“Not at all. The IPCC, Pennsylvania State University, the University of East Anglia CRU and the UK Met Office have been doing a grand job of destroying the warmist cause.”

“@John, Llanelli
I think that you should thank U.S. Republican Party and Steve Milloy for most of your last post.
Personally, I find that Milloy and the GOP are extremely biased.
If you have anything original to state: Submit your findings to Centre for Climate Change Research at Imperial College London.”

“Before you pass and coments you want to live in the shadows of this stinking filthy works you will soon change your minds”

“It is absolutely evidence-based. There is NO demonstrable evidence that man is influencing the climate. After the Climategate revelations in November 2009, even Phil Jones, the head of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia and major contributor to the IPCC reports came clean and had to admit that there had been no global warming since 1995, even though the earth¿s CO2 concentrations have increased by around 8 per cent since then. Furthermore the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has admitted that the U.S. could be shut down in terms of CO2 emissions for 100 years and it would make precious little difference to the atmospheric CO2 level - possibly on the order of 5 percent.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the global climate is not playing ball with computer-modelled predictions. For example, in 2000, scientists smugly predicted that, due to global warming, snow would be a thing of the past in the UK by 2010, while failing to predict that the global climate would start to cool from 2002. The big bucks, far from being paid out by the energy companies upon who mankind depends, are being waved around in front of scientists by politicians who seek world government while fleecing the taxpayer through green taxes, higher energy bills and the demonisation of plant food.

Adjusting observed data (¿hiding the decline¿) and allowing through an increasing number of ¿heat island¿ temperature readings to fit preconceived climate models is a complete reversal of scientific principles and demonstrates how politicised the whole issue has become. I don¿t deny that the global climate is warming ¿ it has been doing so within the realms of natural variability since the last mini Ice Age in the 18th century, but the runaway warming predicted by Al Gore, Michael Mann etc is increasingly at odds with observed events such as the ongoing multi-decadal cooling phase (similar to the one between 1945 & 1975) that an increasing number of scientists now claim we are set to remain in until around 2030, thanks in no small part to the current prolonged solar minimum.

The atmospheric feedbacks on which the whole MMGW theory depends exist only in hypothetical computer models which do not even take into consideration the impact of solar activity or the cooling effect of clouds which the increase in atmospheric water vapour would produce. The ability of nature to control its own destiny is being swept aside for political ends. The ¿king¿s new clothes¿ story is alive and well in the 21st century. Enjoy it, Bill.”

“@John, Llanelli
Is your statement about "blind belief in the man-made global warming scam" evidence-based or are you parroting the views of cranks and billionaires with a vested interest in putting money ahead of everything?
If you have proof that humans do not add to sufficient greenhouse gases to make any difference, please submit your findings to Centre for Climate Change Research at Imperial College London.
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/climatechange”

“Unfortunately it's going to take something like the withdrawal of Tata from the UK before the government wakes up to how their blind belief in the man-made global warming scam is really just wrecking the country's economy while being of no real benefit.

The UK will be grossly uncompetitive while the likes of India & China, free of the the shackles of green political dogma & EU emissions targets, will thrive.”