[Politics] Brexit

[Thunder Bolt]

[tweet]1081498490117734400[/tweet]

 

[Lincoln Imp]

[tweet]1081498490117734400[/tweet]

It was interesting to read in a round-up of Brexiteer views yesterday that (a) the Environment Minister told an NFU conference that a No Deal would lead to an instant catastrophe for most British meat exporters, that (b) the NFU responded by pointing out that a loosening of import controls in the aftermath of No Deal would lead to us condoning appalling animal welfare standards and (c) that over two-thirds of Tory Party members wanted No Deal.

We live in strange times.

I am wading through my latest acquisition, The Great Deception by fervent Brexiteer and climate change denier Christopher Booker, in the hope of finding an explanation.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

It was interesting to read in a round-up of Brexiteer views yesterday that (a) the Environment Minister told an NFU conference that a No Deal would lead to an instant catastrophe for most British meat exporters, that (b) the NFU responded by pointing out that a loosening of import controls in the aftermath of No Deal would lead to us condoning appalling animal welfare standards and (c) that over two-thirds of Tory Party members wanted No Deal.

We live in strange times.

I am wading through my latest acquisition, The Great Deception by fervent Brexiteer and climate change denier Christopher Booker, in the hope of finding an explanation.

No evidence to base this on, but I suspect that there's something of a correlation between climate change denial and pro-Brexit. Would be interested to know the views of our resident Brexiteers, preferably without resorting to insults please.

 

[Baldseagull]

There you go again talking absolute cobblers.

One of life's losers? Explain your theory on this.

Another thing you can't get your head around I didn't need ' Nige and Boris' to target or advice me . I was voting out of that ragtag organisation at the first available opportunity.

So Murdoch told you.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

No evidence to base this on, but I suspect that there's something of a correlation between climate change denial and pro-Brexit. Would be interested to know the views of our resident Brexiteers, preferably without resorting to insults please.

Strange link but as requested ..... climate change happens naturally but has been sped up by humans.

 

[Baldseagull]

There is a little positive news, Seaborne Freight have at least one boat now. Here it is on sea trials.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

23rd time you've posted this Youtube clip, well done

have you listened to any of them , clearly not , have another go
https://youtu.be/gUsKWsPcRXE
regards
DR

 

[Two Professors]

No evidence to base this on, but I suspect that there's something of a correlation between climate change denial and pro-Brexit. Would be interested to know the views of our resident Brexiteers, preferably without resorting to insults please.

Climate change happens,but not just caused by humanity as the lefties screech.Volcanic activity,solar activity,under-sea tectonic shifts diverting currents,all have their inputs.Even some 'clever' people think the current hysteria laughable.

 

[larus]

No evidence to base this on, but I suspect that there's something of a correlation between climate change denial and pro-Brexit. Would be interested to know the views of our resident Brexiteers, preferably without resorting to insults please.

Here’s a few charts to ponder.regarding catastrophic temperature change.

 

[ManOfSussex]

No evidence to base this on, but I suspect that there's something of a correlation between climate change denial and pro-Brexit. Would be interested to know the views of our resident Brexiteers, preferably without resorting to insults please.

Climate change scepticism, anti abortion rights, opposition to same sex marriage - there's no need to suspect the correlation between leave voters and these things - they exist - both on this thread and in the wider country. ERG members at Westminster, such as Jacob Rees-Mogg, Owen Paterson and Peter Bone and their like minded colleagues in The DUP are a prime example. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions as to why that might be, as I have I.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Thanks to the climate change sceptics Brexiteers who have taken the trouble to reply. May the futures of your children and grandchildren be prosperous, safe and sustainable.

 

[Two Professors]

Thanks to the climate change sceptics Brexiteers who have taken the trouble to reply. May the futures of your children and grandchildren be prosperous, safe and sustainable.

For some reason,you lot seem to think we don't love our children,and grand-children.Utterly bizarre,along with the idea that we all decry abortion rights,same-sex marriage.Only the extreme wings of politics have strong views either way.Personally,I long for the day somebody sane takes control of the Lib-Dems and normality returns.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Thanks to the climate change sceptics Brexiteers who have taken the trouble to reply. May the futures of your children and grandchildren be prosperous, safe and sustainable.

Out of interest, which Brexiteers match your decription ?

 

[melias shoes]

So Murdoch told you.

What? How did you come to that conclusion?

