More than 2,500 people in England and Wales are likely to perish from cold in the week leading up to Christmas, experts said today.
The forecast from the Faculty of Public Health and Met Office comes amid renewed concern over the plight of the poor and vulnerable during cold snaps.
Each winter, a larger proportion of Britons die because of unseasonable cold weather than in either Finland or Russia.
An estimated 40,000 more people die between December and March in the UK than would be expected from death rates during other times of the year.
h/t to Dave G
This is an utter travesty in a modern first world country and also preventable. The corrupt powers that be have inflated energy prices to the point that many people are dying because they can’t afford energy that otherwise would and should be dirt cheap. How the populace hasn’t risen up and committed wholesale slaughter of politicians is beyond me. This is what happens when citizens are disarmed and is the one and only reason for taking arms out of the hands of the common man.
Because they want to do things TO you, not FOR you like the democratic model is supposed to work.
It gets worse. DEFRA (the Environment Dept) know all this. Their Climate Change Risk Assessment Report earlier in the year predicted that under global warming
premature deaths due to cold winters are projected to decrease significantly (e.g. by between 3900 and 24,000 by the 2050s) and premature deaths due to hotter summers are projected to increase (e.g. by between 580 and 5900 by the 2050s).
What sort of govt would deliberately try to stop a reduction in premature deaths?
http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/defra-reluctant-to-reduce-premature-deaths/
What sort of govt would expect the rest of the planet to get warmer because it can’t provide heat for its small island?
The UK’s CO2 is so small that eliminating it completely will no make a halfpenny’s difference to global temperatures.
But if you are so concerned, why don’t you go and demonstrate in Tiananmen Square?
By that logic, it wouldn’t matter if I don’t pay my taxes, because it’s so small the government would never notice.
Are you OK with that?
Obama will spend whatever you pay in taxes.
Taxes are at a 50-yr low. So naturally the government needs to spend it.
The Revolutionary War was fought over much lower taxes.
Between federal and state income tax, social security, capital gains, estate, sales, medicare, etc. taxes are close to 50% to pay for a lot of really useless people – like Obama.
This isn’t the 18th century, and you haven’t built your cabin from a clearing you hacked from the wilderness.
So according to Mr. Appell residents of the UK should freeze to death in sympathy with the rest of the world even if even if the UK’s CO2 emissions are a non-MF’ing factor one way or the other.
According to Mr Appell, the UK should gets its act together and provide heat for its people.
“… provide heat for its people.”
I concur. Crank up the carbon based fuel utilization.
David Appell – “Taxes are at a 50-yr low. So naturally the government needs to spend it.”
Gentlemen (& ladies – oh, yeah – and hermaphrodites) – “so naturally the government needs to spend it” – doesn’t that sum up beautifully the fantasy world in which these clowns live…..they just got no idea.
Since it has been in the 50’s in the UK during the past week, I doubt that many people are freezing to death.
Living in Britain, I see it every year. The reason that so many extra people die is alluded to in the article – people do not plan for the cold. There are two reasons for this lack of planning.
Firstly, we do not need to plan for extreme weather, as it is infrequent and (usually) of short duration. Being an island, the climate is moderate. Snowfalls are only once or twice a winter, and usually melted within a few hours. There are no need to buy snow chains or winter tires for cars – they are frankly a waste of money unless you live in the mountains of Scotland. Snow plows in most areas are needed once a decade. Result is that nobody prepares for a couple of inches of snow. Traffic grinds to a halt as idiot fails to adjust their driving, old folks with a dodgy ticker drop dead when they open the door, and countless more slip on the ice breaking limbs. Not only do the morgues fill up with the frost and snow, but the local hospital accident & emergency departments as well. When everywhere defrosts, we then get burst pipes and flooding.
In a similar way, if we get a weekend when it is above 70 F with clear skies, half the population return to work on Monday morning looking like over-cooked shrimps.
The second reason we do not plan, is because the state does it for us. We expect the state to keep the roads clear; to provide “free” medical services, and to provide fuel subsidies every winter to all pensioners regardless of income.
Don’t worry about us though. As a climate expert confidently predicted in 2000, snow will become a thing of the past. Along with increased wheat yields, the IPCC AR5 will recommend Britain as the place to be to avoid the excesses of the coming climate apocalypse.
http://manicbeancounter.com/2011/10/03/climate-change-impacts-in-ar5-%E2%80%93-it-is-better-than-we-thought/
I thought UK medical services were paid for by taxation. So, how is it “free?”
