|
|
Post by icefisher on May 25, 2010 1:11:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on May 25, 2010 2:24:09 GMT
After reading the article, I think there could be another conclusion or two about the results. First, I am going to assume that the audience of undergraduates are really being impartial and trying to judge the debate (although the accounts of placement of applause make this seem to not be the case. It seems like there was a home-field advantage for Lord Monckton's team).
The proposal was:
As I understand it, the level of economic fear in GB right now is pretty high. With the statement at the beginning, it seems that the results may be more an expression of which the audience fears most at this current time. If this is true, then I think the general populace may, in fact, be very close to the same opinion that the audience of this debate was.
So it may be just that economic woes are very real right now, and that any fears are of projected AGW which cannot be perceived. In such a case, the audience is not voting that they do not believe in AGW, but rather that they think the more immediate concern is their economic situation.
But the (obviously friendly to Lord Monckton) account given in the article makes it sound as if the other side of the debate was ill prepared and poorly delivered. That could also account for the results.
I am glad to see the debate taking place.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on May 25, 2010 4:03:34 GMT
So it may be just that economic woes are very real right now If its reaching a majority of Oxford undergrads indeed it is tough times! |
|
|
|
Post by poitsplace on May 25, 2010 5:18:06 GMT
That would be pretty hard economic times, now that you mention it. But even the economic reality flies in the face of the AGW alarmist movement. If the alarmists want to talk "consensus" then they should bow to the reality...the consensus is that it will be FAR CHEAPER to adapt than to cut CO2 emissions. So even if the alarmists are right about the warming...they're wrong about the solution.
|
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on May 25, 2010 5:58:18 GMT
I'm sure it reaches some of them in a painful manner, but even if it is not what you would call painful to most, it can be of a level that gets their attention ... sort of like when I look at my own portfolio right now. That may be more likely. They don't have to be in pain to be affected by it and worried about it.
I agree with poitsplace that even if the AGW folks are right about the warming, they're wrong about the solution.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on May 25, 2010 18:36:54 GMT
I'm sure it reaches some of them in a painful manner, but even if it is not what you would call painful to most, it can be of a level that gets their attention ... sort of like when I look at my own portfolio right now. That may be more likely. They don't have to be in pain to be affected by it and worried about it. I agree with poitsplace that even if the AGW folks are right about the warming, they're wrong about the solution. Yeah their dad's called and complained about excessive use of the credit cards. At least that puts AGW in the proper context. . . .something just before picking up the bar tab you pause for a second and think of dad and drop a pound off the tip. The only thing that can solve the AGW crisis will be common ordinary private demand and the freedom to pursue individual solutions. Governments should just stay out of it until at least an argument that convincing to a super majority of citizens is put together. The government should have stayed out of Galileo's face also. If you look at your history you will find that the nations that lead economically on a per capita basis are the ones that lead environmentally and that the ones that lead economically on a per capita basis are the ones where individual choice and freedoms are respected. |
|
|
|
Post by hairball on May 25, 2010 19:30:31 GMT
The economic crisis, AGW scare and peak oil are part of the same thing. One of the head honchos is a fellow countryman of mine, Peter Sutherland SC, Knight Commander of The Order of St Michael and St George. A former chief legal adviser to the Irish government, European Union Commissioner, Director General of the GATT (later WTO, of which he was the first head), non-executive Chairman of Goldman Sachs International (who are generally credited with causing the economic collapse), non-executive chairman of British Petroleum, and Bilderberg Group steering committee member. When the Trilateral Commission he's a member of met in Dublin last month the Irish media didn't even report on it despite the Prime Minister here giving the opening address. He never stops banging on about Global Warming, that every Westerner will soon live in a Utopia where we only do service jobs and about how agriculture is completely unimportant in international trade deals despite the fact that he looks like he eats a small family for lunch every day.  Peter Sutherland KCMG. |
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on May 26, 2010 1:29:30 GMT
icefisher, I'm not even sure if you're trying to argue with me. What is the point of the first part of the post?