 

[larus]

Thanks to the climate change sceptics Brexiteers who have taken the trouble to reply. May the futures of your children and grandchildren be prosperous, safe and sustainable.

I've virtually stopped posting on here due to the level of personal abuse and blinkered posts. However, I view you usually fair and polite. So, here's my reply to your post.

In regards to Brexit - I (like most Brexit supporters) accept that there will be some disruption when we leave. Of course, over time this will mitigate. The 'Project Fear' being espoused by those who wish to have another referendum won't work. The EU have already admitted that there won't be a hard border in Ireland and they are working on contingency plans to ensure that security, aviation, etc., still function properly. I believe that after things settle down after Brexit, this will allow the UK economy to grow at a faster rate and to focus on future industries such as AI, robotics., space exploration. We are already a leader in some of these new emerging technologies, so I do not fear the future post Brexit.

Next to climate change. Everyone accepts that there was warming towards the end of the 20th century and that CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased. However, all predictions of temperature change based on the 'models' have consistently been wrong and overstated the rate of change. The science is far from settled and the constant scare stores we hear about the impacts of a slightly warming world have been wrong. Such as more hurricanes, tornado's, lack of snow, etc.

Just because someone questions the cause of climate change does not make them a 'flat-earther' or conspiracy theory nut-job. Science is constantly evolving and our understanding is improving.

For example, the big bang theory and dark matter/dark energy. At the end of the 20th century it was widely accepted that the universe was about 13.6bln years old, and expansion was still on-going as observed by red-shift of light. However, new calculations throw this into doubt as the observed mass of the universe only makes up 5% of the mass/energy required. Yes, the total of all of the galaxies etc is only 5% of the mass which the theories need. The rest is dark matter/energy which we can't detect. So, 95% of the universe we are saying we can't detect if.

From wikipedia:


The primary evidence for dark matter is that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating, or would not have formed or move as they do, if they did not contain a large amount of unseen matter.[2] Other lines of evidence include observations in gravitational lensing,[3] from the cosmic microwave background, from astronomical observations of the observable universe's current structure, from the formation and evolution of galaxies, from mass location during galactic collisions,[4] and from the motion of galaxies within galaxy clusters. In the standard Lambda-CDM model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the universe contains 5% ordinary matter and energy, 27% dark matter and 68% of an unknown form of energy known as dark energy.[5][6][7][8] Thus, dark matter constitutes 85%[note 2] of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95% of total mass–energy content.[9][10][11][12]


So, to question science is not a stupid thing to do - it's what has allowed mankind to develop. To constantly challenge the accepted.

Also, remember that Einstein was ridiculed for the theories and proven to me right in the end, so don't assume that the supposed numerical advantage of climate change scientists are correct. And no, I don't claim to be like Einstein, it's just that accept theories change.


A collection of various criticisms can be found in the book Hundert Autoren gegen Einstein (A Hundred Authors Against Einstein), published in 1931.[4] It contains very short texts from 28 authors, and excerpts from the publications of another 19 authors. The rest consists of a list that also includes people who only for some time were opposed to relativity. Besides philosophic objections (mostly based on Kantianism), also some alleged elementary failures of the theory were included; however, as some commented, those failures were due to the authors' misunderstanding of relativity. For example, Hans Reichenbach described the book as an "accumulation of naive errors", and as "unintentionally funny". Albert von Brunn interpreted the book as a backward step to the 16th and 17th century, and Einstein said, in response to the book, that if he were wrong, then one author would have been enough.[5][6]

 

[A1X]

In regards to Brexit - I (like most Brexit supporters) accept that there will be some disruption when we leave.

What level of disruption is acceptable? How long will the disruption to food, medicine and energy have t last before it becomes not worth it? None of that is "project fear".

The EU have already admitted that there won't be a hard border in Ireland

Have they? When was that? Must have missed that one.

 

[larus]

What level of disruption is acceptable? How long will the disruption to food, medicine and energy have t last before it becomes not worth it? None of that is "project fear".

On a scal of 1-10, about level 6-7 initially, but this will be short lived. This will east to level 5 and then gradually down to a level 1-2. Then after time, no noticeable disruption. By this point, the availability of humble pie will be dire though due to excessive consumption by remainers.

Have they? When was that? Must have missed that one.

