City where the temperature was recorded sits on very sandy soils (brilliant for drainage) and thus allowed this very warm temperature to be achieved.

Despite us experiencing a warmer climate, this temperature has not been since exceeded. Indeed, the 1800s turned up a few more 33+°c temperatures including another 33.3°C in Markree Castle, Sligo in June 1851 or the 33.4°C in Dublin back in 1876. These figures are generally not spoken about as Met Eireann has put 1880 onwards as the 'reliable' record of weather recording in Ireland.

if the machines had money in them expect a big digger to drive into them to take the money

Plus the insurance issues on the money and the additional cost to transport the money, fill the machine etc

Perhaps, but we can only work off of records that we have. Met Eireann note that the driest year was 1887 on their website with Glasnevin the station there noting Ireland's record driest year:

• Lowest annual total: 356.6mm at Glasnevin, Co Dublin in 1887

From: https://www.met.ie/climate/weather-extreme-records

Dry soils help increase temperatures near the surface as the sun's energy gets reflected as opposed to absorbed by the soil.

I know people like to find any reason to complain but seriously this is a new low

🤦‍♂️

It’s fairly simple why it’s a shop voucher, if you can’t work it out then it’s not my problem

If you are not able to work the machines, well then I suggest you keep all the bottles in a large bag and get someone to help

Which massive deforestation is that? Happy to read any links you have.

CO2 increase has led to increased vegetation in Africa.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229548696_Impacts_of_Climate_Change_on_the_Vegetation_of_Africa_an_Adaptive_Dynamic_Vegetation_Modelling_Approach

Both forest and cropland are increasing at the expense of shrubland, but overall vegetation coverage is increasing. Vapor pressure deficit measurements indicate some soil moisture deficits.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X2201319X

Land degradation is negatively affected by demographic changes and slash-and-burn farming techniques. However, better management can increase crop yields. Crop yields in west Africa have continued to increase.

https://production-new-commonwealth-files.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/documents/Policy-brief-2_Land-Degradation_Final_09032020.pdf?VersionId=YY9IxFeMAXNuaz6U66Kr6muz_SMCIe6Y

There is a ton of academic literature, some of it mutually contradictory. Africa is a vast place, extending from above the northern tropic to below the southern one. Broad analyses of the whole continent tend to be simplistic. They also sometimes confuse climate change with human factors such as farming practices, irrigation, conflict, and more. It's likely that any negative effects of climate change could be more than offset by stable government and increased affluence. One irony is that such transformation is impossible without access to far more energy.

Kinda handy for them that there are no records going back more than 87 years. Had there been I doubt it would have broken the record.

In nearby Death Valley Saturday and Sunday temperatures had a high of 128F (53.3C), The record is 134F (56.7C) from back in 1913.

Is there not cause for concern for the mentality of some one who so eagerly sacrifices his own political career so that some one else can progress theirs biased solely on their sex rather than on their ability

Ed Miliband introduced the climate change act to the UK back in 2008. It more or less has unanimous agreement of main political parties (David Cameron, Teresa May & Nick Clegg also contributed), plus finance people in the city and the permanent government in Westminister, there is not even much difference between the main political parties on the subject.

The loss of energy intensive industries such as Port Talbot steelworks should have been the canary in the coalmine, giving early warning of general economic damage as the costs of climate policies are passed through from energy to all other costs in the economy. Cemex have been shutting cement manufacturing in the UK, thus more cement is imported. The UK equivalent to the CRU in Ireland is OFGEM, In 2010 Milliband neutered them and they no longer comment on climate policies that are driving up electricity costs for UK consumers with prices even rising during long periods of falling gas prices, as a result of increasing grid system inefficiency caused by unreliable generation.

The Tories promised the UK that Net Zero could be delivered at modest cost. The decarbonisation drive is now causing pain across both the UK & Irish economies, and policies such as mandatory electric cars and heat pumps are unpopular. As jobs are lost, and bills keep rising, it could soon get much, much worse. The Tories will be glad they handed the net zero time bomb over to the Labour Party. Keir Starmer has probably got his own problems balancing the Blair faction and the militant faction (Corbyn and Rayner) and probably has no idea the scale of the problems he has inherited, or that he sees the risks that Ed Miliband represents to his new administration since the center power based in London are mostly in agreement, all he has are yes men.

A few years ago the population showed what it thought of the possibility of water services being privatised that resulted in a promised referendum that we are still waiting on, yet now the same is for all intents and purposes happening with electricity.

I have no problem with slashing emissions, but again importing power generation leaves us at the behest of other on supply and cost and leaves our energy security even futher in the red.

But we aren't slashing emissions. It's that part of the whole shambles that bugs me. Outsourcing it elsewhere is moving the problem (temporarily) just so it can be shown that we're doing great and pat ourselves on the back. When soon it will be a big kick in the hole that will be delivered