• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

'The Great Global Warming Swindle': Is Climate Change A Myth?

ted_bloody_maul said:
...

All very depressing. Do you know how the present figures for climate migrants compare with non climate-related migrants at present, though (this article seems to be dealing with projected trends)?
The reason I that asked my original question, about how many would be climate change migrants are actually drowning out there in the Mediterranean, is because I haven't seen any figures mentioned anywhere, just the fact that there seem to be more and more people trying to cross the Mediterranean by clinging to smaller and smaller boats and rafts. More and more desperation.

Just how do the 'experts' decide what factors, the neat little labelled boxes, in which combinations, whether Climate Change, politics, civil conflict, economics, exhaustion of resources, population growth, etc. etc. are to blame in any given situation? My overall impression is that bigger factors create symptoms which give rise to smaller factors, which symptoms might be the obvious candidates for the blame, but which actually serve to obscure the true reasons for the migrations. 'Economic Migrant,' as a label, doesn't really explain what those factors are which lead to the economic necessity of migration, for example.

The quantifiable and accelerating desertification of Sub Saharan Africa being one of those key bigger factors, with everything else following on in its wake.

To be honest, I believe that a lot of 1st World 'experts' and scientists have been so busy getting a bead on the effects of Global Climate Change, that even the 'fine details' on the scale of Africa, the effects on real time populations in knife edge regions like the equatorial belt's Third World regions, haven't been getting full attention.
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/tiempo/issue08/desert.htm

Desertification: the scourge of Africa

...


Africa provides increasing evidence for linking the impact of climate and climate change and variability with the incidence of environmental degradation in arid and semi-arid lands.

...

Michael Bernard Kwesi Darkoh, a leading authority on desertification issues, is Professor of Geography at Kenyatta University.
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
Just how do the 'experts' decide what factors, the neat little labelled boxes, in which combinations, whether Climate Change, politics, civil conflict, economics, exhaustion of resources, population growth, etc. etc. are to blame in any given situation?

The Christian Aid document on which that article is based suggests they believe themselves able to do it and its they who are making the case here. They might be inaccurate, of course, so it's difficult to see what significance there is in its figures (or rather its projections).

Pietro_Mercurios said:
My overall impression is that bigger factors create symptoms which give rise to smaller factors, which symptoms might be the obvious candidates for the blame, but which actually serve to obscure the true reasons for the migrations. 'Economic Migrant,' as a label, doesn't really explain what those factors are which lead to the economic necessity of migration, for example.

True. The problem seems to be a combination of environmental factors and economic ones, though. Australia has environmental problems, for example, but because of its strong economy this hasn't displaced large sections of the population. However, the same Christian Aid report suggests that one of the major causes of displacements are development projects. Projects which can be beneficial in respect of the economy risk the habitat of some populations. Even development programmes which might alleviate environmental problems, like dams, also has the same effect.
 
My original question, "how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?", still stands. It's a kind of rhetorical question.

The migrant internment camps on the little islands and on the coastal boundaries of the EU and the Middle East are already full to bursting, with places like Malta begging for more support from its EU big brothers and it doesn't look like there's much interest in keeping a close tally on all the bodies floating.
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2581249.ece

Doomed to drown: the desperate last calls of the migrants no one wanted to rescue
ndependent. By Peter Popham in Rome. Published: 25 May 2007

A young Eritrean looks straight at the camera, waving a red sweatshirt above his head. The mother in brown near the bow clasps her small baby as the propeller of the Yamaha outboard engine twists uselessly in the water. The sun beats down on the turquoise water as a swell begins to lift the waves over and into the woefully crowded boat.

This is what we are in the habit of calling "an everyday tragedy". But it is the first time it has happened in front of our eyes.

The photograph was taken from a Maltese armed forces reconnaissance plane on Monday morning 80 nautical miles south of Malta, roughly halfway between the coast of Libya and the southernmost point of the EU. At around the same time, some of the 53 people on the boat, all of them from Eritrea, were begging their friends and relatives in Europe by satellite phone to help them, saying the boat's engine had stalled, that the sea was rising and that the boat risked being swamped. Calls were placed to Malta, towns in northern Italy and to London.

