Hi Kevin
Nice little drama. Nothing that everyone on these lists won't already
be aware of, but it does bring home how effective the forces of
conservation are. For all the bleating from the UN and IPCC yesterday,
I don't see any tangible evidence that those forces are any less bent on
lining their pockets while they destroy everything on which their
supposed success depends. The ultimate irony!
Maybe I'm setting the bar too high, but I don't see much hope until
fossil fuel producers begin aggressively to close down their FF
production and transition at scale to ultra low and zero emissions
energy (what I refer to as ULZEE). They can do this willingly or in
response to worldwide state coercive intervention. That's a detail,
albeit a politically significant one. The problem is that this
transition has been left so late, that it's unlikely it can now occur in
an orderly manner because of it's knock on consequences across almost
every aspect of current economic activity, particularly in developed
nations. If the transition means many must suffer some pain, and some
more pain than others, the challenge is to minimise your pain even at
the expense of others' - a macabre global zero sum game. And while
global elites are arguing about that, the few remaining threads holding
the global warming Sword of Damocles, ping one after the other.
The audience for the sequel to Smoking Guns might be very small.
Regards
Robert
On 21/03/2023 08:23, Kevin Lister wrote:
The BBC did a good radio drama on it called Smoking Guns.
It is available on BBC Sounds.
Regards,
Kevin
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023, 21:19 Robert Chris, <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Tom
I'm just beginning to engage in this thread that's been running
for a few days now.
Do you have evidence or can you refer to credible sources that
corroborate the statements you made below. The point I'm trying
to get hold of is not whether there's political bias in the IPCC's
work, that is relatively easy to substantiate. But whether it was
a deliberate and intended act by some actors to slant the the
scientific analysis in a particular way. If it was, who were
these actors, when did they do this, how did they do it, how was
it sustained, and so on.
The IPCC process involves thousands of scientists. My
understanding is that the IPCC is purely a review body and does
not undertake any primary research itself, although it may provoke
research in areas that it regards as worthy of further
investigation. I'm reluctant to posit a conspiracy theory in
which this whole process has been subverted by dark forces, but if
that's what's being proposed, it would be helpful to have some
evidence of it.
We know that the SPMs are subjected to considerable political
editing. While this might impact the way that the media report
the findings, those that take the trouble to engage with the
detail often find it to be a mine of really useful information and
references to the original research.
In the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, I am
tempted to regard the IPCC's considerable shortcomings as emergent
properties of its structure and the sociopolitical context in
which it is operating, and not the result of some malevolent cabal
of controllers.
But if you know something different, please share.
Regards
Robert
On 16/03/2023 17:00, Tom Goreau wrote:
IPCC was given a _political_ mission, make projections what will
happen for a decade or two while governments are in power, not a
_scientific_ mission to determine what the actual impacts would
be to the planet and humanity afterwards (warming in the pipeline).
That flawed time scale was deliberately built by governments into
IPCC’s mandate at the start, IPCC was intentionally _designed_ to
underestimate the problem, and any potential liabilities.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to
[email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/a14da076-9299-406c-ce95-919d98dd7f31%40gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/healthy-planet-action-coalition/a14da076-9299-406c-ce95-919d98dd7f31%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Regards
Robert
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/52749422-14d8-6e75-f8a5-4a9093f2a29d%40gmail.com.