Free at the point of consumption. If you can call on a service at nil direct cost, you will demand more of it than if you have to pay part or all of the cost.
In other words, if you aren’t smart enough to realize that the taxes you pay go to provide medical services, the services are “free.” Right.
David – “In other words, if you aren’t smart enough to realize that the taxes you pay go to provide medical services, the services are “free.” Right.”
A lot of the people who use these “free” health services the most do not pay much in the way of taxes – it is “entitlements” for them, and use it they do.
Perhaps lower income people need more medical care.
Wouldn’t that be a travesty!
David – you don’t actually know any “low income” people, do you?
This is why this topic has grown into an irrational cult.
At lease Mr. Christopher Booker injects some reality into the news from the UK –
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/9770705/Europe-wind-warming…-were-slowly-waking-up-to-reality.html
Do you think maybe the UK ought to work on getting heat to its citizens, instead of warming the entire rest of the planet??
Would you chill an entire city to keep your butter cool? No, you would not.
They are doing a lousy job warming Colorado this week.
Amazing! And what percentage of the globe is the land area of Colorado, and the time period in a climatological context??
Last winter, the Earth’s climate was determined by Washington DC.
You might have heard that Russia, Eastern Europe and Asia are having their coldest winter on record. Or perhaps you missed that?
Perhaps you missed that weather isn’t climate?
Except when David wants it to be.
Sixteen years of no global temperature rise is just weather.
Over the last 16 yrs there has been warming at a statistical significant level of 93%. Are you really hanging your hat on 2 percentage points?
http://davidappell.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-ever-shrinking-david-rose-hole.html
HadCRUT shows declining temperatures. Hansen predicted exponential warming. Alarmists strike out.
The correct data sets to look at are RSS or UAH which measure the mid troposphere where models predict the maximum warming trend to occur, and where there is no argument about UHI effects.
The issue is not whether the planet is cooling, stable or warming. Climate models make specific predictions. These are what need to be compared against observations. E.g.,
“The multimodel average tropospheric temperature trends are outside the 5–95 percentile range of RSS results at most latitudes.”
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/11/28/1210514109.full.pdf
Ben Santer was a great champion of the climate models until recently. Now even he is acknowledging they are failing.
False. I’ve done the calculations. You are wrong.
http://davidappell.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-ever-shrinking-david-rose-hole.html
OK let me get this straight – some dickhead (David Appell) writes some crap in his blog – versus a peer reviewed paper in a climate journal co authored by 22 scientists. Who to believe…? Tough call…
You really are a nasty little crank aren’t you?
Both UAH LT and RSS LT show strong warming over climatologically relevant time intervals: 0.17 and 0.15 C/decade, respectively.
No they don’t
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1997/plot/rss/from:1997/trend
That’s the thing about cranks, they make up terms like “climatologically relevant time intervals” – they have no idea what that means or what they are talking about. They’ve pulled a number out of their arse and decided that sounds “about right”, to them.
Steve Steve Steve, your problem is that you’re not using a “climatologically relevant time interval”. That’s why you don’t find a positive trend!
If you really want to understand this topic properly, go to google scholar and search on the key words “climatologically relevant time interval” where you will get exactly zero hits… 😉
I said “a climatologically relevant” interval. You have cherry picked your time period.
Last I heard, 15 years was the interval. That shows a sharp decline
Fuck you, Will. I know what the term means, and why it’s important. You, clearly, do not (as I would expect from a mere engineer).
LOL.
Give me two numbers:
1) the degree of natural climatological fluctuations
2) the rate of manmade global warming
Divide (2) by (1).
Try to hear harder.
Funny — in Salem Oregon, the last 3 months have been 2.3 F above normal.
Should I extrapolate to the year 2100?
A year or so ago I read a long boring scientific assessment report on the ill health effects of global warming. Here was the interesting part – there was essentially nothing in it. In a passing sentence or two the researchers mentioned significantly higher death rates relative to hospital admissions in winters as opposed to summers but that was all. The dilemma: they had received grants to find that heat was bad; they were not being paid to evaluate the merits of cold versus warmth.
So, in the absence of actual data what did they do? Well, they built a model of course. They speculated about increases in cardiac related heat stress. Did they ever get around to subtracting lives saved from reductions in winter deaths from their model? Of course not. Not paid to do that.
(It was a bit like “environmental economics” where all the supposed negative impacts of capitalism are added up, but all the positive impacts are ignored.)
Will , you keep citing facts and relevant studies and common sense , and David ( rotten ) Appell hates that . He also hates that someone who didn’t spend extra years in formal education institutions is smarter than him .
