eurealist.co.uk

The argument advanced by scientists who study the sun is that too little respect is given to the effect of the sun on climate change.

If these scientists are right, those who argue that even if the likes of Al Gore are wrong about the causes of global warming, it is better to something than nothing at all, are going entirely in the wrong direction and it would actually be better in the long run if we did in fact do nothing.

The upper layers of the world’s oceans are - much to climatologists’ surprise - becoming cooler, which is a clear indication that the Earth has hit its temperature ceiling already, and that solar radiation levels are falling and will eventually lead to a worldwide cold spell, Abdusamatov said.

“Instead of professed global warming, the Earth will be facing a slow decrease in temperatures in 2012-2015. The gradually falling amounts of solar energy, expected to reach their bottom level by 2040, will inevitably lead to a deep freeze around 2055-2060,” he said, adding that this period of global freeze will last some 50 years, after which the temperatures will go up again.

http://alfin2100.blogspot.com/2007/01/solar-power-driving-climate.html

Rising levels of carbon dioxide and other gases emitted through human activity, generally believed to trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere, are an effect rather than the cause of global warming, a prominent Russian scientist said Monday.

Habibullo Abdusamatov, head of the space research laboratory at the St. Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory, said global warming stems from an increase in the sun’s activity. His view contradicts the international scientific consensus that climate change is attributable to the emission of greenhouse gases generated by industrial activities, such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.

“Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and a lengthy - almost throughout the last century - growth in its intensity,” Abdusamatov told RIA Novosti in an interview.

“It is no secret that when they go up, temperatures in the world’s oceans trigger the emission of large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. So the common view that man’s industrial activity is a deciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation of cause and effect relations.”

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070115/59078992.html

On his blog John Redwood wrote that the Conservatives failed yesterday in the House of Commons to get a commitment to a referendum on part of the Constitution, if they decide to smuggle some of it in by the back door. Mr Redwood says it is typical of this government’s approach. It is also typical of the Conservative approach to miss the fact that they are already smuggling parts of the constitution in through the back door.

However he correctly says “most people in the UK strongly oppose a federal EU state. We are fed up with the continual power grab by Brussels, and the dissimulation by this government as they give more and more power away.”

But then in a veiled criticism of UKIP says “Some now think the only answer is to declare unilateral withdrawal from the EU” Mr Redwood argues that there are “two big problems with this approach”

“The first is there are no MPs elected to vote for this in the present Parliament, and no-one thinks there will be any elected on such a ticket for a fringe party after the next election either.”

“Secondly, we would need a series of agreements with the EU and other European countries which would need to be negotiated when changing the relationship. For example, we need agreement for landing rights at continental airports, train route agreements through the Tunnel, general trading agreements, environmental agreements over cross border pollution, agreements over the use of the North Sea and Channel.”

“The issue therefore is a simple one. If you like me belong to the Eurosceptic majority that wants a different relationship with the neighbours, is it best to negotiate without unilateral withdrawal, or try to negotiate after you have pulled out?

It seems obvious that you should negotiate. The best approach is for the UK government to seek to negotiate a relationship we can be happy with, and then put that to the UK people in a referendum. The fact that the result of the negotiation will be put to the people would give the continental negotiators an incentive to give us a better deal, for otherwise the UK will reject it.”

The first point he makes is rather like saying we do not want to breath because no party is offering us air and begs the question; if returning power to our government it is so important to Conservatives why on earth is it not their policy, the question the Conservative party needs to address is if it is not their policy as “most people in the UK strongly oppose a federal EU state” then why is it not their policy. The question we as voters need to consider is if the Conservative party will not offer sensible grown up policies on the EU then why should we bother to vote for them.

On the second point I think Mr Redwood is attempting to put the horse before the cart, first we should hold a referendum on staying in or leaving the EU. In this the Conservative party could and should lead the way in selling an alternative to EU membership for this country, then our government would negotiate the various agreements with the EU.

The important point is returning power and accountability to our lawmakers not on agreeing with several different international agreements our sovereign government would have the power to make for the benefit of the people of this country. The reasons for leaving the EU should not be conflated with landing rights at continental airports.

Mr Redwood then returns to the main theme of his post which boils down to an appeal for EUsceptics to back the Conservative parties approach to the EU.

“In the last three General Elections Eurosceptics have split their votes, giving the federalists an even bigger majority. It is ridiculous that a country which opposes the Euro, common borders, a common foreign and security policy and the constitution by big margins should be represented by a Lab Lib majority who want all these things.”

I am not persuaded by the argument that to vote for a party which stands on the platform of leaving the EU is splitting the EUsceptic vote, the Conservatives do not offer us that option, for as long as we remain a member, our own parliament in Westminster is a charade, and it really does not matter which particular British political party has to follow the socialist EU line.

What we can however glean from Mr Redwoods post is the Conservatives parliamentary party’s slow realisation that they just might need the EUsceptic vote their leader has so far distained. But I am afraid they will have to do a great deal better before they are ready to lead this country out of the EU madness which they took us into in the first place.