Hey Webmasters! New Photo Album Service Launched - Check it out!
|
|
|
John Pugh MP - Southport's new 'Eco-Champion'?
Or
A local MP urging his own constituents to 'support' unproven eco-protocols that could cost the planet.......
£76 TRILLION?
----------------
Has Southport’s MP John Pugh now jumped on the 'Environmental Bandwagon' via his latest promotion for 'Climate Alarmism' in the Southport media? Does he know 'more' than 18,000 scientists who opposed the Kyoto Protocol?
-------------------------
“The scale of the problem of global warming is awesome"
John Pugh MP - Champion, 4th Jan. 06
John Pugh MP - Midweek Visiter - 4th Jan. 06
John Pugh MP (standing); the new 'Eco-Champion' of the masses against alleged man-made Global Warming or just one more 'out of touch' politician following the herd into unproven and mega-costly eco incentives?
------------------
18,000 qualified scientists put their names to the following statement:
"We urge the
United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written
in Kyoto,
Japan in December, 1997, and any
other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the
environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health
and welfare of mankind.
There is
no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane,
or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause
catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's
climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in
atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural
plant and animal environments of the Earth."
The Oregon Petition
So does Southport's climate alarmist, Mr Pugh, know more than these experts?
----------------
Whilst areas of local countryside are being smashed to pieces via land hungry Council-approved business developments, Southport's MP has now apparently decided in his wisdom that we all need to do something positive for the environment by combating so-called man-made 'Global Warming'.
However, strong indications are resounding worldwide that certain government-funded scientists are creating sensationalist theories for funding advantages. Scientists are granting the press with the usual 'sensationalism' they crave because they know the media will of course be quite happy to publish nightmare scenarios that the world is on the brink of disaster, thanks to carbon emissions created by man's actions. Of course, numerous politicians have been very quick to take advantage of this situation too. Unfortunately again, the professional editing process has gone out of the window and genuine analysis of factual data has been dumped in favour of unfounded alarmist hype!
SSGB gives one small example of such unfounded climate alarmism below:
This week (January 2006) in both the Southport Visiter and the Champion John Pugh MP has stated:
“The scale of the problem of global warming is awesome and that can make us defeatist but since action by millions of individuals can make a difference there seems no excuse for doing something.”
SSGB say: Says 'who' exactly and with what PROOF?
---------------------
SSGB believe that such ludicrous ecological 'scaremongering' has little to do with environmental concern yet 'plenty' perhaps to do with run of the mill politics.
Naturally, sanctimonious politicians of all parties have grabbed the limelight via using the global warming AXE to terrify the populace with on many occasions, they however of course conveniently omit to tell their constituents that such fears are based on contemporary 'theories', which are coming under more scrutiny each month, and NOT scientific fact!
Mr Pugh, who seems to ignore the ongoing loss of our Southport countryside at Kew, gives the disturbing and yet commonly-held impression that allegedly man-made global warming is a serious danger to us all and that such a 'peril' is some kind of 'proven' fact of life. Nothing we believe could be further from the truth!
A growing body of principal scientific minds are now expressing deep concern over disproportionate claims concerning global warming theories, that have now become the darling ‘Holy Crusade’ of numerous scientists and politicians, perhaps seeking to extend their reputation via supposed ecological concern in public circles. It seems that almost everything which goes wrong is somehow or somewhere blamed, by shrewd politicians etc, on supposed man-made global warming. It has become a huge 'Scapegoat' entity in its own right, in fact the new version of erroneous, anciently-perceived witchcraft threats for whatever is thought to be wrong within the environment; the new 'Bogey man' that's coming to get us all unless we mend our wicked ways - ways that are suggested and then controlled by those in power! Volcano, flood, earthquake, forest fire - blame it all on our 'carbon emissions' and get your "bike" out to save the planet!
Our politicians, who frequently and without question gladly accept scientifically-unconfirmed theories as hard fact, tell us that we burn fossil fuels, which discharge amplified levels of carbon dioxide - the primary so-called 'Greenhouse' gas' into the atmosphere, causing the atmosphere to heat up. They inform us this is global warming and that it's largely our fault! A growing number of distinguished scientists are now however saying that this is utter nonsense. Regrettably though for the moment, it is the more 'pessimistic' worldview that apparently has majority support. Global warming - at least the contemporary frightening, end of the world description of it - is an ongoing fairy tale.