He didn’t cite anything — he claimed he read something. What was the report? Its title? Who wrote it? Where can I read it.
Up you game.
Where to even begin?
“In many temperate countries, death rates during the winter season are 10-25% higher than those in the summer.”
World Health Organization.
http://who.int/globalchange/climate/en/chapter5.pdf
And globally?
Well they won’t find this trend in the tropics David, because everywhere already died there from global warming hundreds of years ago. You’re so silly.
Can you cite the report you claim to have read, or not? It seems not.
Well, let’s see, it’s up 10 degrees here since this morning…. not so worried about 2 degrees rise per century. Humans persist in climates ranging from -50 in Alaska to +115 in Phoenix. … still struggling to worry… uh oh! Rising Seas!…..a full METER! Dear GAWD! That’s almost as much as the tide in Florida! How to adapt?
Perhaps David can get to the heart of the problem, and go to China and protest. They’re putting in a new Coal fired power plant every week and they don’t believe in emission controls. He could stand in front of a tank somewhere waving a copy of AR4
In other words, you think the daily temperature change in your back yard (10 C) is more significant than an ice age (6-7 C globally). Is that really your position?
Ok, I just checked. There’s no ice in the backyard. You had me worried there for a minute. It’s rather cold out tho…. and I like to have the back door open, so I blast the heat to make up for it. Since the world isn’t warming fast enough to scare anyone, I could go spin some brodies in the SUV to do my part. So, I’m like 40X per capita the average Chinese farmer….. and trying to figure out how to increase it. The world isn’t warm enough, and I want to do my part. I want it so hot the dinosaurs will come back, and eat all the climate kooks and Liberal Politicians.
So you pay for a lot of extra energy out of pure spite. Smart.
Well, no. I pay for extra energy because it’s convenient and the cost isn’t significant to me. Hey Me! Love that video! And there are bikinis after it plays too…. I need to get one of those things. I could do burn outs at the next climate conference.
You’ll really like this one then! 😆
Sweet! Even better. I love how the stacks shoot fire….that is way better for the climate conference.
PS: US per capita emissions are 2.5 times China’s. And 16% of their emissions go for products consumed in the US (and 9% in Europe).
China wants you!
You are so bad,you are funny.
The fake concern you try hard so to show us is priceless that I am on my knees in awe at your holy bullshit!
There are over a BILLION people in China so yes despite spewing out far more CO2 than America these days they dilute it with people showing that overpopulation is helpful in hiding their “pollution” from the rest of us.
Please continue to post here so we can laugh at your drivel and wonder how a PHD holder can be so gawd awful wrong these days.
Every Chinese person has exactly the same right to pollute that you insist on taking. Deal with it.
David – “Every Chinese person has exactly the same right to pollute that you insist on taking.”
David – are we talking about CO2 or pollution????
David Appell is back with more word tricks or better known as showing his created ignorance openly:
“According to Mr Appell, the UK should gets its act together and provide heat for its people.”
It would help if your eco buddies would stop attacking high mass power generation in the UK and move to China and stop pushing low mass stupidity at the same time.
So you want the right to pollute, but not to have to pay for the consequences? Right?
Those days are ending, pal.
Those low mass power stations you like so much is a major reason why they are getting increasingly cold.
Why fight Thorium or Aneutronic power since they will not kill birds like wind power does such as shown here:
http://globalwarmingskeptics.info/thread-1954-post-12164.html#pid12164
Environmentalists used to fight wind power hard and for years until the CAGW scam came along then they drop it and get rich on the heavily subsidized power.
The victim are the taxpayers who are also dying from the increasing winter cold in recent years because of idiots like you interfering with VERIFIABLE climate science research and promoting low mass power production that can’t keep up with demand.
I suspect a good part of the answer is that the UK government, in spite of all modern economic thinking, insists on ever more austerity, despite it already causing a double-dip recession.
If a government puts ideology above the body temperature of its own people, the people should do something about it.
David Appell – “If a government puts ideology above the body temperature of its own people, the people should do something about it.”
The people probably would, but their government has taken their guns away from them….
David Appell writes:
“Taxes are at a 50-yr low. So naturally the government needs to spend it.”
That is probably true but it is definitely true that spending is at ALL TIME high thus even if the bush tax cuts were to end and revert back to previous tax levels the budget deficit will still be massive anyway because they are spending way above what is coming in.
It is obvious the real problem are the assholes in Washington DC. who can’t stop their overspending habit.
