Markduc Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 1 minute ago, manxman1980 said: Care to share these scientific studies which have been peer reviewed? University of Colorado studies just as valid as the raving’s of a challenged teenager 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted February 16, 2022 Author Share Posted February 16, 2022 1 hour ago, Kopek said: ...but that does allow such as SP to have a platform for their outrageous views for five years and to hell with the next election? Heading towards Trumpism and QAon??? He's balanced out by 23 other MHKs. Stop panicking 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 (edited) I think the £42 million earmarked for “green stuff” would be far better spent on overseas aid. Particularly to those countries which because of geo, social and economic circumstances can’t afford the luxury of adopting greener policies and have to keep relying on cheaper, more polluting ways of living. For example giving them the capital to adopt recycling facilities. A drop in the ocean yes but I think that using the £42 million in this way would reap more ecological benefits worldwide than anything we spend locally. Not much good the IOM feeling smug about our own green credentials when in some of the world they can’t afford to drink clean water Edited February 16, 2022 by The Voice of Reason 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 2 hours ago, Kopek said: Two votes per person, one favourite and stick a pin in the list for the other. You don't necessarily have a mandate Stu. Well he does. He may well have been the favourite and the other candidate the pin stick one. We don’t know. Anyway that’s how democracy works. I’m surprised you have to have that pointed out to you. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 19 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said: We don’t know. Yes I suppose if you don't bother to read the results we can't know. If you do read the results it's pretty clear. David Fowler - 163 Keiran Hannifan - 553 Alison Lynch - 792 Stuart Peters - 965 Jane Poole-Wilson - 1,788 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted February 16, 2022 Author Share Posted February 16, 2022 52 minutes ago, manxman1980 said: Care to share these scientific studies which have been peer reviewed? https://www.colorado.edu/today/2022/02/11/paris-climate-agreement-goal-still-within-reach-suggests-new-cu-boulder-study https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/16/fact-check-have-we-really-avoided-the-worst-case-climate-change-scenarios https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10515705/Worst-case-climate-predictions-no-longer-plausible-study-shows.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
english zloty Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 (edited) A little deep but has anyone studied Kondratieff waves at all? I did early 90s and even back then the theorists were starting to look beyond the sixth (health) and to the seventh as either the internet of things/and or climate transition. In plain English back in the mid 80s people were predicting the next innovative and economic boom would be in health and medicine. By extension because there is money to be made from it, folk have more chance of living longer. The seventh is the same, innovation and spend on the climate will bring a period of boom economy. It might therefore be argued the urgency for change is being promoted by those who will most benefit from it. That is not to state there isn't a change occurring but that the timing and urgency maybe driven by economic gain. Even locally you can see certain 'green' organisations stoking up the fire at every opportunity, in the main because they see £££. https://www.sociostudies.org/almanac/articles/the_sixth_kondratieff_-_the_new_long_wave_of_the_global_economy/ Ps. My studies early 90s related to new renewables and the reinvigoration of nuclear power as a clean option. Anyone following such matters will know the UK is rushing to commission mini nuclear plants (as was predicted). Of course convincing folk not to be nimby for the greater good might be more of a challenge. Edited February 16, 2022 by english zloty To add the ps for context 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted February 16, 2022 Author Share Posted February 16, 2022 It's weird how worked up some people get when Stu Peters comes up. He's 1/24th of all MHKs. It's not like he's running a massive political party. His presence in Tynwald is healthy and provides for more varied political discourse. Last time I checked we didn't live in a totalitarian 'climate' state... long may that continue. I think is views are probably representative of at least 1/24th of the population. So what's the problem? Instead of telling us all how wrong he is... let's hear your great ideas for saving the planet! 3 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted February 16, 2022 Share Posted February 16, 2022 2 hours ago, Markduc said: University of Colorado studies just as valid as the raving’s of a challenged teenager 1 hour ago, 0bserver said: https://www.colorado.edu/today/2022/02/11/paris-climate-agreement-goal-still-within-reach-suggests-new-cu-boulder-study https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/16/fact-check-have-we-really-avoided-the-worst-case-climate-change-scenarios https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10515705/Worst-case-climate-predictions-no-longer-plausible-study-shows.html None of this supports the views expressed by Peters in which he has suggested climate change is a positive thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted February 17, 2022 Share Posted February 17, 2022 Stu was elected fair and square, you can't take that away from him. It doesn't matter why people voted for him or for what reason, the fact is they did in sufficient numbers for him to be elected. To be fair to him his views on climate change were fairly well known before the election too. Democracy is something to be greatful for, many people in the world don't have it. It should be encouraged and developed. Ours has a long way to go, especially regarding our constitutional arrangements with the UK, but the election of MHKs is one aspect that is fairly well done. The STV system was arguably fairer, but that was scrapped because the lawyers paid to be returning officers found counting numbers instead of crosses too difficult IIRC. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted February 17, 2022 Share Posted February 17, 2022 7 hours ago, 0bserver said: It's weird how worked up some people get when Stu Peters comes up. He's 1/24th of all MHKs. It's not like he's running a massive political party. His presence in Tynwald is healthy and provides for more varied political discourse. Last time I checked we didn't live in a totalitarian 'climate' state... long may that continue. I think is views are probably representative of at least 1/24th of the population. So what's the problem? Instead of telling us all how wrong he is... let's hear your great ideas for saving the planet! I don't think it is a lot different to some other MHKs except because SP posts on here there is a two way dialogue and some posters on here view him as their friend so come running to defend him. Daphne Caine and her climate change agenda seem to get people worked up in the opposite agenda. Like most MHKs I expect SP to achieve square root of F. A. by the time he steps down The main difference though with SP to other MHK's, as far as I know, is that he appear to be a science denying racist bigot and I think that should not be glossed over. I have no issue with a person having different views on how or whether you tackle a problem. I am much more concerned if a person in a position of authority simply ignores the facts and pretends they don't exist. If SP had been on the Titantic I expect that he would have been on deck to the last second arguing it was unsinkable as that is what he believed despite all evidence to the contrary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted February 17, 2022 Author Share Posted February 17, 2022 7 hours ago, manxman1980 said: None of this supports the views expressed by Peters in which he has suggested climate change is a positive thing. You didn't ask for evidence to support 'climate change is a positive thing'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted February 17, 2022 Author Share Posted February 17, 2022 5 minutes ago, Lost Login said: Like most MHKs I expect SP to achieve square root of F. A. by the time he steps down That goes for all 24 of them. The only achievements will be the spending of astronomical sums of money that we don't have and unlocking their pension entitlements. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted February 17, 2022 Share Posted February 17, 2022 Daphne is happy with her £42m but single parent says lack of help is a death sentence, a bit dramatic but she has valid points https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/lack-of-support-for-single-parents-in-the-budget-is-a-death-sentence/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted February 17, 2022 Share Posted February 17, 2022 (edited) 11 hours ago, finlo said: I think your figures are a bit awry there it's only rated at 40 MW isn't it? You are correct I was out. I was a zero out. However we were both wrong (you were nearer though) Its 65MW The key facts though are that its big enough for today's demand Its getting on a bit and won't last for ever (maybe OK for another 20 years) If demand goes up due to EVs, Heating by elec instead of oil and gas. Its too small This is an interesting read Edited February 17, 2022 by Happier diner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.