Mr Pugh, who tells readers that he will be using his “bike” and the "stairs" at work more to save the planet has perhaps fallen for the latest version of this wholesale scientific myth. Moreover, although he and several of his fellows are entitled to their personal opinions, they have no right whatsoever to spread such doom-laden theories amongst constituents which are unproven, hysterical and controversial to say the least.
Perhaps scaremongering MPs need to redirect their alleged environmental 'concerns' a little more into care for their 'own' local countryside issues and regional species of wildlife at risk such as with the odious Kew eco-destruction situation.
However, please remember that land generally increases by 8-10 times in value with the granting of Planning Permission. (Source: Alvin Hall, Presenter of BBC’s Investing for All and Wall Street’s most respected investment educator.) This makes wildlife an expendable commodity and their fragile habitat a valuable FINANCIAL ASSET to ecologically cold-hearted, councils etc that pay nothing but hollow 'lip service' to the environment.
Wild habitat severely under threat from political intransigence and cold hearted Council - approved developments at Kew, Southport. Money talks and wildlife dies!
----------------
So folks, who do we actually believe then - a top environmentalist professor & an increasing lobby (thousands) of other expert global warming sceptics or Southport's so-called "Green Drive" MP?
Perhaps Southport's MP needs to have a chat about his latest frenzied global warming claims with a few people like 'Professor David Bellamy' before making any further highly alarmist press statements?
We quote Dr Bellamy below from the Daily Mail - July, 2004:
“To explain why I believe that global warming is largely a natural phenomenon that has been with us for 13,000 years and probably isn't causing us any harm anyway, we need to take heed of some basic facts of botanical science. For a start, carbon dioxide is not the dreaded killer greenhouse gas that the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and the subsequent Kyoto Protocol five years later cracked it up to be. It is, in fact, the most important airborne fertiliser in the world, and without it there would be no green plants at all. That is because, as any schoolchild will tell you, plants take in carbon dioxide and water and, with the help of a little sunshine, convert them into complex carbon compounds - that we either eat, build with or just admire - and oxygen, which just happens to keep the rest of the planet alive. Increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, double it even, and this would produce a rise in plant productivity. Call me a biased old plant lover but that doesn't sound like much of a killer gas to me. Hooray for global warming is what I say, and so do a lot of my fellow scientists. Let me quote from a petition produced by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, which has been signed by over 18,000 scientists who are totally opposed to the Kyoto Protocol, which committed the world's leading industrial nations to cut their production of greenhouse gasses from fossil fuels. They say: 'Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide are in error and do not conform to experimental knowledge.' You couldn't get much plainer than that. And yet we still have public figures such as Sir David King, scientific adviser to Her Majesty's Government, making preposterous statements such as 'by the end of this century, the only continent we will be able to live on is Antarctica.' At the same time, he's joined the bandwagon that blames just about everything on global warming, regardless of the scientific evidence. For example, take the alarm about rising sea levels around the south coast of England and subsequent flooding along the region's rivers. According to Sir David, global warming is largely to blame. But it isn't at all - it's down to bad management of water catchments, building on flood plains and the incontestable fact that the south of England is gradually sinking below the waves. And that sinking is nothing to do with rising sea levels caused by ice-caps melting. Instead, it is purely related to an entirely natural warping of the Earth's crust, which could only be reversed by sticking one of the enormously heavy ice-caps from past ice ages back on top of Scotland. Ah, ice ages... those absolutely massive changes in global climate that environmentalists don't like to talk about because they provide such strong evidence that climate change is an entirely natural phenomenon. It was round about the end of the last ice age, some 13,000 years ago, that a global warming process did undoubtedly begin. Not because of all those Stone age folk roasting mammoth meat on fossil fuel camp fires but because of something called the 'Milankovitch Cycles,' an entirely natural fact of planetary life that depends on the tilt of the Earth's axis and its orbit around the sun. "
"The glaciers melted, the ice cap retreated and Stone Age man could begin hunting again. But a couple of millennia later, it got very cold again and everyone headed south. Then it warmed up so much that water from melted ice filled the English Channel and we became an island. The truth is that the climate has been yo-yo-ing up and down ever since. Whereas it was warm enough for Romans to produce good wine in York, on the other hand, King Canute had to dig up peat to warm his people. And then it started getting warm again. Up and down, up and down - that is how temperature and climate have always gone in the past and there is no proof they are not still doing exactly the same thing now. In other words, climate change is an entirely natural phenomenon, nothing to do with the burning of fossil fuels. In fact, a recent scientific paper, rather unenticingly titled 'Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over The Last Glacial Termination,' proved it. It showed that increases in temperature are responsible for increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, not the other way around. ”
---------------
Possibly Southport’s MP, who tells his constituents via the press that “The scale of the problem of global warming is awesome” needs to seriously rethink his stance on this particular theme – either that or replace some of his 'assistants' who possibly supplied him with such controversial and unproven source material in the first place? After all, a politician can only be as good as his advisors!