False. Federal spending peaked at 25.6% of GDP in 3Q10, and is now 1.8 percentage points lower. Bush left a massive crater in the economy, after all, and it’s going to take years to crawl out of that.
Are you still saying Bush did it ? We have had your moron buddy as president for four years now and you are still blaming Bush . You are pathetic .
Yes, Bush did it. Has there been a worse president in US history? Worst terrorist incident in world history. Worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Worst jobs record on record (WSJ, 1/9/09). Killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in a war fought to avenge his daddy. Lied about Iraq’s WMD. Never caught bin Laden. Watched a major American city drown. Spied on Americans. Tortured people. Lied about regulating CO2.
How much worse do you want, for crying out loud? Even his brother apologized for him. Romney wouldn’t dare speak his name. Bush Jr. was an absolute catastrophe.
ROFLMAO!
You just admitted that what I wrote was true,the problem is wild overspending and the culprit are BOTH political parties with the democrats who have made the latest overspending spree that went well above the Bush previous spending spree.
The deficit spending rate % is higher under the Obama administration than it was under Bush but they are BOTH guilty of overspending right along with the two political parties.
Until they get their crazy over spending habit under control it will not matter what tax level we are at because they are simply not close to enough coming in to cover the current outflow.
The government *needs* to spend in a recession, because no one else is. Why is that so difficult to understand?
It is the governments who creates recessions in the first place with their socialist minded money control and spending decision making.
It is not the people who are spending over 2.1 trillion for a year,it is the GOVERNMENT doing that.I am personally debt free as I deliberately keeping my spending in line with my net wages.
I doubt you are doing that.
Meanwhile once again you have succeeded in driving the conversation off topic because YOU KNOW you have nothing against what Steve wrote about therefore muddy it up with the usual off topic crap.
So this is how PHD educated dweebs like can do these days is exhibit gross difficulty in staying on topic?
Governments aren’t people. Get it?
Governments spend to support social and societal needs. Get it?
Perhaps you would be happy if people went hungry? If more would be homeless? If children went without doctors and dentists?
What exactly is it you want?
“Perhaps you would be happy if people went hungry? If more would be homeless? If children went without doctors and dentists?
What exactly is it you want?”
Typical deflection because never have I suggested that people go hungry and have no medical care at any time.
This is why I trample all over you since you are such a poor screwed up commentator and one with a PHD who should be able to stay on topic and make credible clear minded statements which you rarely do incredibly.
What I want is the federal government stop their wild overspending habit and stop treating their own citizens like criminals on so many things that are not criminal in nature.
There was a time when the Federal government was in reasonable control of itself and America was then a beacon of hope to the world where people could make a good life.That is why MILLION and MILLIONS emigrated to New York and Florida to get free of their nations that were suppressing their freedom to live as individuals.
Your obsession with my degree is getting weird…. I am out of here.
Mr. Appell, I’m impressed that you’ve managed to cram so much absurdity into so few words!
1. Borrowing 40¢ of every dollar the federal government spends, year after year, is not a sustainable economic strategy. It’s utter insanity. Yet Obama still wants increase government spending.
2. The reason people don’t spend is that they are poor. Massively inefficient government enterprise doesn’t solve that problem, it makes the problem worse. Massive government borrowing ties an anchor to the economic prospects of future generations.
3. The recession ended 3.5 years ago. It’s hard to tell, isn’t it? Population is up about 9 million, employment is up less than 1 million, and the only reason the unemployment rate has declined at all is that it doesn’t count the burgeoning numbers of discouraged workers who’ve dropped out of the labor force.
4. The idea that gov’t deficit spending is the road to economic recovery is long-discredited Keynesian nonsense. It’s been tested, and failed dismally.
For example, compare Reagan & Obama. Each inherited a recession from the previous administration + a Democrat Congress (though the recession Reagan inherited was worse). But there the similarity ends.
Reagan was an economist, who sought the counsel of the best economists of his generation, from a broad spectrum of political ideologies. Obama is a lawyer, who knows nothing about economics, and compounds the problem by surrounding himself exclusively with leftist ideologues.
Reagan’s supply-side approach (with the help of a reform-minded bipartisan coalition in Congress) cut taxes, reduced government regulations, and refrained from Keynesian “stimulus” spending. The result was a tremendous economic boom, dramatic employment growth (in spite of increased defense spending), declining deficits, and improved economic prosperity in every income quintile.
Obama’s Keynesian approach, of massive “stimulus” spending, gargantuan deficits, increased government regulations, and modestly higher tax rates, has resulted in a recovery so anemic that 3.5 years into it you (and many other people) still mistakenly think we’re in recession.
