• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Political manipulation of climate change by governments

flogger

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
18,049
Reaction score
4,907
Location
Wokingham, England
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Many snicker at the accusation that governments are complicit in the current AGW scare and that they are simply following the advice of their scientific advisors. These three public information videos financed using public taxpayer monies would seem to suggest otherwise by going far beyond what the science supports in order to scare their respective taxpayers into compliance. In Europe in particular this has been fair game

This one aired on the BBC was clearly meant to programme the guilt into the conscience of parents whilst scaring the kiddies about their futures too. Obviously this acheived the clever double header of programming both present and future taxpayers. Needless to say this propaganda piece was devoid of any legitimate scientific content.

Act on CO2: Bedtime Story - YouTube

This one was paid for by the UK government is so graphic it had to be pulled by the BBC. But the fact that someone in government thought that financing and then airing this shocker would be advisable in the first place is what is so troubling

10-10 - No Pressure: green ad shows kids exploding GRAPHIC!!! - YouTube

And then you have this one financed by EU money that wheels out that old alarmist cliche the polar bear. The cute and cuddly polar bears are always good for guilt trip or two even though their populations are actually flourishing ! (warning graphic)

Polar Bear - YouTube

When you see this sort of government backed media disinformation campaign its little wonder why some of the more gullible out there are so vehement in the defence of claims of looming catastrophe isnt it ? :(
 
Last edited:

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
94,200
Reaction score
46,633
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Lots of propaganda out there about seat belts too. For shame, governments. Trying to encourage responsible choices. For shame.
 

flogger

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
18,049
Reaction score
4,907
Location
Wokingham, England
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Lots of propaganda out there about seat belts too. For shame, governments. Trying to encourage responsible choices. For shame.

Yeah broadcasting doom laden scary bedtime stories ,exploding schoolkids and pulverised polar bears is alright. No shame in spending taxpayer cash presenting those kind of 'facts' in such a 'realistic' manner when they fit your politics right ? Its not your energy taxes that are skyrocketing each year off the back of this crap after all ...... yet

Good grief :roll:
 
Last edited:

iacardsfan

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 17, 2011
Messages
1,981
Reaction score
806
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.
 

flogger

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
18,049
Reaction score
4,907
Location
Wokingham, England
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.

Manipulation is one thing exploitation quite another. These ads were simply a politically saleable conduit for increasing the tax burden on the basis of gross distortion. Maybe its just that I dont like having my pockets emptied by my government on the basis of a scam
 

the_recruit

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
4,207
Reaction score
2,615
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
...whereas, of course, the anti-AGW crowd is entirely objective and free of political manipulation. Wake up.
 

the_recruit

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
4,207
Reaction score
2,615
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They arent the ones fraudulently emptying my pockets :(

Yeah, keep believing that. :roll:

High-Gas-Prices.jpg
 

the_recruit

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
4,207
Reaction score
2,615
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
When I buy fuel I'm getting something in return. What exactly is it I have gotten from the 40% green CO2 tariiff on my UK energy bills since 2009 ? :(

It's not exclusively a benefit to you, it pays for a reduction in the negative externalities of global warming, or so the theory goes. In the same way you're forced to fork over extra quid for a car equipped with a catalytic converter and other pollution reduction technology.
 

flogger

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
18,049
Reaction score
4,907
Location
Wokingham, England
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's not exclusively a benefit to you, it pays for a reduction in the negative externalities of global warming, or so the theory goes. In the same way you're forced to fork over extra quid for a car equipped with a catalytic converter and other pollution reduction technology

So you'd be quite happy to see yourself scammed on the basis of an increasingly dodgy hypothesis and no warming for the last 15 years ! Somehow I'd seriously doubt that.

UK energy bills are set to double by 2020 despite falling commodity prices and expected national gas self sufficiency by 2015 purely on the basis of this stealth tax. If you can afford to pay for such moral superiority be my guest. Me I get a bit angsty when I'm getting 'volunteered' for it. I can currently afford the heating bills but our old folk certainly cant. Such is the cost of paying for that moral superiority then :roll:
 
Last edited:

the_recruit

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2011
Messages
4,207
Reaction score
2,615
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So you'd be quite happy to see yourself scammed on the basis of an increasingly dodgy hypothesis and no warming for the last 15 years ! Somehow I'd seriously doubt that.

UK energy bills are set to double by 2020 despite falling commodity prices and expected national gas self sufficiency by 2015 purely on the basis of this stealth tax. If you can afford to pay for such moral superiority be my guest. Me I get a bit angsty when I'm getting 'volunteered' for it. I can afford the heating bills our old folk certainly cant. So much for moral superiority then :roll:

The science isn't a scam and you're deluding yourself if you consider the evidence "increasingly dodgy" - the exact opposite is true.

Have reports of the consequences and extent of AGW been over-reported? Yes. But that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening or that the science isn't there. You're simply buying into the exact same overblown propaganda from the opposite side by doing so.

