George Osborne’s Global Warming Pratt Fall: Video
THE Conservatives are in a mess over the Green story: are they unaware that the Anthropogenic Global Warming debate is lost? Are they so utterly out of touch?
Richard North watches George Osborne’s pratt fall. The story:
George Osborne, is set to announce a working group to draw up plans for a Green Investment Bank, with Nicholas Stern–a top climate change adviser to the current Labour government in recent years–taking on a role as adviser to the group, according to Osborne’s office. Bob Wigley, chairman of international telephone directories company Yell Group PLC, will be among those serving on the working group.
The aim is for the Green Investment Bank to provide a mix of government and private-sector cash to invest in promising new technologies, Osborne will say.
Says Richard:
There must be very few examples of rats climbing aboard a sinking ship – holed at the Stern, one might say. Delingpole rises to the occasion, the comments reinforcing the enormity of the blunder made by that idiot Osborne.
Strangely enough, there is no comment on the unofficial Tory party blog, while Tory wannabe MP Iain Dale is also silent on the matter. Having to go to non-Tory sites to get news of the not-the-Conservative party, one finds, is a very sure sign of problems.
James Dellingpole offers perspective:
When Osborne talks about the “green jobs” his brave new economic model is going to generate, is he really not aware of the pitiful example of Spain where for every “green job” created through government spending 2.2 jobs have been LOST in the real economy?
And before approaching Lord Stern to head this new economic suicide unit (he has since turned them down, apparently) could they really not have first tried someone with a bit more commonsense, bottom and scientific credibility? Ronald McDonald, maybe? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? John Terry?
As for the debate:
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
Pardon the scepticism, but:
The “climategate” controversy intensified last night when the senior British scientist at its centre, Professor Phil Jones, faced fresh accusations that he attempted to withhold data that could cast doubt on evidence for rising world temperatures.
Spotter: Andrew Bolt
Posted: 3rd, February 2010 | In: Reviews Comment | TrackBack | Permalink