The astonishing thing is that there’s anyone left foolish enough to think that Obama knows what he’s doing.
Typical. Spoken like a true Keynesian/socialist.
The debt created by the spending beyond revenue will cause harder economic times than the one the spending is trying to stop.
It’s necessary for good economic health to allow for the human engine to turn around the economy, not governmental intrusion. Recessions are natural responses to poor economic foundations. Recessions naturally occur anyway, but more frequently for bad economics. If they are allowed to run their course, they fix most of the underlying problems. The spending we’re seeing today is exacerbating the economic problems. And will end horribly.
Debasing a currency is rarely a cure for anything, except prosperity.
Clearly you do not understand the paradox of thrift — or are aware of the consequences of austerity in Europe.
It’s not a paradox unless you’re imbecile. Europe could have avoided austerity had they found more suckers to loan them money indefinitely. But even they ran out of idiots. A resource one tends to incorrectly assume is of unlimited supply…
David, there is very little “austerity” going on in Europe. You should pop by my blog from time to time. We frequently discuss economics and often specific to Europe.
And clearly, you entirely ignored the part of my comment about the spending creating a larger problem than what they’re trying to end.
Tell me, what happens to interest rates if and when our economies take off again? Now, apply that interest rate to the massive debt accumulated in trying to spend out of the recessions. All the spending does is delay and worsen the inevitable.
David writes:
“Every Chinese person has exactly the same right to pollute that you insist on taking. Deal with it.”
Except they pollute the air very much because they lack those anti pollution devices that are a common feature in America.
The air pollution problem that ONCE existed in America back in the 1960’s was dealt with by legislative action due to pressure from the people who got tired of the dirty air.Unfortunately there is STILL a coal dust problem that even environmentalists and the stupid EPA have not tackled and that baffles me to no end.
Americans dealt with it,David and you as a PHD hold should have known about this already.
I meant coal ASH problem as they are in giant piles and have unacceptible levels of radiation in them.
Clearly you don’t understand the difference between aerosol pollution and carbon pollution. Tsk tsk. Try to read more.
“The air pollution problem that ONCE existed in America back in the 1960′s was dealt with by legislative action due to pressure from the people who got tired of the dirty air.Unfortunately there is STILL a coal dust problem that even environmentalists and the stupid EPA have not tackled and that baffles me to no end.”
Tsk,tsk…,
Read it again fella since I was making a GENERAL statement something that flew right over your PHD created potatoe head.
Coal and Diesel burning produces air pollution and that is an undeniable fact something you are bullshitting me over.
Coal ASH pollution which has dangerous levels of radioactive materials in it are piled in nice hills is still a concern one where Environmentalists are not doing much complaining about… could it be because there is no money in it as there is for CO2 … he he… “pollution” where they can corrupt legitimate science research with eco/socialist propaganda bunkum and save the world like the egg sucking poodle gog and magog you guys are?
Obviously you still don’t understand. Aerosols — traditional pollution — cools the planet. CO2 warms it.
Read, study, think, and come back here in a few days.
Now I know why people like you, and like “Steve Goddard” (you do realize he’s afraid to use his real name, right?) use fake names — you’re just not smart enough to want people to know who you really are.
PS: I”ve been able to discern part of “Steve’s” IP address from a gmail he sent me. Does anyone here have the last half?
David, why would you want Steve’s IP address? Are you demonstrating malevolent intent?
Yes. “Steve” tears down and insults others, but is such a big pussy he is afraid to put his real name beside his claims. That will end.
David blogs that he is worried about Internet spying, and at the same time claims that he is an Internet spy. ROFL.
David Appell – “Now I know why people like you, and like “Steve Goddard” (you do realize he’s afraid to use his real name, right?) use fake names — you’re just not smart enough to want people to know who you really are.”
The reason we do this is because there are too many unbalanced people, like yourself David, who would “do anything” for “the cause”. Personally, I would meet you anywhere with or without any weapon of your choice, but the last time we had the mentally unbalanced roll up to the front door, there were 8 children under the age of 16 in the house. Not really a problem until the government took away our guns.
I was just wondering about your PhD – isn’t that where someone (like yourself) spends about 3 years studying in detail some tiny part ? The end result being that you end up knowing an awful lot about very little??
Obviously, your PhD is not in science or something worthwhile and useful like (mere) engineering, so can I hazard a guess as to what your thesis was? My guess is that you put a lot of effort into the philosophical aspects of the timely insertion of butt plugs into anally retentive doctoral students….