Alternatively, maybe our MP feels that he knows 'more' about this subject than Professor David Bellamy?
Professor Bellamy continued:
“But this sort of evidence is ignored, either by those who believe the Kyoto Protocol is environmental gospel or by those who know 25 years of hard work went into securing the agreement and simply can't admit that the science it is based on is wrong. The real truth is that the main greenhouse gas - the one that has the most direct effect on land temperature - is water vapour, 99 per cent of which is entirely natural. If all the water vapour was removed from the atmosphere, the temperature would fall by 33 degrees Celsius. But, remove all the carbon dioxide and the temperature might fall by just 0.3 per cent. Although we wouldn't be around, because without it there would be no green plants, no herbivorous farm animals and no food for us to eat. It has been estimated that the cost of cutting fossil fuel emissions in line with the Kyoto Protocol would be £76trillion. Little wonder, then, that world leaders are worried. So should we all be. If we signed up to these scaremongers, we could be about to waste a gargantuan amount of money on a problem that doesn't exist - money that could be used in umpteen better ways: fighting world hunger, providing clean water, developing alternative energy sources, improving our environment, creating jobs. The link between the burning of fossil fuels and global warming is a myth. It is time the world's leaders, their scientific advisers and many environmental pressure groups woke up to the fact.”
---------------
So there we have it – an MP who, when speaking on global warming/climate change, is telling readers:
“I would encourage my constituents to think of a similar New year’s resolution”
as opposed to a leading eco-professor who informs us after years of meticulous scientific studies:
“They say this is global warming: I say this is poppycock.”
SSGB say to all local politicians:
‘If you genuinely care about the wild environment adjacent to your own constituents then place your attentions into saving the disappearing local countryside areas therein. Stop playing the popular 'eco-card' via accentuating urban myths like threats to us from global warming that are contentious and set to be 'hugely' costly to say the least!’
Dr Bellamy is certainly not alone in his abject scepticism of any threats from so-called Man Made Global Warming. Below are just a few examples of many to ponder over:
--------------
Meteorologist Likens Fear of Global Warming to 'Religious Belief:
An eminent
meteorologist recently dismissed alarmist fears about human induced global
warming as nothing more than 'religious beliefs.'
"Do you believe in global warming? That is a religious question. So is the
second part: Are you a skeptic or a believer?" said Massachusetts Institute of
Technology professor Richard Lindzen, in a speech to about 100 people at the
National Press Club in Washington, D.C.
"Essentially if whatever you are told is alleged to be supported by 'all
scientists,' you don't have to understand [the issue] anymore. You simply go
back to treating it as a matter of religious belief," Lindzen said. His speech
was titled, "Climate Alarmism: The Misuse of 'Science'" and was sponsored by the
free market George C. Marshall Institute. Lindzen is a professor at MIT's
Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences.
-----------
Patrick J. Michaels is the author of a
new book "Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists,
Politicians, and the Media." He is an environmental sciences professor at the
University of Virginia who believes that claims of human-caused "global warming"
are scientifically unfounded.
Michaels spoke with CNSNews.com Thursday following a panel discussion sponsored
by the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., where Michaels also
serves as a senior fellow in environmental studies.
"John McCain, a Republican, has probably held the most biased hearing of all,"
Michaels said. McCain is a big proponent of limiting greenhouse gas emissions,
which he believes are causing "global warming." The Arizona senator also "is
trying to define himself as an environmental Republican, which he is going to
use to differentiate himself from his rivals for the (presidential) nomination
in 2008," according to Michaels.
