A Place to Stand

Once again an eco-website, Deltoid, has censored discussion of the warming claims. How unexpected. This is the response they censored, though naturally, this has not prevented them publishing further ad hominum attacks on me.

Dave [he had asked for evidence the Guardian is government funded] virtually all newspapers make their profit (or solvency) out of their advertising. Most newspapers get a broad range of commercial advertising but if you look at the Guardian you will see that its advertising is overwhelmingly from government organisation or government funded Fakecharities. The Guardian is thus, like the BBC & almost all "charities" & political groups supporting warming propaganda, state funded.

This is the "man behind the curtain" of this tax & regulation justifying swindle.

Mark [had asked for an example of "Green" censorship] here is an example of Deltoid doing so http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2008/12/brave-new-climate-censorship.html

Coicidentally, Jeff Harvey, a former Nature editor,{had written a wholly dishonest ad hominum attack on me which, if Deltoid was honestly censoring for discourtesy would have lead to his banning long ago} can confirm that censorship since it was on that thread that he attacked me by saying that sir David King the government's science advisor was capable of only "kindergarten" science. Jeff hadn't properly read what I said & didn't realise who I was quoting but nonetheless his assessment of king was dead on.

In his latest comment he continues with ad hominum attacks on people about whom he is clearly either wholly ignorant or wholly dishonest [Harvey had claimed that the main scientific opponents of warming know no relevant science & lie through their teeth - a statement so clearly dishonest that nobody honest, or indeed non-fascist could support it - not one single person other than this censored post disputed his claim]. There are very many people on the sceptical side who are good scientists (indeed good scientists are automatically sceptical because that is what science is about). On the other hand I would challenge him to name a prominent alarmist scientist who has not been, like the Guardian, government funded.[obviously he couldn't]

Certainly Sir David isn't one. I would be interested to see if Jeff or indeed Nature has ever publicly attacked him in the same way when they knew who they were talking about - though Jeff is an ignorant fool that does not prevent him being a scientist but if he were unable to show that he had treated claims equally irrespective of the source that certainly would. Another government scientist, Alan Thorpe, responsible for handing out £300 million government subsidy has promised to engage in a public debate on warming & has had his challenge accepted by several prominent sceptics.

Admittedly his challenge was issued in December 2006 but it would be discourteous to assume he has hidden simply because, as a typical alarmist, he is a corrupt lying fraud who knows perfectly well, that their story is a lie that cannot withstand the light of honest investigation. There are other possible reasons - perhaps he was kidnapped by aliens.

In their attacks on me & from my viewing figures I know a number of Deltoids have read my blog so anybody at all among presumably hundreds of readers who believes in free speech will be willing to say here why I am wrong. One complaint there was that I had used the terms eco-fascist & eco-Nazi on my own blog. Obviously if so much as 1% of the readership of Deltoid aren't such they will respond to the chance of uncensored debate & also to Deltoid's presumed censorship of anybody who Harvey's allegations are untruthful & could not be maintained by anybody who was not both as fascist & happy to engage in the group lies common to Nazism.

I will be interested to see if as much as 1% of this random selection of the more educated of alarmists turn out to be non-fascist. Experience suggests not.

Incidentally, former Nature editor & apparently making his living as a scientist, defended his his error in saying Sir david King could manage only "kindergarten science by saying "that Sir David King, whom I greatly admire, was almost certainly making an off-the-cuff remark" which manages to display crawling, ignorance & a contempt for the concept of people actually trying to tell the truth, all in less than 1 sentence. I can see why he was a prominent eco-journalist.

---------------------------
Subsidising Solar

Widely unreported in Britain is the recent case of Spain whose recession is made worse as Spanish treasury is being sucked dry by well-intentioned subsidies for solar installations -- $26.4 billion in commitments for one year alone. And they will get only about 450 MW of power for all that By comparison a modern nuclear 1 MW plant producing 4.4 times as much power (remember solar only works during the day) can cost £1.2 bn. We all knew renewables need massive subsidy but even I am surprised to find them costing 96 times as much as the best (nuclear) option & yet the eco-fascists are so ideologically driven that even that does not deter them.
-----------------------------

And talking of more subsidy

BBC Radio Scotland this afternoon had yet another "renewables2 spokesman on today calling for yet another hidden subsidy - by getting the EU to equalise transmission charges between all power generators. Thus Hunterston nuclear, 20 miles from Glasgow, would be paying the same as a Stornoway windmill, most of whose electricity will be used up in a 400 mile transmission. I emailed this point which, to my surprise they read out in full even though they described it as "controversial". It shouldn't be controversial because it is a matter of engineering fact, while the demand for more subsidy by their eco-fascist guest, clearly is but wasn't so described.

One of our biggest electricity generators is 1550 MW, in Aberdeenshire , steadily producing far more electricity than windmills. Most of that electricity is used in Aberdeenshire but if consumers were forced to subsidise long distance transmission it would be cost effective to the producers to produce electricity there for Dumfrieshire.

This is simply yet another call for more subsidy to windmills which already cost 10 times as much as new nuclear.The eco movement is directly & deliberately responsible for rising electricity prices & fuel poverty & we should not subsidise their hobbies more.

UPDATE Not a single of the Deltoid fascists feel they can make a responsive comment here where free debate is allowed. Back on that blog the thread has turned to calling me a "psychotic" etc in the knowledge that no dispute is allowed. I have put up this response which I am confident will be censored.

I see that, since Deltoid has decided not to allow me to defend myself here, while enthusiastically encouraging ad hominum attacks some of the most cowardly eco-fascists, who feel themselves unable to take on anybody able to reply, have crawled out from under their stones. Not one of these people, or the likes of Harvey feel it is even possible for them to seriously dispute anything I say on my own blog where free debate is allowed.

Obviously every "environmentalist" who is in any way interested in real debate rather than fascist ad hominum sloganeering has already written here to dissociate themselves from this. Equally obviously the number of alarmists here who have done so is zero. Statistically that means that, to a reasonable approximation, that everybody in the movement is a wholly corrupt fascist parasite without the remotest interest in the truth.

Labels: eco-fascism