Don’t insult engineers, fool – just about everything you have has been designed by one.
Carbon dioxide is not “carbon pollution.” Black carbon soot is pollution, but it seems that many on the Left can’t tell the difference.
Another example: UC Berkley calls black carbon soot a “greenhouse gas.” http://pages.citebite.com/l8e7a7i3jnhu
One of the greatest boons leading to improved agricultural productivity is increased atmospheric CO2. E.g., at 570 ppm CO2, “trees grew 26 percent more than those exposed to normal levels of carbon dioxide.” Similar studies with food crops show similar, and sometimes even more dramatic, results.
That shouldn’t surprise you, because the scarcity of CO2 is the primary limiting factor for plant growth on planet Earth.
On Venus and Mars nearly all the oxygen in the atmosphere is in the form of CO2. But on Earth, 99.8% of the oxygen in the atmosphere is in the form of O2, and only 0.04% is in CO2, even though fires and animal respiration are constantly producing CO2 from O2.
Why do you think that is true, Mr. Appell? The correct answer is that it’s because CO2-hungry living things have stripped nearly all the CO2 from the atmosphere.
That’s why, although 21% of the Earth’s atmosphere is O2, CO2 levels are measured in mere parts-per-million.
Certain people reject conventional religion yet can’t live without religion, so they invent new ones.
It is clear that David Appell is a PHD moron because he writes this stupidity:
“Obviously you still don’t understand. Aerosols — traditional pollution — cools the planet. CO2 warms it.
Read,study, think, and come back here in a few days.”
I am talking about the AIR POLLUTION itselt nitwit! not whether it warms or cools it as a pollutant.
I am well aware about Aeresols and CO2 claimed effects but that is not what I was talking about.
You are pathetic…
Frankly, at this point it is hard to tell what you are claiming. Everything and anything, it seems.
Really for a guy with a PHD who can’t read my simple comments?
It is clear that you are suffering from warmist disease that causes otherwise well educated people from understanding simple comments.
I will try once to see if I can get you back on track by starting with YOUR words that I responded to:
David A.
“Every Chinese person has exactly the same right to pollute that you insist on taking. Deal with it.”
My reply,
“Except they pollute the air very much because they lack those anti pollution devices that are a common feature in America.
The air pollution problem that ONCE existed in America back in the 1960′s was dealt with by legislative action due to pressure from the people who got tired of the dirty air.Unfortunately there is STILL a coal ASH problem that even environmentalists and the stupid EPA have not tackled and that baffles me to no end.
Americans dealt with it,David and you as a PHD hold should have known about this
already.”
Nothing there about about Aeresols or CO2 cooling and warming stuff at all.I wrote about “DIRTY air”.
Like I say you are pathetic for failing to understand a simple reply.
It is not news that the Chinese have an air pollution problem.
So what is your point??
Now David is back with his PHD grade snobbery as if it was relevant to the topic HE IS NEVER ON:
“Now I know why people like you, and like “Steve Goddard” (you do realize he’s afraid to use his real name, right?) use fake names — you’re just not smart enough to want people to know who you really are.”
You don’t know when to quit making a complete fool of yourself on this blog.
Hey David A. where did this quote come from?
“Households are said to be “fuel poor” if they have to spend 10% of their income on maintaining a satisfactory indoor temperature.
Across Britain, fuel poverty is thought to affect three million households, 80% of whose members are from vulnerable groups such as the elderly, very young and disabled. Fifty seven per cent of fuel poor householders are aged over 60.
Old properties, absent or inefficient heating systems, the cost of heating, low income, and household size are all factors that contribute to fuel poverty.”
Fuel poverty is common when the cost of fuel and power is too high for the base population.
It sounds like the UK people & govt aren’t taking very good care of their people. What is wrong with their society that they leave people to freeze?
Trick question? Politicians listed to imbeciles such as yourself?
Yes — there are dozens of national governments vying for my opinion.
David A. tries hard to appear smart with his snobbish reply to my comment which he never actually countered:
LOL,once again David is fogging it up with his: “I am too slow to get the simple import of simple comments posted by other people who does not need a PHD to make them.
He was repling to my simple to understand comment that I had made here:
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/cold-kills-40000-every-year-in-the-uk/#comment-173240
David replies,
“Governments aren’t people. Get it?
Governments spend to support social and societal needs. Get it?”
So this is what PHD level education did for you in making these foolish statements.
Of course the “Government” is the people who are elected by the people to run a nation making and passing legislative bills every year to maintain a particular course of governmental pholosophy.It takes a GROUP of people to make a government exist.