--------------
A packed house of staff and media heard on Capitol Hill about sea-level rise from Dr. David Malmquist, Assistant Research Scientist at the Bermuda Biological Station for Research. This scientific discussion sponsored by the Cooler Heads Coalition clarified some of the mysteries of the sea. "Sea level rise has been occurring for thousands of years and is explained by natural processes," Dr. Malmquist observed. Claims that alleged human-induced global warming will cause sea level rise to accelerate is unfounded, he said. "Observations show that current accelerated rates of sea level rise date back to the early 19th century and preceded any substantial inputs of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere from the Industrial Revolution."
-------------
The European Science And Environment Forum - a group of independent scientists concerned about "premature certainty" on environmental issues described the Greenhouse Effect as "a Political rather than a scientific phenomenon" in their 1996 book, The Global Warming Debate.
-----------
Friis-Christensen and Lassen pointed out in the Journal of Atmospheric & Terrestrial Physics that 83% of global temperature variations since the 1500s can be accounted for by the solar cycle.
-------------
Eminent physicist, Nigel Calder, has written a book - The Manic Sun - which challenges the idea that burning fossil fuels warms the planet.
----------------
Dr Piers Corbyn of Weather Action and the Southbank University wrote a major article in the May edition of Weather Action. This began by questioning the "conventional wisdom" of man made global warming which were "clearly contradicted" by reliable satellite measurements. He said that the fundamental assumptions behind GWT must be challenged.
----------------
Global warming has happened many times before cars and industry were invented, and to higher degree than now. Climatologists agree that during the period 9,000 BC - 5,000 BC global temperatures were over two degrees warmer than now, while a team led by Prof. Shamesh of the Weizmann Institute, Israel, has shown from lake sediments in Kenya that there was another period of global warming between 350 BC and 450 AD.
----------------------
Another point of interest is that Mother Nature produces far more greenhouse gases than humans do. For instance, when the Mount Pinatubo volcano erupted, within just a few hours it had thrown into the atmosphere 30 million tonnes of sulphur dioxide, that’s almost twice as much as all the factories, power plants and cars in the United States do in an entire year. Oceans release 90 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, each year. Decomposing plants push out another 90 billion tonnes, compared to just six billion tonnes a year from man. 100 million years ago, there was six times as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as there is today, nonetheless the temperature then was marginally cooler than it is today. Numerous scientists have also concluded that carbon dioxide doesn't even influence climate.
---------------
Is Southport's MP urging his constituents to support unproven measures that could cost the planet TRILLIONS?
Dr Bellamy also alludes to a petition signed by 18,000 scientists who are totally opposed to the Kyoto Protocol, which committed the world's leading industrial nations to cut their production of greenhouse gasses from fossil fuels. They say: 'Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in minor greenhouse gasses like carbon dioxide are in error and do not conform to experimental knowledge.'
Bellamy mentions that financial estimates for cutting fossil fuel emissions in accordance with the Kyoto Protocol may be in the region of £76 TRILLION.
Wasting such mega amounts of money on daft scientific myths is , highly unwise, immoral and disgusting. Policy makers and politicians should consider that such funds could be spend much more wisely on reducing third world debt, combating starving societies, alternative energy, creating jobs and conserving local eco-systems under threat etc. What a pity that Southport's MP appears now to be 'supporting' such measures that will lead to yet more poverty and colossal debt in many places. More importantly though, what a shame that he also is encouraging his constituents to follow his example in this matter.
Sadly, Mr Pugh appears to be quite ignorant to all this easily accessed information and much more, which strongly indicates that his support for the man-induced global warming theory is alarmist, unwarranted and founded on very shaky grounds indeed.
Local press also reported that he and several other politicians have signed a New Year's 'Pledge' to curb their 'carbon emissions' by 25%. In light of the above, we say that this possibly-well meant promise is loaded with wholesale controversy, sensationalism, waste and based on little else but modern scientific myth!
Will Southport's editors now actually have the courage to address valid SSGB concerns about this highly important issue?
------------
MP and the wind turbine issue
More hot air or a fact of life?
Mr Pugh was recently pictured in the Champion Newspaper (4th Jan 06), happily promoting little ‘Wind Turbines’ as a source of renewable energy.