Nine hours later, at about 6.30pm, a fast offshore patrol vessel of the Maltese armed forces reached the zone where the 10-metre-long boat had been logged. Why this powerful boat, capable of top speeds of more than 80mph, took so long to arrive is a mystery. It drew a blank.

"We continued the search until dark," reported Malta's armed forces chief, General Carmel Varsallo, "extending the zone a further 10km in the hope of finding something, but found nothing." There is probably a simple explanation. An Eritrean woman called Lepetan, living in the Italian city of Bologna, who believes that her brother was among the passengers, had spoken to several people in the boat on Monday morning. "They called me to say water was coming on board, the engine was broken, they wanted me to get people to help them," she said. "Nobody had come to help, they told me."

She - and others in Italy who had received similar calls - phoned the coastguard on the island of Lampedusa,south of Sicily, to relay the message. When Lepetan called the boat back at 2.30pm, there were no Eritrean voices at the other end, only a recorded message in Italian telling her to try later.

In the city of Bergamo, an Eritrean called Jonas had the same experience. On board this nameless boat were Jonas's brother, sister and fiancé, and several other relatives, about 10 in total. He had spoken to them repeatedly during the morning, after he had received the first call pleading for help. But when he called again at 3pm, the phone was dead.

It is possible that the batteries of both phones died at the same time. Possible but unlikely. Given the rising swell, the dead motor and the insane overcrowding of the boat, it seems more likely that it went down some time after 2pm on Monday with all hands. The Maltese patrol vessel, arriving more than four hours later, found no trace.

Nameless people, a nameless boat, a horrible death, all made shocking and vivid by the photograph and the reports of phone calls to people who are now our neighbours in Europe.

"Imagine if there had been 53 white Europeans on that boat, what would have been done to rescue them," said Laura Boldrini, in the Rome office of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees. "It is clear discrimination, as if their lives don't have the same value." But the deaths of these 53 migrants - supposing that a miracle has not intervened and their rudderless boat does not swim back into view during the next few days - is far from uncommon. At least 10,000 people are believed to have drowned in the Mediterranean attempting to cross illegally into Europe. Many of them, caught by sudden storms, never had a chance. These ones did.

This week's tragic events recalled the incident in 2005 when a much bigger boat packed with around 200 Africans was caught in a storm and spotted by the Maltese military five miles off the small island of Gozo. Last year a transcript of the exchanges between rescuers and army command was leaked to Malta Today, the Maltese Sunday paper.

The captain of the fast rescue boat sent to the site told his command: "There seem to be a big quantity of people... 4.3 miles from Gozo... heading north." HQ radioed back: "Captain A Mallia... told us to monitor them and keep a distance away from them."

Commenting on the leaked exchange, the Maltese Prime Minister's office said it was "standard practice" to keep at a distance from migrant boats "in order to verify the intentions of the persons on board". "Operational units are kept at a safe distance to avoid interfering with the migrants' boat in any manner which could compromise its safety." On that occasion some 30 people died before Italians rescued the rest in Italian waters.

If the 53 Eritreans on board this boat had been rescued by the Maltese, they would have found themselves packed into an old British Army camp outside the town of Safi, which is already full to the brim with around 3,000 would-be immigrants: equal to the combined force of the island's police and army. The cost of keeping the immigrants eats up 49 per cent of the police and army budget.

Nor do the immigrants have any desire to be in Malta. The enterprising ones escape and pay sailors to take them to Sicily. Malta's crisis demands a European solution. But the EU has no appetite for this one.

Yesterday General Vassallo said his force had done "everything possible" to locate the drifting boat. Meanwhile, every day tens of such boats are venturing across the Mediterranean from Libya. A journalist in Valetta said: "We've reached an emergency situation very early in the season. We're in for a very tough summer."
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2611745.ece
http://www.guardian.co.uk/libya/story/0,,2090156,00.html
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/CHI929428.htm
http://no-racism.net/article/134/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4336493.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3712696.stm
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2002/09/15/italy_boat020915.html
etc. etc. etc.