And combating AGW doesn't have a damn thing to do with morality. It's purely an issue of practicality. The purported effects of AGW, if true, are undesirable. Plain and simple.
 

flogger

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
18,049
Reaction score
4,907
Location
Wokingham, England
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The science isn't a scam and you're deluding yourself if you consider the evidence "increasingly dodgy" - the exact opposite is true.

The IPCC is a political body not a scientific one and the guy in the picture who heads it up isnt even a scientist but a railway engineer . There are thousands of scientists in this field yet this is the guy who is their spokesman which says it all really ! :shock:

Have reports of the consequences and extent of AGW been over-reported? Yes

As my OP amply illustrated

But that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening or that the science isn't there.

But it isnt and 100% of the models the speculation was initially based on have failed

You're simply buying into the exact same overblown propaganda from the opposite side by doing so

I've spent years looking for this so called hard science . Yet it has turned up missing every time

And combating AGW doesn't have a damn thing to do with morality. It's purely an issue of practicality

It currently has a whole lot more to do with reality. And the reality is that there has been no warming be it AGW or otherwise for 15 years now which even the IPCC has been forced to confirm. So again what is my tax bill is supposed to be 'combating' again ?

The purported effects of AGW, if true, are undesirable. Plain and simple

Theres a lot of things that if true would be undesirable. I prefer to base my future on things that are self evidently fact than speculation and I 'm not very keen on currently paying for the latter.
 

Muhammed

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Messages
6,426
Reaction score
2,219
Location
Mecca
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.
Climate realists did not write the the climategate e-mails. They climate fraudsters did that to themselves.
 

gslack

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
1,250
Reaction score
334
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The science isn't a scam and you're deluding yourself if you consider the evidence "increasingly dodgy" - the exact opposite is true.

Have reports of the consequences and extent of AGW been over-reported? Yes. But that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening or that the science isn't there. You're simply buying into the exact same overblown propaganda from the opposite side by doing so.

And combating AGW doesn't have a damn thing to do with morality. It's purely an issue of practicality. The purported effects of AGW, if true, are undesirable. Plain and simple.

Cool story bro! Next time tell it with unicorns...

Your article is about the UN IPCC's latest alarmist nonsense.. I know this because the guy saying that nonsense was this guy, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.. He's a politician and latest UN alarmist goon..

And this guy, Rajendra Pachauri another alarmist goon...
 

What if...?

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
37,052
Reaction score
15,171
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.

This phenomenon, and the tools and methods used to accomplish it, is one of, if not the, biggest problem facing our society.

It makes it almost impossible for us to talk.

The more I look at it, the more it looks like scientists had real concerns and frightening models, and somebody had the bright idea to bring in the PR guys to spin up a fear campaign. I would imagine because America is a big, slow ship. And it takes her decades to turn. But there was concern that thirty years might be too late, so they went with a fear campaign to hurry things along.

I think man is contributing to climate change, global warming, whatever you call it. It should probably be addressed, among other things, from a sense of stewardship for the only planet we got, if nothing else.

A wise people would have listened to their frightened scientists and said "Here is money. Go figure this out. Quickly." And told the people straight up, "We may have a problem, the scientists are looking into it. We'll keep you apprised. In the meantime, think about how you can save a little energy here and there. Insulate and what have you. It just makes sense."

We're not real wise though.

And an endless barrage of high tech propaganda isn't helping a bit.
 

code1211

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
47,695
Reaction score
10,466
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Lots of propaganda out there about seat belts too. For shame, governments. Trying to encourage responsible choices. For shame.



Education and indoctrination are two very different things.

You apparently can't recognize the difference.
 

Mithrae

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
7,306
Reaction score
3,541
Location
Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
So you'd be quite happy to see yourself scammed on the basis of an increasingly dodgy hypothesis and no warming for the last 15 years ! Somehow I'd seriously doubt that.
Pop quiz y'all. The world is not warming anymore because:

A > 2000-2009 was hotter than 1990 to 1999
B > 11 of the 12 hottest years in the past century have occurred since 2001
C > 1998 was very hot (an average 0.025 degrees hotter than 2010!)
D > 2008 was very cold (0.007 degrees colder than the 1981-2010 average; or 0.116 degrees colder than 2001, the 12th hottest)

(Edit: The year isn't done yet, but for the record 2013 so far is shaping up to be hotter than 2012, just as 2012 was hotter than 2011; with an average over eight months of 0.21525 degrees above the 1981-2010 average, if my maths is correct, that'd make 2013 the 6th warmest year on record in the unlikely event that number remained steady.)

###

Many snicker at the accusation that governments are complicit in the current AGW scare and that they are simply following the advice of their scientific advisors. These three public information videos financed using public taxpayer monies would seem to suggest otherwise by going far beyond what the science supports in order to scare their respective taxpayers into compliance. In Europe in particular this has been fair game

This one aired on the BBC was clearly meant to programme the guilt into the conscience of parents whilst scaring the kiddies about their futures too. Obviously this acheived the clever double header of programming both present and future taxpayers. Needless to say this propaganda piece was devoid of any legitimate scientific content.