I agree with most of the last 3 paragraphs in your post, but since you quoted me, I think there must be something you are trying to contend with me on.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on May 26, 2010 1:52:41 GMT
icefisher, I'm not even sure if you're trying to argue with me. What is the point of the first part of the post? I agree with most of the last 3 paragraphs in your post, but since you quoted me, I think there must be something you are trying to contend with me on. I thought it was fairly obvious. You stated that apparently the Oxford undergrads are more concerned about the economy than global warming. I agree. I was merely putting it in context that the typical Oxford undergrad is typically not much concerned about the economy either. I think that becomes more obvious when one considers that economic concerns with the general public is number one and concerns about global warming is dead last (out of 19 issues in Britain according to a recent poll), suggesting that for some people the economy could be second to last and you would get the same result. So you will have to tell me if that amounts to a contention with what you are saying I wasn't thinking it was. |
|
|
|
Post by slh1234 on May 26, 2010 2:21:26 GMT
Okay, I understand it now. I was probably giving them a little more credit than you were, but that's not a major difference in our points. You just weren't literal, so I wasn't sure I understood what you meant.
|
|
|
|
Post by poitsplace on May 26, 2010 3:55:25 GMT
He never stops banging on about Global Warming, that every Westerner will soon live in a Utopia where we only do service jobs and about how agriculture is completely unimportant in international trade deals despite the fact that he looks like he eats a small family for lunch every day. Peter Sutherland KCMG. Yeah, they don't seem to get that while service jobs are important...it all requires an industrial base for support...oh, and obviously food. I have to say though, I am impressed with the speed of the AGW collapse. Since climategate the number of believers has dropped sharply and people seem to FINALLY be looking around and realizing..."Wait a minute...warmer weather is GOOD...its cold weather that actually sucks." I suppose it really shouldn't be surprising though. The economy died and economically it has ALWAYS been a bad idea to try to mitigate CO2...no matter what "doomsday" projection is used. The evidence was always thin (or entirely absent) for AGW...and the climategate emails helped to illustrate just how bad it was. And of course...one harsh winter is all it takes to remind everyone that its COLD that sucks. |
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on May 26, 2010 5:41:22 GMT
The economic crisis, AGW scare and peak oil are part of the same thing. One of the head honchos is a fellow countryman of mine, Peter Sutherland SC, Knight Commander of The Order of St Michael and St George. A former chief legal adviser to the Irish government, European Union Commissioner, Director General of the GATT (later WTO, of which he was the first head), non-executive Chairman of Goldman Sachs International (who are generally credited with causing the economic collapse), non-executive chairman of British Petroleum, and Bilderberg Group steering committee member. When the Trilateral Commission he's a member of met in Dublin last month the Irish media didn't even report on it despite the Prime Minister here giving the opening address. He never stops banging on about Global Warming, that every Westerner will soon live in a Utopia where we only do service jobs and about how agriculture is completely unimportant in international trade deals despite the fact that he looks like he eats a small family for lunch every day. Peter Sutherland KCMG. I knew I liked you. |
|
|
|
Post by hunter on May 26, 2010 12:36:28 GMT
I think we can conclude that the fear tinged faux crisis that catastrophic AGW promoters have built careers and fortunes on is becoming passe and that real concerns, like jobs and economy, are taking its place.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter on May 27, 2010 12:28:51 GMT
Another take away in this is that the promoters of catastrophic AGW have to manipulate the public square to suppress the skeptical view point.
When people actually hear well prepared skeptics critically examine the claims of CAGW, and when they hear well prepared promoters of CAGW defend it, CAGW loses.
CAGW promoters know this, and are committed to making sure this sort of open discussion happens in the public square as seldom as possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on May 27, 2010 14:51:39 GMT
Yes this is a lot more than AGW is less important than the economy.
It is a statement that solutions to AGW are incompatible with economy.
|
|