If I were a gambler, it's a problem I'd lay good money on continuing to get worse.
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
My original question, "how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?", still stands. It's a kind of rhetorical question.

The problem is how you spot a climate migrant. There are plenty of obvious ones on the Costa Del Sol (which causes other problems), but I doubt whether anyone headed in the other direction would say it was the weather that drove them.

Granted the drought has played a big part in the Darfur crisis, but the underlying conflict was there already. There has been a steady stream of migrants for many years, and while climate change will undoubtedly make it worse, it's certainly not the sole cause.

People are still migrating to Phoenix in large numbers, which doesn't make any sense at all in terms of climate change.
 
wembley8 said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
My original question, "how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?", still stands. It's a kind of rhetorical question.

The problem is how you spot a climate migrant. There are plenty of obvious ones on the Costa Del Sol (which causes other problems), but I doubt whether anyone headed in the other direction would say it was the weather that drove them.

Granted the drought has played a big part in the Darfur crisis, but the underlying conflict was there already. There has been a steady stream of migrants for many years, and while climate change will undoubtedly make it worse, it's certainly not the sole cause.

People are still migrating to Phoenix in large numbers, which doesn't make any sense at all in terms of climate change.
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?
Do you keep asking that to make a point, or because you genuinely don't know?

It's really developing an "Ever Pick Your Feet in Poughkeepsie?" sort of ring to it.
 
ghostdog19 said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?
Do you keep asking that to make a point, or because you genuinely don't know?
Both.

It's a fairly straight forward question. Considering the amount of prevarication and it has already produced, it's a good one. Worth giving some thought.

Whatever the real figure, I suspect it's probably higher than many suspect.

Global Warming is not somewhere off in the future, it is already happening. In Africa, its effects are exacerbated by overpopulation and the exhaustion of natural resources. I suspect much of the escalating crisis around Africa has the same few root causes.

And migrants to Phoenix probably waste energy and burn carbon by running air conditioning.
 
ghostdog19 said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?
Do you keep asking that to make a point, or because you genuinely don't know?

It's really developing an "Ever Pick Your Feet in Poughkeepsie?" sort of ring to it.
So, what answer would you give, ghostdog19? Or, does the question really make no sense to you at all?

It's almost certain that some of the would be migrants have been forced to it because of Climate Change, even if it's only a proportion of the total. So how many of the drowned, would it be single figures, tens, hundreds, thousands, 1%, 10% 30%, more?

:confused:
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2581249.ece

...

"Imagine if there had been 53 white Europeans on that boat, what would have been done to rescue them," said Laura Boldrini, in the Rome office of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees. "It is clear discrimination, as if their lives don't have the same value." But the deaths of these 53 migrants - supposing that a miracle has not intervened and their rudderless boat does not swim back into view during the next few days - is far from uncommon. At least 10,000 people are believed to have drowned in the Mediterranean attempting to cross illegally into Europe. Many of them, caught by sudden storms, never had a chance. These ones did.

...
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
ghostdog19 said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?
Do you keep asking that to make a point, or because you genuinely don't know?

It's really developing an "Ever Pick Your Feet in Poughkeepsie?" sort of ring to it.
So, what answer would you give, ghostdog19? Or, does the question really make no sense to you at all?

It makes sense to me, only initially not the way you were intending it. This shits for real, but it's way beyond us to quantify the cost,which is the meaning I gleaned from what you were saying. but as you've now said, it was just a straight up question, one you yourself don't know the answer to, that kinda puts us in the same boat (not a tasteless pun). I think a pork-pie hat would suit you and I think Laura Boldrini has a point.
 
I don’t believe in climate change and I never have, I watched the program and to me it put it totally into perspective that it is a money thing for governments and businesses – SO carbon footprint my Arse I will burn as much electricity and boil as many kettles as I like because I have a CHOISE and the freedom to choose! :p

And until I am held down and slapped around my buttocks with a live Cod covered in superglue I do NOT have to follow the flock like a little lost sheep. :twisted:
 
I don't think that climate change is something that one can "believe" in or not. There has never been a time when the Earth's climate wasn't changing.