Act on CO2: Bedtime Story - YouTube
How long have you lived in a democratic country, I wonder?

The way it generally works is, a government is elected on the basis of its policies and promises to deliver certain results. Often they renegue on those promises; but in theory, they should do what they can to pursue the goals for which the people elected them. Now I haven't looked into it much, but from a brief glance it seems that the Labour government of 2009 (when that video was aired) had made election promises to reduce greenhouse gas emissions:
"The country has also missed the target of cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 20% from 1990 levels by 2010 that was set by Labour before coming to power in 1997."

That promise was broken, with emissions going from 593 million tonnes per year in 1990 to 496 million tonnes when Labour left government in 2010; a decrease of only 16.3%, and that in spite of considerable 'outsourcing' of emissions to foreign countries.

However it seems to me that your complaint here is simply against a government making a big show of doing what it was elected to do. Sure, you may not have voted for Labour yourself - but complaining about how democracy works neither reveals some grand conspiracy by governments, nor undermines the information provided by the scientific community.

This one was paid for by the UK government is so graphic it had to be pulled by the BBC. But the fact that someone in government thought that financing and then airing this shocker would be advisable in the first place is what is so troubling

10-10 - No Pressure: green ad shows kids exploding GRAPHIC!!! - YouTube

And then you have this one financed by EU money that wheels out that old alarmist cliche the polar bear. The cute and cuddly polar bears are always good for guilt trip or two even though their populations are actually flourishing ! (warning graphic)

Polar Bear - YouTube

When you see this sort of government backed media disinformation campaign its little wonder why some of the more gullible out there are so vehement in the defence of claims of looming catastrophe isnt it ? :(
Your evidence that the these videos were funded by the UK government and EU money, please.

Judging by the language the first one was put on Youtube by a teenager, and while humorous it is blatantly obvious that the "no pressure" irony is propaganda against the 10/10 campaign. There's a link to the site there ( Welcome to 10:10 | 10:10 ), but strangely enough I cannot find that video anywhere there.

The second one explicitly says that it was made for Plane Stupid, which "is a loose association of autonomous regional groups.[3] It is inspired by networks like Earth First! and the earlier peace camps and road protests. It is funded by donations.[4]"

So unless and until you show us the evidence that your claims of governmental funding for those two videos are true, it looks very much as though it is you who is running a fear and misinformation campaign here.
 
Last edited:

code1211

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
47,695
Reaction score
10,466
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
People from both sides manipulate anything they can grab onto to make the other side look bad, their side look better.



The problem is that spending government funds to indoctrinate the uneducated is a bit unethical.

Imagine that. A government operating without ethical guidance.

Well, it worked pretty well for Hitler so, why not?
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The problem is that spending government funds to indoctrinate the uneducated is a bit unethical.

Imagine that. A government operating without ethical guidance.

Well, it worked pretty well for Hitler so, why not?


HEEEEEY GODWIN

I'm curious as to when in Conservaland "educate" and "indoctrinate" became synonyms.
 

code1211

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
47,695
Reaction score
10,466
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
...whereas, of course, the anti-AGW crowd is entirely objective and free of political manipulation. Wake up.



The difference is that one side is asking me to give them money to finance yet another boondoggle and the other side is merely pointing out that the boondoggle is happening.

You see, I don't care if someone has a hair brained idea. Folks with hair brained ideas are often fun to watch and sometimes produce good results with the outside the box thinking.

It's when those with the hair brained ideas hold me up, take my money to spend on their hair brained idea, waste that money on the hair brained idea and then demand more that I get a tad irate. This is what is happening.
 

code1211

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
47,695
Reaction score
10,466
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It's not exclusively a benefit to you, it pays for a reduction in the negative externalities of global warming, or so the theory goes. In the same way you're forced to fork over extra quid for a car equipped with a catalytic converter and other pollution reduction technology.



A catalytic converter converts auto emissions into CO2.

Interesting bit of a cross purpose there, don't you think?
 

code1211

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
47,695
Reaction score
10,466
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The science isn't a scam and you're deluding yourself if you consider the evidence "increasingly dodgy" - the exact opposite is true.

Have reports of the consequences and extent of AGW been over-reported? Yes. But that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening or that the science isn't there. You're simply buying into the exact same overblown propaganda from the opposite side by doing so.

And combating AGW doesn't have a damn thing to do with morality. It's purely an issue of practicality. The purported effects of AGW, if true, are undesirable. Plain and simple.



The head of NASA seems to disagree with you:

NASA Chief Questions Urgency of Global Warming : NPR
<snip>
I have no doubt that ... a trend of global warming exists. I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with. To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change. First of all, I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown. And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take.
<snip>
 

code1211

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
47,695
Reaction score
10,466
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
HEEEEEY GODWIN

I'm curious as to when in Conservaland "educate" and "indoctrinate" became synonyms.



Who's Godwin?

They are not synonyms. That's the point.
 
Top Bottom