Member Info for big-blue

"The shocking exposure of a multi-million-dollar, 30-year denial campaign that has undermined science and cast doubt on the dangers of climate change."

Good for you sunserfer, I didn't watch it. I got as far as the word 'shocking' in the click bait headline and can well imagine what the content will be. The internet is overloaded with these - prominent in well promoted in search results.

I had expected you to hit back with the
Global Warming and Climate Change skepticism examined
https://skepticalscience.com

These are of course great tombs of incontestable non-partisan open ended free speaking proof positive slam dunk last words. If you want to hear one and only one voice, fill your head with it. I have seen and read a great deal of the very same junk. It is your problem not mine. You want to believe it, and not question it, your call. Good for you.

Give that man a medal Sargent!

I always find it fascinating how people take it personally when certain basic questions are raised. Why would it be of any consequence what ever I would care to question? Why does it become a personal issue? Could there be some inner conflict in others they are being pushed to confront? Such reactions. Fascinating. I really should have pointed ears. Live long and prosper peeps.

We've been led up the garden path on this one. The lock-in before pay day will be somewhat longer than desired. The testing for green countries is a deliberate action to with hold travel freedom for as long as possible. It's a con.

"narcissist " oh I do like this one. Your established group belief theory is challenged. Your reaction? By your own post, exactly WHO is the narcissist? Take your time...

By the way, you are forgetting the classic fall back answer "but it won't hurt to reduce pollution and clean up te environment so even if the data was fiddled a bit there is no harm done".
Apart from our pretty landscape being decimated by turbines like the march of the Tripods and the ever increasing energy poverty as all fuel prices escalate exponentially to pay for all the "green crap"*, it is what is coming down the road winch should worry people. Very significant restrictions placed on personal mobility locally, nationally and internationally. People live where they do and work where they do because they have personal transport to balance the cost out. When that personal transport is removed due to unaffordable electric vehicles, moving closer to work is not an option due to accommodation costs and jobs don't exist local to the present accommodation. The enforced switch to electric and removal of hydrocarbon fuel has unintended consequences that are not being vocalised because of the closed debate. There's significant trouble ahead and the moves to bring it all forward earlier is ell underway.

*Cameron et al

urmmm... empirical evidence ???
The hockey stick graph is supposed to be just that. I give you links that show the questions over the empirical evidence as chosen, presented analysed and published. Who's the denyer now?

You have interrupted the information available and come to your firm conclusion and will no doubt make you investment decisions based on that. But in resorting to trying to pigeon-hole me as an extremist, a religious zelot, right winger, left winger, upper, downer and any other outsider you can think off in the vain hope one of them will stick rather shows you have no argument to offer. Quite typical, just resorting to personal attacks.

Wellies are smelly anyway - have them back (fooooooooo.....)

I don't do conspiracy theories (stop laughing at the back).

There is story about two ships being built and the name plates switched for some reason. It makes for a good yarn, could even be true. As long as the production company that put the documentary together very cheaply made enough to pay for the town flats in Soho, then the job was a goodun.

Does anybody remember Uncle Remus play kits? If you want to put a face to the name, uncle TP, fix this in your mind so every time uncle TP posts, this is what you will see.

https://www.doyouremember.co.uk/memory/remus-play-kit

I'll be on so many filter lists now, nobody will ever know about the links!

Any way, my intention was to not flog it further as point made, links posted and people can ignore or factor in. Uncle TP has requested an end and return to more pertinent postings.

"RE: market corruption ?Today 09:01

market correction sorry should have checked"

Same thing isn't?

Nzonze, they did challenge me for links! I suspect they will think twice before requesting any more, lol.

Any how, the point has been made and the wise will DYOR with a little bit more depth and breadth one hopes.

My investment here is purely during the recovery of the industry but keeping one beady eye on the progress of the hystericals in their onward campaign to reduce mankind back to the caves. The day it is announced people will have individual travel quotas per year is the day you will say, wish I'd sold up yesterday!

360!

finally.... well you must of course do your own research, DYOR, when it comes to investment decisions and the best research is done with blinkers off.

For those who would like to consider the debate on climate change policies further as part of their long term portfolio research, here are two links. The first is the Guardian and the second is a rather long but interesting analysis of the core evidence in the debate. Remember, the entire climate change industry is based on this initial claim. Given the degree of intrusion into every single part of your life the consequences of the claim has made, and looking at the current sate of total non-debate, to what extent will the climate change brigade further affect you?

