Charles and the climate sceptics

Post Reply
Tony Williams
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:51 pm
Location: Somewhere in England
Contact:

Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by Tony Williams » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:40 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22463480
World leaders must "act now" to protect the rainforests or risk the Earth becoming a dying patient, the Prince of Wales has warned.

In a speech to ministers and tropical forest scientists, he said his work on climate change could be "disheartening" but action was needed because the risk of doing nothing was "too great".

"The doctor must act on what evidence is already there," Prince Charles said.
Well, I'm with him on this one. This response caught my eye:
And Graham Smith, who runs the anti-monarchy Republic group, said the prince should stay out of politics, "especially when government ministers and MPs have a different view".

"But even if they all shared his view, it's a political issue and he shouldn't be getting involved."
Right. Scientific evidence has nothing to do with climate change, it's all about politics...

User avatar
chaggle
Posts: 2330
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by chaggle » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:41 pm

Tony Williams wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22463480
World leaders must "act now" to protect the rainforests or risk the Earth becoming a dying patient, the Prince of Wales has warned.

In a speech to ministers and tropical forest scientists, he said his work on climate change could be "disheartening" but action was needed because the risk of doing nothing was "too great".

"The doctor must act on what evidence is already there," Prince Charles said.
Well, I'm with him on this one. This response caught my eye:
And Graham Smith, who runs the anti-monarchy Republic group, said the prince should stay out of politics, "especially when government ministers and MPs have a different view".

"But even if they all shared his view, it's a political issue and he shouldn't be getting involved."
Right. Scientific evidence has nothing to do with climate change, it's all about politics... :fp
What with politics and the 'vested interest' angle (both sides claim that one) science is often relegated on this issue.

The Guardian had an interesting piece on AGW the other day...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... nhouse-gas
For the first time in human history, the concentration of climate-warming carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has passed the milestone level of 400 parts per million (ppm). The last time so much greenhouse gas was in the air was several million years ago, when the Arctic was ice-free, savannah spread across the Sahara desert and sea level was up to 40 metres higher than today.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

smudge
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:44 pm

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by smudge » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:42 pm

"The doctor must act on what evidence is already there," Prince Charles said.
......"And then choose the correct homeopathic treatment" presumably. :fp



The thing is, should he be commenting, correct and evidence based or not? I totally agree with him on climate change (and on some other environmental issues). But he talks crap for such a large percentage of the time. He should have no bloody influence on any policies at all ever!

Tony Williams
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:51 pm
Location: Somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by Tony Williams » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:43 pm

He should definitely stay out of any party political issues, which this is not (in the UK anyway - different in the USA). But it seems reasonable to me that he should be able to express concern about an issue which has such huge potential consequences for the world, and which is not even considered to be controversial by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists.

User avatar
chaggle
Posts: 2330
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by chaggle » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:43 pm

Tony Williams wrote:He should definitely stay out of any party political issues, which this is not (in the UK anyway - different in the USA). But it seems reasonable to me that he should be able to express concern about an issue which has such huge potential consequences for the world, and which is not even considered to be controversial by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists.
In the same vein then; should he be able to "express concern about an issue which has such huge potential consequences for the world, and which is not even considered to be controversial by the overwhelming majority of (health) scientists" when that issue is homeopathy?.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

Matt
Posts: 871
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:50 pm

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by Matt » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:44 pm

reminds me of a quote from the Abyss: "Hippy, do me a favor? Stay off my side."

Tony Williams
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:51 pm
Location: Somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by Tony Williams » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:45 pm

chaggle wrote: In the same vein then; should he be able to "express concern about an issue which has such huge potential consequences for the world, and which is not even considered to be controversial by the overwhelming majority of (health) scientists" when that issue is homeopathy?.
Yes he should - unfortunately, he's on the wrong side, so his views are definitely controversial (to put it politely :roll: ).

User avatar
chaggle
Posts: 2330
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by chaggle » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:46 pm

Tony Williams wrote:
chaggle wrote: In the same vein then; should he be able to "express concern about an issue which has such huge potential consequences for the world, and which is not even considered to be controversial by the overwhelming majority of (health) scientists" when that issue is homeopathy?.
Yes he should - unfortunately, he's on the wrong side, so his views are definitely controversial (to put it politely :roll: ).
Yes - I realised after I wrote it that on AGW he is with the consensus whereas on woo medicine he's not so the two scenarios are different. It's just that skeptics are always telling him to butt out when he supports homeopathy. Perhaps he should only comment on subjects when he is right. :-?
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

smudge
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:44 pm

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by smudge » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:46 pm

Well that would be nice! If we could just have those with unjustified, disproportionate, influence (like Royals, game show winners, crap but popular musicians, and glamour models) only comment when they are right the world would be a better place. However,
we cannot cherry pick what these people say, who/what gets media time - they have influence. This is the problem surely? Charlie should not be influencing anything based on the coincidence of his birth. No more than the latest finalist from 'celebrity talent in the attic' TV show.

User avatar
Asthmatic Camel
Posts: 539
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 8:54 pm

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by Asthmatic Camel » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:47 pm

Seems Prince Harry has come out against Wind Farms in the UK because they don't look very nice. I wonder what Big Ears thinks.

User avatar
bindeweede
Site Admin
Posts: 3394
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:45 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by bindeweede » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:47 pm

Well, this is a year old but whether it reflects the latest thoughts of Charlie, I don't know.
Prince Charles endorses wind power in new film at Sundance Festival.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... tival.html

Croydon13013
Posts: 1382
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:48 pm

Re: Charles and the climate sceptics

Post by Croydon13013 » Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:48 pm

I agree with smudge. Jug-ears should butt out regardless of whether he is right or wrong. When he is correct it is only by random chance.

I am reminded of Jenny McCarthy (C-list actress who stripped for Playboy) and her anti-vax campaigning. When Amanda Peet spoke out for vaccination, McCarthy asked why people should listen to one actress rather than another, Peet replied that they shouldn't be taking advice from actresses, they should follow the scientific evidence. [not exact quotes]
thIS sIGnaTure iS an

Post Reply