The question is whether or not one believes that the current changes are entirely natural, entirely man-made or a combination of both.
If it's a combination then how much is natural and how much is man-made.

Plenty room for a lot of beliefs there I think.
 
That the climate is constantly changing, that much is undoubtedly true. I think, however, that the truth of mankind's contribution to it lies somewhere between 'more than we'd like to believe' and 'not nearly anywhere close to how much we're told'.
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?

None. As I explained before, I don't think you could describe any of them as climate migrants.

I recall a study on how climate change would affect the health of the UK. Oddly enough they discovered that it would mean a net decrease in deaths. There would be more probems with certain diseases, but these were outweighted by a drop in cold-related deaths.

So how many people's lives were saved by global warming this winter? ;)
 
I'd say about a thousand people a month are dying on the crossing from Africa to Europe, mostly trying to escape economic disaster zones grossly exacerbated by climate change mainly in the forms of drought and desertification. Obviously unemployment caused by agricultural collapse and internal population movement will contribute to the rise in tensions leading inevitably to armed conflict in turn leading to more of the same. If I was an African I'd take my chance on the high sea and when I got here I'd be a fuck lot angrier than the Africans who live around me seem to be.

Anyone who gives any credence to the doc that started this thread, having read the reactions of the scientists misquoted or the history of the producer, is a complete tosser and a moron. :twisted: :twisted:

Climate change may be an almost entirely natural event but that doesn't mean we shouldn't take the relatively easy steps necessary to stop any human element in the process, indeed we'd benefit from a cleaner environment, who doesn't want that ?
 
Climate and the environment and natural resources - all a bit like the world of technology, medicene and pharmacutials.

We could all be using renewable resources and wireless electricity (or a replacement for electricity) by now, in fact last century.

We could all have enough food.

We could all live without cancer, knowing it is a matter of a injection or two and it goes away in weeks.

We could all be using clean efficient vehicles which do not run on electricity derived from inefficient sources or run on explosions.

We don't.

Why?

Because companies are making too much money out of making drugs to treat the symptoms of cancer and not the cancer itself.

Because there are lots of companies involved with the inefficient technologies we use now for many things inc vehicles that there is too much money involved in that to replace it at the moment.

Because making everything cleaner and more efficient would mean change and replacing the money making but highly inefficient things we use now - and that cost is not going to be taken on by anybody at the moment.

Cost. Money.
 
Or...

We could all be driving cars, using tumble dryers and watching television but the people that operate the trams, manufacture wringers and own cinemas won't allow it. ;)
 
If I'm not very much mistaken electricity was once regarded as something to be regarded with suspicion or skepticism.
 
coldelephant said:
If I'm not very much mistaken electricity was once regarded as something to be regarded with suspicion or skepticism.

Perhaps. However, the point here is that, for example, drug companies have eradicated diseases in the past even though they could arguably have made money from post infection treatments. Besides, renewable energy will not be cost free and it won't be self-supplied. There will still be money to be made from it and more than likely it will be made by the companies who currently supply us with non-renewables.
 
crunchy5 said:
Anyone who gives any credence to the doc that started this thread, having read the reactions of the scientists misquoted or the history of the producer, is a complete tosser and a moron. :twisted: :twisted:

To call someone who gives credence to an entirely feasible point of view, albeit one that you don't subscribe to, a complete tosser and a moron is the type of thing a complete tosser and a moron might do :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
 
Scunnerlugzz said:
To call someone who gives credence to an entirely feasible point of view, albeit one that you don't subscribe to, a complete tosser and a moron is the type of thing a complete tosser and a moron might do :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:


Scunnerlugzz said:
To call someone who gives credence to an entirely feasible point of view, albeit one that you don't subscribe to, a complete tosser and a moron is the type of thing a complete tosser and a moron might do :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

My comments were clearly aimed specifically at those who still believe, or pretend to, that the information imparted in the documentary was correct unbiased and well presented, if that includes you my view is unchanged, if it doesn't I ask you to withdraw your remarks directed at me.