It is not whether you believe or disbelieve the claims. Even in the overall supportive Guardian piece, the talk is open about the need to present a particular narrative to cause a certain influence in one single direction even if the data has to be fiddled. The extent of the fiddling is demonstrated in the second link. The motivation behind the need to establish the narrative is not as altruistic as the proponents may have you believe. The reasoning is both political, professional pride and a significant degree of macho chest beating. Oh, and of course money - lots and lots of money. Always keep the 360.

Happy reading.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/feb/09/hockey-stick-graph-ipcc-report

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2008/8/11/caspar-and-the-jesus-paper.html

I try TP to enlighten, I also try to expose. When the preprogrammed dismissals are offered I try to encourage research and debate. Against the brick wall of opinion and hypnosis of some 35 years non-stop one sided propaganda and indoctrination from toddler upwards, I know that in the large part I am ****ing in the wind. To not respond is to play into 'their' hands as has been posted, prove it, prove it, prove it - I dare you. So I do try. I often find I am absolutely not alone in my suspicions. Oh to live in a society where people may speak freely and question openly without the mob attacking. Should I refrain from the argument, or should others put away the pitch forks and flaming torches?

As for investing in this old dog, I am sure there are going to be a few years of rises and falls to make money. But longer term there maybe less of a return. The idea rationing the number of times one may fly by way of a punitive tax on flights above some sort of travel allowance is firmly on the agenda and expect to be implemented in the next year or two. Using the pandemic to scare people against international travel for fear of importing bugs, especially foreign bugs [oh yes the Greens will play that card as and when required] in order to wind down aviation to 'save the planet'. BA and IAG may be one of the lucky ones lasting longer since they can argue green credentials such as economy of scale and investments in 'green' fuels. BA know what is on the horizon which is why they are sinking money in the green fuel schemes. The overall carbon budget is negative, as with those turbines, but the impression and brownie points might just deflect the greens enough to keep going at scale for another, say five years.

Can't help you Johnbri4, but I understand the troubles many have when this truth is placed in front of you. You believed the propaganda, you believed the narrative, you never questioned it and then you discover you were played for a fool and used. Problematic for many people. Should have kept the 360, read between the lines and maintained a critical overview - just in case you were being used.

Here sunsurfer, start with this. It will give a little insight into the subject and why all is not what it seems. Remember I also did actually serve up a strong point of evidence citing the claim that north pole melting equals sea level rise. It is an example of how something that is so fundamentally incorrect is used as de facto proof and repeated over and over as the gospel. Even with thousands and thousands of people screaming at the news editors, they just stuck up two fingers and called all those not accepting the narrative as denyers to be despised and ostracised from society. Now, new journalists are quietly briefed to not refer to sea level rise as a result of any melting of the north pole - which incidentally should have disappeared years according the the climate change proponents but is still there waxing and waning in size over the decades as it allways has been since the last ice age.

Anyway, try this as a leader.....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/03/01/steve-mcintyre-was-michael-mann-exonerated-by-the-oxburgh-panel/

But I am only an engineer, Ive never claimed anything else. I would love to hear what this amazing experiment of rumandcoke is, as I due d say. As far as links to prove anything, this is not quite the place as I am have merely pointed out that the climate change lobby appeared to have been slow to take advantage of the pandemic but over the last few days there are many references to building the new world order post covid and the greens are now very active. With the international conference cop something or other and emergence from lockdown together with a left of center sympathetic president in the US, here we go.
Fascinating use of smoking and oil hidden agendas as proof that there muat be some correlation to climate change claims. Is this the extent of your science? Those who wish to keep the 360 and decide if holding airline stocks as part of a pension plan woyld do well to familiarises tham self with Mann v MacIntyre. This case should have been mainstream media over years but was not because the insight does not follow the narrative. Also lool up the Oxburgh panal findings. Again hidden from the public gaze.

In considering long term stocks for your portfolio, something's are not quite what they seem.

And sunny, if you accept the consequences of climate change claims, what the hell are you doing investing in an airline? There is no logic in your choice. Another mega hypocrite happy to chant the mantra to fit in but safe in the knowledge that tje hippie radicals will never really have an impact.

Too late matey, they are and the hysteria is about to turn all your worlds upside down. I suggest you all educate yourselves.

.... actually just noticed something, "You call yourself a physicist". If you had been paying attention you will recall I said in a very recent post that I am an engineer.

