Middle

[Lost Login]

5 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

I didn't need to research anything (and often wouldn't have known what to research beforehand). 

That seems to be a neat summation of your views and position. If somebody tells me something and it is the sort of thing I want to believe I will and if not I will ignore.

Having watched the Energy debate my view is that you have JPW head and shoulders above the rest with DF at the other end. In the middle you have the other three candidates who will attract a range of support. This sort of debate should be meat and drink to SP based on his background and in my view he gave a much more polished performance in this debate than the one at Marown School and if you based your vote purely on this programme you may be tempted to vote for him. That is if you ignore his Michael Grove moment where he effectively decided that the experts were basically wrong on climate change because he had found something on the internet. 

 

 

 

[Declan]

9 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

If hundreds of people over some 18 years tell you the SPC fares are what is limiting tourism, is it not worth at least testing that premise

Yet if 99% of climate scientists tell you something …

[Stu Peters]

Nice conflation Declan. I knew I could rely on you. I've tried to stay away, but they keep pulling me back in.

I'm talking about a trial programme that would cost nothing much to run and could provide a major benefit for our hospitality industry. Or it could achieve bugger all, but at least we'll know and it won't really have cost anything.

You're talking about something that is more to do with politics than science that will cost trillions to 'address' and provide no benefit except to the global industrialists who have a vested interest or the politicians who will use it to tax us all to the hilt. Even if I conceded that it's all about carbon dioxide and it's man-made (which I don't), I don't believe there's a damn thing can be done about it. Anything that improves the environment is a great side effect, of course, but that's not the root problem.

I said at the hustings tonight that I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about climate change and I meant it. But people who cite alarmist IPCC reports don't mention that it's a political organisation that cherry picks the reports and research that promotes its objectives. We've had 50 years of 'scientists say...' doomsday predictions, from imminent droughts to floods to a new ice age to famines...and they've all proved wrong. Al Gore's predictions were wildly exaggerated. Even the IPCC agreed that 'no confident prediction about global mean temperature or it's impact can be made'. So I have more questions than are being answered about climate change, I think it's real but cyclical and natural, but if you're convinced it's my V8 and gas boiler, that's your absolute right.

[TheTeapot]

Hey Stu, what you've just said there, replace climate change with covid and ipcc for who and gore for fauci and you sound just like Courtney headcase.

 

[Chie]

6 hours ago, Stu Peters said:I think it's real but cyclical and natural, but if you're convinced it's my V8 and gas boiler, that's your absolute right.

Then how do you explain the global temperature dropping when air travel was restricted during the pandemic.

How do you explain the measurable and proven gradual increase in global temperature since the introduction of the Industrial Age.

This…

 

[Banker]

Still awaiting manifestos from all candidates except Lynch, Ballafletcher Road area ? 

[Barlow]

14 hours ago, finlo said:

The smoking ban was the only useful thing the government has ever done even if it was copying what everyone else was doing!

And the Isle of Man was late in coming to the party on that one. The Isle of Man could quite easily have been first.

 

13 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

I myself used to enjoy popping into the pub after work to enjoy a pint and a cigarette or two. But being forced to stand on the steps or the doorway made it such an unpleasant experience that I gave up smoking.

I would not like to have to stand in the company of smokers, people who are, by definition, drug addicts.

 

13 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Well no, I don’t see it as a filthy habit. 

I used to enjoy smoking ( as people do, that’s why they do it) and I miss it.

I do appreciate some people may find the smoke irritating. That is why I would advocate coming to some sort of accommodation rather than an outright ban in public premises.

What you were enjoying was the short fix of overcoming an addiction. But it's not seen as such, because the drug is erm, cheap and relatively easy to acquire (and if desperate, 9 times out of 10 you could ask a fellow reeker for a ciggie and be successful). Oh, and you used to be able to smoke anywhere at anytime - on the bus, in a cinema or theatre, restaurants.

Your views on smoking have basically summed up your personality (I appreciate that feeling may be reciprocated)

 

 

[Barlow]

  

13 hours ago, Lost Login said:

You were host of a day time programme that until it changed its name was known locally as the “moanin line” where the people who rang up where from a reasonable narrow demographic, generally people who rang when they thought they had something to moan about and often it was the same rotating group of contributors. Hardly a group on which to hang your hat and base a policy without some basic research.

 

To be fair, Stu Peters was the host of Morning Mandate (RIP) for a number of years, right in there with the nitty gritty of Manx Politics.

[Barlow]

8 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

I think it's real but cyclical and natural, but if you're convinced it's my V8 and gas boiler, that's your absolute right.

You must have grown up within sight of the fag end of industrial Manchester and area. All that shite spewing into the air from long long before you were even born, 24 hours a day.

Multiply that by 10,000 for the world.

And it aint gonna make no difference to our climate? (etc) 

[The Voice of Reason]

2 minutes ago, Barlow said:

And the Isle of Man was late in coming to the party on that one. The Isle of Man could quite easily have been first.

 

I would not like to have to stand in the company of smokers, people who are, by definition, drug addicts.

 

What you were enjoying was the short fix of overcoming an addiction. But it's not seen as such, because the drug is erm, cheap and relatively easy to acquire (and if desperate, 9 times out of 10 you could ask a fellow reeker for a ciggie and be successful). Oh, and you used to be able to smoke anywhere at anytime - on the bus, in a cinema or theatre, restaurants.

Your views on smoking have basically summed up your personality (I appreciate that feeling may be reciprocated)

 

 

“Drug addicts”, “Overcoming an addiction “  That’s a bit strong isn’t it?
 

I just said I used to enjoy having a cigarette at the pub after work.  But that no longer was an option ( not in any meaningful way, like standing outside in all weathers) So I don’t/can’t do it.

If I was addicted I imagine I would be smoking in the few places where it is allowed (beer gardens, at home etc) but it’s too much of a faff so don’t smoke at all.

Is everyone who enjoys the occasional pint a drug addict?

[Stu Peters]

1 hour ago, Banker said:

Still awaiting manifestos from all candidates except Lynch, Ballafletcher Road area ? 

Mine just in from the printer, so mailing begins tomorrow.

[Fluffy123]

On 9/5/2021 at 9:01 PM, pongo said:

Only the candidates who come 1st should get a salary, pension etc.

It's not really a full time job anyhow.

Utter bollocks 

[SleepyJoe]

The IPCC is an intergovernmental body of the United Nations providing scientific reports on climate change - what's political about it @Stu Peters?

[Keiran Hannifin]

https://www.facebook.com/StudioOneIOM/videos/393410835462487/

 

 

[Stu Peters]

33 minutes ago, SleepyJoe said:

The IPCC is an intergovernmental body of the United Nations providing scientific reports on climate change - what's political about it @Stu Peters?

The word 'intergovernmental' is the main clue Joe. And the fact that governments fund their research. As we've seen here recently, the science often comes second to the politics, so I think expect they carefully select their advice from scientists who are on-message. Only my opinion, I'm not trying to convince anyone I'm right and they're wrong, just explaining why I've come to this viewpoint.