So, for the purposes of the discussion, I will take it you give credence to the man and his work in the documentary, despite all the evidence given that would lead an intelligent person to doubt that work. Or do you acknowledge those failings and decide to publicly ignore your doubts because you think they represent an attack on the way you live your life. You may note that in the other parts of my post and other posts in the thread that I acknowledge the possibility of climate change being a natural event. You aren't I take it one of those people who deny the actuality of climate change are you, perhaps you're someone who believes we are all deluded victims of a conspiracy mounted by the solar panel industry or even a member of the Revolutionary Communist Party ? :shock:
 
I don't particularly agree with the gentleman in question's career moves.
However only an unintelligent person would shoot the messenger.


As for "the type of thing a complete tosser and a moron" might do comment I stand by it.

If you resort to sweeping generalisations and name calling you can hardly be offended by your own term of reference.
 
When I watch a program on the telly, I do not look up who made it and who for but the fact is that I never bought into global warming before the program

Anyhow I still recycle and that stuff to preserve natural resources but I am not a moron :x and I never believe anything I read or watch else it will make you paranoid
;)
 
andrew1461 said:
When I watch a program on the telly, I do not look up who made it and who for but the fact is that I never bought into global warming before the program

Anyhow I still recycle and that stuff to preserve natural resources but I am not a moron :x and I never believe anything I read or watch else it will make you paranoid
;)

Whilst a good degree of scepticism about our various media is always healthy would it not be more paranoid to never believe anything you read or watch?
 
Scunnerlugzz said:
However only an unintelligent person would shoot the messenger.

Not always true, it's a quick and efficient way of replying to the message without getting ink on your hands.

So, you don't agree with the guy or the program so clearly don't qualify as a tosser or a moron in this case, I'm always a bit dubious about folk who claim they don't "toss" at all.

Don't forget this thread is about the program there is at least 1 other thread about Global warming in science if you want to argue about that, as far as I'm concerned the program has been conclusively rubbished by all the evidence presented after the fact. :twisted:
 
Conclusively rubbished? Really?

So are you saying that the correlation between Global warming and Sun spot activity as presented on the programme doesn't exist then?

Or is it just as you think the maker of the programme is not your cup of tea then anything he presented can be dismissed out of hand without bothering to check?
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?

None,economic migrants,probably quite a lot,to be able to relocate from your home country takes a fair bit of cash, forget images of poor staveing peasants leaving their country to look for a "better" life, it does'nt happen,it's only those with a bit of cash who think they can make a bit more, who do it.Yes, I'll probably get shot down in flames for making that statement,but just think about it !.
As for Global Warming ?, it's happened many times before without our help !.
 
LividBullseye said:
As for Global Warming ?, it's happened many times before without our help !.

Agreed, however that doesn't mean we aren't exacerbating the effects of a natural event with our greenhouse gasses and it doesn't mean that it won't wipe out 95% of life on Earth like it did in the Permian extinctions or at the very least convert Terra from being the benign place we evolved our comfy lives on to a hell hole where we scratch an existence if we're the lucky ones.

Weather out's nice for July isn't it :?:
 
LividBullseye said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
So, how many climate migrants from Africa, do you think, were drowned in the Mediterranean, this month?

None,economic migrants,probably quite a lot,to be able to relocate from your home country takes a fair bit of cash, forget images of poor staveing peasants leaving their country to look for a "better" life, it does'nt happen,it's only those with a bit of cash who think they can make a bit more, who do it.Yes, I'll probably get shot down in flames for making that statement,but just think about it !.
...
Since that's such a massive generalisation, it's safe to assume that it's unlikely to be true. Yes, most of the refugees that make it as far as the Mediterranean and the shores of Europe, are probably ones with at least a bit of money. That doesn't necessarily mean they're only goal is to make more.

I have met a few Africans over the years, some of whom were refugees, from East and West, North and South. War refugees in the main, not Climate refugees, at least not directly. Some of them were so traumatised, by life experiences of such horror and endurance, that many in the West might just not be able to comprehend.

LividBullseye said:
... As for Global Warming ?, it's happened many times before without our help !.
True. This time it's getting a bit of an artificial boost. In the past there were never so many people and the level of human organisation and culture was never so highly developed, or fragile.

So, this time things could get interesting.
 
Back
Top