America was originally funded on a small limited powers federal government platform doing only few specific duties such as providing a national defense,justice department and regulate the coinage of money while the state and local governments would most of the work in providing the everyday needs of the people.
It is socialist/marxist assholes who came in and corrupted the constitutionally created REPUBLIC set up with their bullshit and now it is the Federal government that has grown outside their limited powers and trampling on the states rights by legislative blackmail and wild spending habits that greatly reduces the states ability to fund their own constitutional requirements.
David writes this,
“Governments spend to support social and societal needs. Get it?”
That was originally supposed to be done at the STATE level but over time the federal government took a lot of it away with their nationalized socialism that is now bankrupcting the economy.The states can’t bail out the feds spending screwups and there is a good reason why but you are not one who can figure that out.
The US was established over 200 years ago. Do you think maybe things have changed a little since then? That people no longer build their cabin from a clearing they hacked out of the wilderness?
The Constitution still has those limited enumerated powers that the federal government exceeded long ago with their many legislative chicanery they impose on the states where the real power were supposed to reside in.
Yeah a young nation without a defined central government that were building their log cabins hacked out of the wilderness that managed to beat off a powerful nation and won their independence and they did it with a collection of individual state representatives who convinced enough individuals who were tired of a far away overbearing central government who wanted to FUCK over their colonists with high taxes and stupid regulations.
This is why Amerca was created as a Constitutional Republic to prevent this kind of
abuse of an overbearing central goverment from happening to them again but now it IS happening because America has been changed to socialist based ideology that is in sharp conflict with the founding fathers republican ideals.
There has been a lot of socialism in the US for a long time. Our defense has been socialized since the beginning. Legal protection of contracts and private property. Then the US mail. Roads. Railroads. Telecommunications, effectively, Utilities too. Veteran care. Elder care. Care for the poor.
People want these. They weren’t there without the government.
Socialism is acceptible at the state,county and local level but NEVER at the federal level.
That is a distinction you miserable socialists fail to understand and why America is in the mess it is in now.They expect the Federal government to do the work that was originally apportioned to the states but now taken away over the previous decades by the federal government infected with the socialist/Marxist ideology that has caused the mess America is in now.
Appell is conflating government involvement in anything with “socialism”. That is not even close to what socialism is. Socialism is the doctrine of an enforced monopoly or near-monopoly status for the government in the business affairs of a nation.
Even the examples of government charity for poor and elder persons is not socialism, unless it exceeds the basic necessities (which of course it has begun to do.)
Even the doctrine of property held (legitimately) in common for the equal benefit of all members of a group is not socialism or socialist. That is what I would call a mutual-aid or commonwealth doctrine. To be socialist, a system has to have one key element. The element of force, enforced monopoly or oligopoly of the public over the individual. In other words, theft, hooliganism, extortion, and mayhem visited on resistors. In other words, criminality; organized crime. State-sponsored racketeering.
But this is all just a side point, because every single thing Appell lists was done by the private sector of one or more countries before government ever got involved! So they certainly were there without the government, at some point in time. Government generally doesn’t respond to people’s needs as fast as private interests do. This has always been the case, and it will be as long as we are living in this corrupt, fallen world. So this man’s entire argument in that comment is ludicrous from all possible angles. And I don’t necessarily buy that he is totally ignorant of all this, either.
RTF
David digs his stupid hole a little depper with this gem:
“It is not news that the Chinese have an air pollution problem.
So what is your point??”
Around we go and still this clod lose track of the conversation.
Sad to see a PHD holder in action who can’t stay on topic that Steve (not his real name but who cares) Goddard and EVEN his own off topic ramblings he has lost track of.
David A. writes:
“Yes — there are dozens of national governments vying for my opinion.”
Gosh that explains why so many are going bankrupt these days since they carefully listened to your rancid socialist suggestions.
You must be proud of your success!
As far as I’m concerned, if someone were to f-bomb my blog once, they would be permanently spam unless they managed to convince me that they had totally turned over a new leaf.
We’ve all fallen short, but there are different levels of offense. When we step out of our door and into public, we are instantly held to a much higher standard than we’re held to inside the confines of our own home. People used to learn this as small children, and carry it with them the rest of their life. And we wonder why we have big problems today??
Well said!
Agreed, mostly. But if you want a healthy family, then your conduct within your home should be as blameless as outside your home. If you treat your wife with less courtesy than you would treat the bag boy at the grocery store, what does that say about your priorities? Nearly every failed marriage has, as one important element of that failure, a failure by one or (usually) both partners to “tame the tongue.”
