OT Corrupt BBC at it again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[animallittle3]

Reasonable points as always animal.

I think you have to look at this in perspective of the global warming data I just tried to discuss above. This isn't even contested in scientific circles, it is simply what is happening to us.

We can either accept that or not. If we deny it (as Reform do, despite the evidence) and we continue on the path we're provenly going, then fair enough. Is that where you are? Do you simply deny it?

If we accept that the measurable data is correct, and the projection is a reality, then we can either 1) keep up out own efforts to invest in green infrastructure which are measurably bringing down our own carbon footprint, and then hope that China, USA, Russia also reverse their trajectory in time to avoid the worst case scenario the 16 degrees global temp that we are currently going to hit in the 2040s. Or 2) give up and aim to reverse our progress on carbon footprint by increasing fossil fuel production despite evidence that China and the other super powers moving in the right direction.

It sounds like you're in favour of 2? I'm sure you have kids/grandkids, and you've read the scientific data of where we're heading. So, is it that you simply reject the scientific data, or you just are buying shares in Greenland with Howdy?

I hope as a result of all of this, my reasons for supporting the Green Party over the years come over. You may consider it as well intentioned but not in touch with reality, but surely the reality I've explained in the above post is quite clear? Only my point of view, and I would love someone to come on and show me that I have made horrendous misreadings of the scientific global warming data above, but at what point does competing with China in a fossil fuel war of competitiveness just become a point of sticking our own heads in a noose? I guess you could say that we can improve our own economy in the next 30 years by increasing our emissions again and sealing our fate, but doesn't it seem like an empty and doomed future to consign the youngers to?

What i mean by reality raging is that the Green view fails to take in to account the social impact on all of this such as the loss of 5 million jobs .

[ragingpup]

What i mean by reality raging is that the Green view fails to take in to account the social impact on all of this such as the loss of 5 million jobs .

Where do you get the evidence that it will cost 5 million jobs? I can see that it will result in a significant reskilling of jobs in the fossil fuel energy secor but most research on this indicates that the development of a green industry replacement infrastructure will actually create between 250K and 750K new jobs net. That's from LSE and relates to the UK only. I can see that the ILO forecasts that globally 6 million jobs would be lost but offsets this with forecast that 24 million would be created in green development.

So I can't see the evidence of such a gloomy prediction. Where do you see it?

[ragingpup]

You mean you haven't seen it reported on BBC News?

Ah, I see it's a further edit airing of the same speech, but 2 years earlier. Got it now! Not from the beeb though!

[Stovicmiller]

I think I tried to explain animal - we all know this historical poor output from China, I was just trying to explain (with some optimism) that there seems to have been a significant sea change in the last couple of years and a resultant slowing/halting of emissions output. See last Reuters link I posted (unless you have any different data to that from Reuters?)

Not being funny but you keep having a pop at reform when you’re a Green Party member, latest from your leader is that he’s going to ask the Russian leader to give up his nuclear weapons maybe he will try hypnosis, all that will happen is that Putin will finish up will bigger tits. Wishful thinking that china give a **** bout climate change, how many fossil fuel power stations have they and how many are they still building. What ever this country does regarding climate change will not matter if India Russia china America don’t get on board.

[MillerBill]

What's this in relation to Bill? Can't see anything different to the Trump news? What's the latest scandal from Auntie you're referring to here?

Prior to the Panorama misinformation,Newsnight also misled the viewers with a pretty much identical fake news item.How many more times have this corrupt broadcaster done this?Probably Net Zero,Gazza,Trans,NHS.on and on and on.

[Redshank]

Prior to the Panorama misinformation,Newsnight also misled the viewers with a pretty much identical fake news item.How many more times have this corrupt broadcaster done this?Probably Net Zero,Gazza,Trans,NHS.on and on and on.

I don't expect the majority on here to give two hoots but the BBC pulled a similar stunt with Corbyn when Kuenssberg asked him a question, then they edited in a Corbyn answer from a completely different question to make him look daft. There were no hystrionics or talk of £1bn law suits, but the beeb were forced into an apology.

Similarly, the Panorama programme on supposed rampant anti-semitism in the Labour Party was full of lies and made up stories.

There are many more examples of of BBC bias.

The BBC is a disgrace and nothing more than a propaganda machine for the 45yr old neoliberal experiment that's so obviously been a chronic failure for 99% of the population.

Some supposedly intelligent people on here ought to know better in their dogged defence of the BBC.

[animallittle3]

Where do you get the evidence that it will cost 5 million jobs? I can see that it will result in a significant reskilling of jobs in the fossil fuel energy secor but most research on this indicates that the development of a green industry replacement infrastructure will actually create between 250K and 750K new jobs net. That's from LSE and relates to the UK only. I can see that the ILO forecasts that globally 6 million jobs would be lost but offsets this with forecast that 24 million would be created in green development.

So I can't see the evidence of such a gloomy prediction. Where do you see it?

Well I'll let you listen to Sir Jim Ratcliffe , he knows a thing or two about the chemical industry , apologies it's 4.8 million jobs at risk in the chemical industry and the supply chain , what reskilling opportunities would you suggest for those who have built good careers in the chemical industry ?

I don't suppose you are in favour of Fracking raging ? , lower energy costs and all that .

https://youtu.be/doPvf995ris?si=X_XZQl-INT6I3SWx

[Spuddy Speight]

Re the Panorama/Splicing/Editing of Donald Trump's speech.
The POTUS, Donald Trump now reported to be suing the BBC for..... 5 billion dollars!!!!
And no, the licence fee payers will not pay for that. The BBC are reported to be insured for such an eventuality.

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

I don't expect the majority on here to give two hoots but the BBC pulled a similar stunt with Corbyn when Kuenssberg asked him a question, then they edited in a Corbyn answer from a completely different question to make him look daft. There were no hystrionics or talk of £1bn law suits, but the beeb were forced into an apology.

Similarly, the Panorama programme on supposed rampant anti-semitism in the Labour Party was full of lies and made up stories.

There are many more examples of of BBC bias.

The BBC is a disgrace and nothing more than a propaganda machine for the 45yr old neoliberal experiment that's so obviously been a chronic failure for 99% of the population.

Some supposedly intelligent people on here ought to know better in their dogged defence of the BBC.

And there is the point of it all. Yes we have seen a couple of high profile resignations but no sackings at managerial level which suggests that the teams on Panorama and Newsnight were only following instructions to rubbish Trump on every available opportunity.

[Timbertop]

All the Trump knockers should watch his interview with Bev Turner on GB News. They might see him in a different light. He certainly knows what’s wrong with our country and more importantly how to solve our problems,specifically immigration and energy.