This is quite surprising when we consider that Tony Dawson, (Mr Pugh’s senior assistant and Oldham's Libdem prospective parliamentary candidate, who recently 'failed' in his political attempt to unseat Oldham’s MP Mr Phil Woolas) was apparently present at a large protest rally in that locality which included Professor Bellamy.
MP Phil Woolas described the planned turbines as “ogres of the north”.
Dr David Bellamy was the star speaker who told the audience that wind turbines produced only ‘30 percent’ of the power the government claimed and were not as cost effective. He described turbines as “totally and utterly useless things”, and said a better money and energy saving option would be to insulate Saddleworth’s houses in cladding. Is John Pugh even unaware of this?
Dr Bellamy also considered these contraptions to be ‘weapons of mass destruction to wildlife’.
To loud ovation Dr Bellamy added: “These are not things to farm the wind and make energy – they are things to milk the taxpayer.”
What a pity that Mr Pugh’s trusted assistant apparently learned nothing from this important environmental event via Dr Bellamy’s expert instruction, because if he 'had' paid a little more attention he may have saved our MP some grace it that particular matter as well.
-----------------
'Windfarms are promoted with "storylines" based on unsubstantiated predictions of global warming.'
http://www.countryguardian.net
“The climate-change people have no proof for their claims. They have computer models which do not prove anything.”
Dr David Bellamy
So wherever does such a statement leave Southport's MP - who clearly disregards such expert advice in favour of unfounded climate alarmism?
Global warming theories, bikes, and wind turbines may perhaps be impressive to ‘some’ constituents but SSGB feel that before pinning his colours to this particular mast, Mr Pugh would do well to direct any ‘genuine’ eco-concerns he may possess to issues a bit closer to home.
Land at Kew, Southport (Dec. 05) which previously held a multitude of wildlife. Blaming myths like global warming for a plethora of things may seem like a good idea to some - but what about our local countryside, which is being turned into Concrete City whilst we speak?
-------------------
Since time immemorial our planet has cooled then heated up then cooled yet again and long before man, cars and industry were on the scene. Dr Bellamy says: "Increase the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, double it even, and this would produce a rise in plant productivity. " By virtue that would mean a greater percentage of effective crops, more food for starving societies (not less) and thus less hunger in the world.
More plant growth equals more insects, more birds, more animals, more fish and a greater biodiversity that can only be good for the planet.
------------
“Global warming is a largely natural phenomenon. The world is wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that can’t be fixed,”
Dr Bellamy speaking at the Royal Institution in London which was hosting ‘Apocalypse No’, a conference organised by the Scientific Alliance.
-----------
We regrettably have several, wholly ignorant and small-minded local councillors working alongside a few other assorted 'agent provocateurs' (some of whom lower themselves, via cowardly internet attacks on SSGB) bleating on and on about the great necessity of destroying Southport's lovely Kew countryside to provide a few business profits and fewer jobs. Alternately, we also have an MP who apparently, by his own words, believes in controversial protocols that could virtually wreck much of the world's economy - or is £76 trillion just a drop in the ocean?
We are certain that Southport's financial infrastructure etc could benefit greatly from some of 'that' sort of money if it were ever offered to us rather than wasted, as mentioned above!
So Mr Pugh, and any other politicians jumping on this particular bandwagon, please stop this nonsense (which may indeed cost us 'trillions' in the long run) and look a little 'closer' to home if you truly want to save the planet.
For a start - try saving Southport’s own countryside before it’s all gone! That precisely is where (as Southport's MP) we believe you should be placing any 'concerns' about the environment!
-----------------------
NB. At the time of writing (Jan. 06) the Champion newspaper reported possible plans by the council to develop a piece of land adjacent to Kew Business Park into a 'green' area. There is even talk of encouraging 'red squirrels'. SSGB truly welcome any 'genuine' proposals to utilise land for wildlife, however this will not benefit species that are currently being driven off the land presently under threat from developments.
SSGB have mentioned the prospects of forestation at Kew before.
We also must point out the local and highly vocal politicians who had previously talked about the great need for cheap houses and other concrete developments in this area. Have these land-wreckers NOW changed their minds for some reason? Has perhaps the important message that we cannot keep destroying our local countryside for business sheds etc finally sunk in? All very odd indeed!
bravenet.com