Mrs. Tet and I have been working on a paper for a group who are working against carbon tax and came across a bit of stuff, thought I’d share. What got me going to post this one was when I read this bit here, from special 25, after I had been keeping an eye on what your concerns were as expressed in the thread.
All we can do is take the rule book and assess whether it is safe and legal to fly - As many of these rules are open to some degree of 'interpretation' there is often disagreement even within our own crews as to whether flights can be achieved with the required safety margins in place.
As a lead in, even though you guys in the mother country read this paper every day it is quite amusing and a good lead
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100069327/climate-change-there-just-arent-enough-bullets/
Then there was, more gaff about the met
http://www.thegwpf.org/index.php
and our friend Jo nova makes a few good points, see point 4, ‘what’s the harm in acting now’
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/pub-questions/
Then along came this story, also from Jo which Mrs. Tet says the helicopter pilots will be excited about, a nice big red chopper half covered with snow. She knew she was not being funny at all, the aircraft depicted (possibly even one of you guys) is recovering the body of the girl killed because the local council or whatever ran out of salt for the roads, why? The met office said it was going to be a warm winter!!
So herein the story is the killer clause, which every good solicitor needs or so I’m told, and when I read the paragraph in bold half way down the page, my blood started to go cold. I thought, here you blokes are trusting the info from the Met office much of which might be formulated on fraudulent data, get the drift? There you could easily go, right up a very dry gully even though you "used the rule book."
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/11/insurance-that-kills/
So then I thought, well the company’s that you mob fly for, and the company’s on the rigs and their support contractors etc that you service, may well like to suggest to your and their's legal people that this sort of information may just be what they need to start making complaints and queries to the met office - and accumulating.
With luck you might force the met bureau at least to come back from the brink and start examining again, unaltered data and form some factual and logical decisions.
Unaltered data you say, oh no that can't be right every one tells us that the German black forest is a gonna, when was that back in 1992 the coral reefs are shrivelling up etc. well it's kinda surprising, that none of that has happened, but a very surpising thing has. That is this little gem was forced into public circulation after a challenge under the American freedom of information laws. It and accompanying documents are now posted on the IPCC website. Those guys must be having fits.
Here you go, you can see for your self that out of the 2500 endorsing scientists just five were left of whom 4 had vested interests and one made one comment only on the entire 11 chapter report.
The UN Climate Change Numbers Hoax | The SPPI Blog
have a nice white xmas . its a cool 32 celsius here.
cheers tet
Last edited by topendtorque; 23rd Dec 2010 at 13:04.