What I was trying to suggest was that humanity generally holds individuals to a higher standard outside our home, when we are in a public space, than inside. In no way does that imply, nor can it be reasonably taken as a suggestion, that things which are unfair to one’s wife or family are acceptable simply because they happen in the home. My main point was simply that since people are weak and may not always be able to be at their maximum potential, that we have historically taught our children that how we treat others outside matters more than how we treat others inside. Ultimately, God judges us by a standard none of us can reach on our own — full perfection at all times. But the fact that we cannot live up to this standard on our own, and the fact that even with His help we will stumble on our journey, does not excuse us from deliberately sinning. There is the key: where our intentions are. If our intention is never to sin, He can be there for us, and our behavior improves automatically. If it is not, He withdraws, and our behavior diminishes. In either case, we are judged according to our works, but only by grace can our bad works be expunged from the record.
Another way to look at it: If Appell came into my home and did that, I would ask him not to do it any more, and if he cared about being welcome in my home, he would stop, because it’s MY space, and he knows that I set the rules. Furthermore, he knows that if I visit him, and he curses at me there, there’s nothing I can do to stop him. He has the power to do that, because I chose to visit him in his space. But who makes the rules for conduct in a public space, hmm?
So that the moral man know this and as a result he treats everything and everyone outside his door, including other people’s homes, with the highest level of respect, because in no way does that belong to him! Of course, a believer in God also should know that his “own” home is not completely his, either, and behave accordingly. But my point that I was trying to convey is that one could be an atheist, and consider one’s home to be 100% his own, but still comprehend that the highest possible standard is required outside, because it’s not his exclusive domain — he doesn’t get to make the rules there! And historically, people of many faiths (including atheists) have taught their children this, because they intuitively understood how important it was to a functioning society. Now, that is breaking down, because evil is spreading, and evil powers recognize no boundaries. They believe they are unconstrained by “petty” concerns such as the needs of others. Unsurprisingly, the society suffers as a result.
RTF
Richard T. Fowler,
I know that you are mainly addressing your comments towards David but I accept that it is including me too in a general way and I thank you for it.I KNOW that I sometimes can get carried away here and maybe deserve a slap for it.
I get disappointed in people who worked hard to get their PHD then squander it away with trolling drivel.He has had numerous opportunities to make direct science based counterpoints to Steves presentations but he so often fail to even stay on topic and ends up with his foot in the mouth comments instead as Steve has shown several times in the past in actual blog entries exposing Dr. Appell’s poor behavior here.The latest one is up about Davids failure to counter Steves charts and such.
Plus I quickly lose respect for those who fail to follow the scientific method that the IPCC fails so badly on.The numerous climate models they push are often impossible to verify and therefore a waste of time yet they are given preposterous level of support by people who are eventually exposed as having economic,environmental and or political position to gain thus indicating that they are working through a conflict of interest like Al Gore who is making millions from his doomsday messages that are so obviously preposterously overblown.
The IPCC organization has been convincigly in recent years shown to be a political and environmentalist playground to advance their style of Eco-socialism to cure all perceived ills of the world.I hate it and what is more I grow interested in defending the Scientific Method where any science claim MUST be falsesifiable and therefore have the chance to be in reasonable time verified as credible and the IPCC has failed in that utterly.
I keep wondering why so many people fall so hard for the CAGW pseudoscience when it is so full of misleading contradictory crap that manage to elude the verification process but be given iconic status anyway.Thus I grow slowly more militant in my replies to those who have shown their scorn for established science process and push their insane eco-socialist bullcrap on the rest of us who wanted a rational discourse to happen not a propaganda based ideology that is stupid on the face of it.
So flawed I may be,I will not back off on attacking people like David who clearly show contempt to the rest of us with his regular trolling and stupid off topic drivel and thus waste all that education in the process.
Why do you think people call it their religeon.
I hear ya, man! Thanks for your thoughts. You do a lot of good around here. Actually, when I wrote my first comment I had not yet seen yourse. But I direct these two comments at everyone, not just the two of you. Even myself — particularly myself. As Paul wrote, “I die daily”!
RTF
Zzzzzzzz. Zzzzzzzz. Zzzzzz
And fer Toshinmack, an encore. Just because I am not feeling the best, and have no time to put up with his Bullshit………..
So your welcome in advance thar Toshinmack. Let’s call it a Sucks Donut, because it sucks don’t it! Remember that when ye get yer next coffee and sucks dount…. 😆