It’s common knowledge. Barnoer has said there won’t be a hard border. ROI have said there won’t be a hard border.
Just one of many articles.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/we-would-be-trapped-taoiseach-comments-show-hard-border-never-possible-says-arlene-foster-37543634.html

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

For some reason,you lot seem to think we don't love our children,and grand-children.Utterly bizarre,along with the idea that we all decry abortion rights,same-sex marriage.Only the extreme wings of politics have strong views either way.Personally,I long for the day somebody sane takes control of the Lib-Dems and normality returns.

This is an unfair and unreasonable inference. Of course I wish your successors all of these things genuinely - for one thing they will be sharing the planet with my own, so why wouldn't I?

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Out of interest, which Brexiteers match your decription ?

Pretty much all of them that responded. But on a very small sample of course.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

I've virtually stopped posting on here due to the level of personal abuse and blinkered posts. However, I view you usually fair and polite. So, here's my reply to your post.

In regards to Brexit - I (like most Brexit supporters) accept that there will be some disruption when we leave. Of course, over time this will mitigate. The 'Project Fear' being espoused by those who wish to have another referendum won't work. The EU have already admitted that there won't be a hard border in Ireland and they are working on contingency plans to ensure that security, aviation, etc., still function properly. I believe that after things settle down after Brexit, this will allow the UK economy to grow at a faster rate and to focus on future industries such as AI, robotics., space exploration. We are already a leader in some of these new emerging technologies, so I do not fear the future post Brexit.

Next to climate change. Everyone accepts that there was warming towards the end of the 20th century and that CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased. However, all predictions of temperature change based on the 'models' have consistently been wrong and overstated the rate of change. The science is far from settled and the constant scare stores we hear about the impacts of a slightly warming world have been wrong. Such as more hurricanes, tornado's, lack of snow, etc.

Just because someone questions the cause of climate change does not make them a 'flat-earther' or conspiracy theory nut-job. Science is constantly evolving and our understanding is improving.

For example, the big bang theory and dark matter/dark energy. At the end of the 20th century it was widely accepted that the universe was about 13.6bln years old, and expansion was still on-going as observed by red-shift of light. However, new calculations throw this into doubt as the observed mass of the universe only makes up 5% of the mass/energy required. Yes, the total of all of the galaxies etc is only 5% of the mass which the theories need. The rest is dark matter/energy which we can't detect. So, 95% of the universe we are saying we can't detect if.

From wikipedia:


The primary evidence for dark matter is that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating, or would not have formed or move as they do, if they did not contain a large amount of unseen matter.[2] Other lines of evidence include observations in gravitational lensing,[3] from the cosmic microwave background, from astronomical observations of the observable universe's current structure, from the formation and evolution of galaxies, from mass location during galactic collisions,[4] and from the motion of galaxies within galaxy clusters. In the standard Lambda-CDM model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the universe contains 5% ordinary matter and energy, 27% dark matter and 68% of an unknown form of energy known as dark energy.[5][6][7][8] Thus, dark matter constitutes 85%[note 2] of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95% of total mass–energy content.[9][10][11][12]


So, to question science is not a stupid thing to do - it's what has allowed mankind to develop. To constantly challenge the accepted.

Also, remember that Einstein was ridiculed for the theories and proven to me right in the end, so don't assume that the supposed numerical advantage of climate change scientists are correct. And no, I don't claim to be like Einstein, it's just that accept theories change.


A collection of various criticisms can be found in the book Hundert Autoren gegen Einstein (A Hundred Authors Against Einstein), published in 1931.[4] It contains very short texts from 28 authors, and excerpts from the publications of another 19 authors. The rest consists of a list that also includes people who only for some time were opposed to relativity. Besides philosophic objections (mostly based on Kantianism), also some alleged elementary failures of the theory were included; however, as some commented, those failures were due to the authors' misunderstanding of relativity. For example, Hans Reichenbach described the book as an "accumulation of naive errors", and as "unintentionally funny". Albert von Brunn interpreted the book as a backward step to the 16th and 17th century, and Einstein said, in response to the book, that if he were wrong, then one author would have been enough.[5][6]

Thanks for your kind words. I too had a long break from the thread because of the sheer nastiness of one or two folk. I think it might have improved of late. Thanks too for your exposition on the nature of scientific method, but on this one I'll go with the consensus of the informed scientific community: just because (as you rightly say) science advances through the refutation of received wisdoms it doesn't imply that all opinions are equally valid.