Misdirection and obfuscation is so easy in a debate where the premise is so poorly understood and reported. Setting up my status to an elevated level and then claiming there is a trivial answer that undermines the elevated status such that nothing I may offer is to be relied on or worthy of questioning thereby returning the observer back to the safe plateau of accepting the established climate change narrative. The fundamental basis for establishing and preserving a narrative. It works as long as there is no counter argument. As long as people are corralled into herds of non-questioning supplicants the lie is established. Until, of course, people do start questioning and a gamble on a yes no referendum is taken. What's the saying, you can fool some of the people some of time... incidently this is why the Trump election victory was viewed with such horror and destain. It proved that even in an environment with saturation negative coverage across almost all the mass media the populous could still act with a degree of independence.

I just hope the realisation occurs and the climate hysteria is stopped before chainsaws are taken to the wings of the BA fleet!

So the climate change rhetoric has nothing to do with iAG or the sp? That is an amazing statement given that aviation is cited as a major polluter and should therefore be significantly reduced and some activists would stop flying altogether. Those voices are no longer on the fringe and because there is no challenging of the utter rubbish and nonsense claimed by the activists and indeed the money grubbing so called scientists there is a real danger those policies will be implemented. Just look at the lemming policy on petrol engines at the moment where you are all going to be forced to electric despite the fact the vast majority of people will never be able to afford the overall cost. The hysterical have taken over. As I said before, stocks like IAG are not for the long, long term.

And as for it being down to conduct experiments doing what I can not imagine, 'dare me' to run what experiment? Give me 1 tenth of 1 percent of the climate change industry budget and I will put together a panel of open minded free thinking experts who do not bow to doctrines and will counter every aspect of the climate change claims. I have no idea what rumandpoker is referring to, what is this experiment and what is it supposed to show climate change is happening given that the 'proof' to date has been extrapolation of statistical data presented without error bars and with a base line that keeps conveniently being moved around to force a particular outcome. We saw that in the naughties and teenies when the predicted increase in temperature ended up with an 11 year decline even after the fudging and fiddling of the numbers.

The false and misleading narrative leads to politicians being spooked into enacting policies that result in industries like air travel being loaded with costs and restrictions which depress profits, bankrupt airlines and have to be priced into lower sp and dividends. To say there is no connection is frankly quite absurd.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - put 1000 Bishops in a conference and ask the motion, does god exist?

NASA - They are repeating what other people are saying, oh and by the way now they have declared it a problem the government should give them a billion or two to fund 'urgent' missions into space. Durrrr - wake up and smell the coffee. And what is more, there are a hell of a lot of NASA people that are frankly embarrassed at the political positioning on climate change. But it brings in money and opposing it is therefore frowned on. ssshhhhhussshhh and just take the money, it isn't hurting anybody.

Oh and another thing about the IPCC, half of the scientist in the first meeting were so appalled at what was being pushed they resigned from the conference and would not have their names associated with it. What was left was the true believers prepared to back a fundamental lie reproduced on the front cover - the hokey stick graph. And it is also interesting to note the actual substance in their reports has a whole heap of probabilities and qualifications.

You are clearly a believer, you swallow it up without any question, they have you exactly where they want you. It is a very easy place to be, it is so much simpler to just fall in with the crowd, keep your head down and don't question anything. What kind of societies does that remind you of?

So sunsurfer, we take the analysis of a 6 year old as the evidence that climate change is a truth and ignore all the older people? The idea that a 6 year old who is still learning elementary maths is in any position to make a critical assessment of the proposed causes and effects of human activity is a nonsense. 6 year olds? The judge and jury? And in terms of being able to assess the climate change theories, what information are they fed? 100% one-sided pure indoctrination. Show me anywhere in any school teaching that the counter arguments are presented for analysis at any level in any form. I can guarantee they are not and children that take counter arguments into a school from outside are subjected to pretty intense 're-education' and even disciplinary action. Contesting the climate change claims is strictly NOT tolerated in the classroom or play ground!

As for the empirical evidence, well I pointed out the fraud of the hockey stick graph which has been used as the basis for the whole pyramid of validation. That was supposed to be empirical evidence except it was doctored and falsified to fit a desired outcome. And it doesn't stop there, so much empirical evidence can be ripped to pieces very little stands up. And then there is the analysis which again is almost entirely statistical and does not ever stand up to scrutiny whenever it is actually released from the inner circle. Climate science is the only science that refuses to release all its data and methodology outside the inner core for independent scrutiny. These are real world facts.

And I note you regressing into using terms like conspiracy theory, fake news and the like. They've got you and you are doing their bidding for them. And that is how this fraud is perpetuated. How much money have they had out of your wallet?

The sentiment here is like that scene from The Italian Job sitting in the traffic in the camper van all down and depressed. Cheer up, we won! [we are up today]