Another day, Another Green crap policy proposal that makes me consider my options of which British political party to give my vote to when needed.
I was already pissed off at the “Conservative” party for ruining my favourite fizzy drinks & fruit cordials with that stupid misguided sugar tax under the hopeless May woman.
In my previous blog post I was rolling my eyes at the proposal to ban cheap to run gas boilers in a country where it gets cold enough to freeze your nuts off.
When I got up today I saw in the news they were dusting off and toying with the stupid idea of bringing forward plans to ditch proper cars that actually work with stupid useless electric things so terrible they make even that old socialist sh*tbox the Trabant look partially decent. Continue reading “Don’t Ban Petrol and Diesel Cars You Morons”
Earlier this year, before the Conservative Party got rid of the disaster known as former Prime Minister Theresa May, I blogged that the “Conservative” Party had come up with the bloody stupid green crap policy of banning gas boilers.
While perusing my Facebook timeline just now, it would appear that bloody stupid idea is still on the menu despite the fact the Americans are massively reducing their emissions by increasing their use of this very same natural gas the “conservative” government is planning to ban boilers that use it. Continue reading “Don’t Ban Gas Boilers You Morons”
Some time around 2016/2017, much was being made about how the USA was cutting emissions big style by increasing use of Natural Gas.
Fast forward to today’s UK Budget statement thingy……….
The feedback in the comments were largely not of a positive supportive nature, and more along the lines of it being a batshit crazy stupid idea…. Continue reading “Another Support Losing Green Crap Policy from the “Conservative” Government”
Climate Realists, aka Sceptics, are like a man with an itchy testicle treating it as such – they’re treating a tiny problem as just a tiny problem.
Climate Alarmists, aka Global Warmingists, are like a man with an itchy testicle reacting to it as though they’ve just had a limb cut off with a chainsaw – they’re over-reacting big time.
Another of the dumb things I’ve noticed leftards do of late is dismiss Climate Realists (or “Climate Sceptics” as they diss them as) who post information showing the reality of climate change / global warming / Man-made global warming – because it was on a blog or a messageboard and not a scientific paper. Even though if they’d bothered to actually read the bloody thing they’d realise it was relaying information from scientific papers calling their beloved climate change religion a load of crap based on bad science out into the mainstream and in a digestible format for people who might not otherwise know where to find or even tackle reading such things.
Then when you point this out to them that Climate Realist blogs pass on info from Scientific papers in a similar way to Newspapers + TV News Stations get information from the like of AP & Reuters, the fucktards cut off your comment (about relaying information) and call you stupid…..
Just because a blog or messageboard says Climate change is bollocks doesn’t make it less relavent because “it isn’t a peer reviewed scientific paper”, as all the majority of them are doing is relaying details of peer reviewed scientific papers that says Climate Change / Global Warming / Man-made global warming is bollocks out into the mainstream where more people can see them…. just like blogs / news articles, etc pitching climate change / global warming as a religion do (even if most of pro-global warming ones seem to recycle old information as true from a couple of years before climate realists later showed them to be either wrong or potentially wrong)
‘ Just because a blog or messageboard says Climate change is bollocks doesn’t make it less relavent because “it isn’t a peer reviewed scientific paper”‘
A researched scientific paper fashioned by an educated expert in the field trumps a private blog or message board posting. How one suggests that it doesn’t is baffling.
@john duck: ‘doesn’t make it less relavent because “it isn’t a peer reviewed scientific paper”,’
Are you really stupid or just delusional?
read the rest of it where it mentions that while they may not be scientific papers, they do RELAY SCIENTIFIC PAPERS, as in BASE INFORMATION IN THE BLOG ON STUFF WRITTEN IN SCIENTIFIC PAPERS…. kinda like how newspapers + TV news stations get stuff from news agencies such as AP or Reuters and pass them on, rather than do the hardwork themselves *rollseyes* some people on here really need to go to bloody SpecSavers ^
Their other favourite thing seems to be, particularly when you point fingers at Climategate to show their views aren’t as much a “Scientific consensus” they stomp their feet insisting it is by them then pointing fingers at articles in New Scientist magazine from 2007 (2 years before Climategate was revealed) insisting it is true because that magazine from 2yrs before it was shown to be dodgy says so.
Bin the post of “Energy & Climate Change Minister”.
- Minister for Environment & Conservation
- Energy Minister / Minister for Energy & Utilities (attached to the Department for Business)