Quote:
Originally Posted by HOZ
But worth a read for those actually looking for the truth.
Matt Ridley |
Surprise surprise, more question avoidance and a random posting of same old, same old, posted in the dead of night.
Anyways ....
"So what’s the problem? The problem is that you can accept all the basic tenets of greenhouse physics and still conclude that the threat of a dangerously large warming is so improbable as to be negligible, while the threat of real harm from climate-mitigation policies is already so high as to be worrying, that the cure is proving far worse than the disease is ever likely to be."
A chairman of a bank that was taken over by the government and had to be bailed out to the tune of 27billion (yes BILLION) UK sterling due to "
recklessness and over-exposure to financial risk" is suddenly "the truth" of risk assessment?
I don't think so.
Hey, but at least he seems to keep good company. Find his name in this list and go four names up. It's your x1000 CO2 buddy
http://www.thegwpf.org/who-we-are/ac...y-council.html
Good old George Monbiot critiques "the truth" that is Ridley and his book.
Quote:
|
The Rational Optimist is riddled with excruciating errors and distortions.
|
http://www.monbiot.com/2010/06/01/th...ck-the-planet/
Oh, and Bill Gate's thoughts on Mr "the truth (but don't mention the 27bn collapse)" Ridley.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...699028330.html
First Plimer, now Ridley. You sure do know how to pick them!