EM 6 :36, when was the report written? Pre or post Brexit?

If it is another report written about all the bad things that may happen, is it any more believable than anything else you believe in about how bad Global Warming may be?

Does it come with a pinch of salt?

golfCharlie. The question Martin A asked and which EM answered at length has nothing whatever to do with climate change.
No one here has even tried to address concerns of the Irish about Brexit mentioned by EM other than give platitudes.
Why not try discussing these matters with EM, rather than exposing him to unwarranted (in this case) abuse and ridicule?

How the UK deals with Ireland will be critically examined by the rest of the world. Here at BH I get the impression its all "full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes".

I went to NI once. It rained every day of thirty-odd, and they gave me a medal. The border was closed to free movement but open for rockets and mortars.

Martin A. I'll leave it to EM to judge whether you have discussed any of the points he raised. I have reread the whole thread since you first asked your question. Let me just say that I think you will find it most difficult to substantiate your claim that you discussed with him anything substantial (lots about the date Eire became independent and whether the great British public can be wrong) Instead your first response was to agree with golfCharlie that EM was unnecessarily worrying (about nothing?).

My view is that because you did not treat EM's comprehenive reply with the respect it deserves it was legitimate to speculate if you were just setting him up. You may not have been, but there is precious little to argue otherwise.

Usual tactic here, attack the person who disagrees with you.

Martin A. Tone troll????? So you cannot defend.your terminological inexactitudes and resort to insults? Never believed you could, but didn't believe you would sink so low. I believed you insist on debate here, seems I was wrong.

EM perhaps you're right, we should let these discussion threads wither on the vine. Resorting to insults and ridicule means it's not worth our candle.

Alan Kendall, everybody has concerns about Brexit. There will be winners and losers.

If I had written about how rural communities from the South Downs were all pro Brexit, and quoted a report to prove it, I think I would have come in for some criticism.

EM has a track record of deciding that everything will be worse about global warming, so why should his views on NI post Brexit, be taken with anymore credibility?

He has cried "Wolf!" too many times. Perhaps this time he is right. Nobody knows, but is EM more certain about NI, because it is a subject he has some balanced knowledge of, or has he only listened to one side of the debate? Nobody knows.

EM is happy with the changes made by the EU and Climate Scientists to the UK economy. More than 50% of people wanted a change in the EU, but the EU never offered change. If the EU wants to go away and come up with an alternative method of operating, then perhaps another Referendum might be worth having. But it would be a bit like an abusive partner offering to change his or her ways, on the steps of the Divorce Court.

The simple answer to your main question golfCharlie about EM's credibility is that he is on the ground. You and others here are right to be wary and sceptical, but none of you gave EM any credit whatsoever. You pre-judged him and mocked his pessimistic views. No one challanged the arguments he made, except with unsupported platitudes. I was interested in what he had to say and so read something about what he claimed. Anyone else here do the same? If you did and came up with evidence/argument opposed to what EM wrote, why didn't you contribute here, or did you only find material that supports EM, and that couldn't be allowed? EM must ALWAYS be wrong.

When I try to get you all to consider EM's comments more seriously, eventually I am branded a troll yet again. No doubt the accusation of drama-queening will not be long in following.

This is a tough site for someone not always in agreement with the mainstream political viewpoint, but it shouldn't be this tough.

Another thread successfully derailed.

Why derailed? Britain's extraction from the EU should not involve deliberately damaging a vulnerable part of the UK like NI or a close neighbour with whom we share much (Eire). The purpose of this thread would be served if we tried to find answers to Irish concerns rather than attacking EM for expressing them. So splitpin what do you have to offer?

Alan Kendall, EM is right because rising sea levels and a baking sun will boil Northern Ireland dry and wet, whilst clouds of carbonic acid will eat all the cement mortar and concrete structures, as malaria wreaks havoc with life expectancy. An Unprecedented plague of poisonous serpents will run rampant, as fast as their mutated legs can carry them, all over the Emerald Isle, which even a Trump style wall will fail to contain, and this time around, Potato Blight famine will be blamed on Global Warming.

This was all predicted by peer reviewed climate science papers.

Alternatively, it is possible that some of the bad consequences of Brexit may not be as bad as feared, and some may be resolved by human ingenuity. In the meantime, attaching too much significance to EM's prophesies of doom, seems a bit premature.

It seems that many have decided to create an illusion of mass panic over Brexit. The same tactics have been used over Global Warming. Perhaps EM gets his info from the same sources, so there is actually no coincidence at all.

Who knows what the different fractions of the Tories will amount to, when attempts to divide are made by Labour and multiplied by the imaginary numbers and political logic of the EU? But EM knows best.

Problem is you may know little about the situation in Ireland golfCharlie and EM's response to MartinA's question about what the Irish fear is, as far as we know, accurate. He was not asked for his views, although I recognize it will have gone through his particular filter. Yet we may never know because you jumped on him with mockery. I note that his detailed reply said nothing about climate change, yet you (and others) repeatedly refer to it. To me EM seems genuinely concerned about his fate and that of the Irish. Could you, for once, have taken his views seriously and tested them by proper debate?

I have sought independent verification of what EM has written, and found it. I have also discovered more positive views but none that actually address the very real future problems. Here, you are either in blissful denial, or if you have done even the slightest research refuse to share it here because that would be supporting EM, and that must'nt happen on BH.

Alan Kendall, I am not in blissful denial. There WILL be problems. EM is stating it is all bad news, based on information supplied to him.

You have obtained some verification of what EM states. How do you know that your verification is not from the same source as EM? I don't, and you don't. Based on EM's consistent track record as a spin doctor, I urge caution.

If this is how the science of climate science was "settled", then you are at risk of being suckered into agreeing with something for which there is no evidence.

What proportion of unemployed Belfast Ship Yard workers are unemployed due to the EU and Global Warming? Shall we just assume it is 100%? It makes it easier to start a discussion with unverifiable sweeping assumptions.

golfCharlie.
1. How do you know information was supplied to EM? From whom?
2. My sources are reading columns from various NI and Eire newspapers. So unless you think all are as biased as EM might be, please accept that his remarks do find an echo in the Irish news media.
3. Concerning EM's track record, has he ever been asked to comment here upon the Irish political situation, and been proven to be overly pessimistic? That's the only track record that counts.
4. Am I being suckered into something for which there is no evidence? On what basis do you make your judgement that there is no evidence? I have found evidence for the concerns expressed by EM, some of which seem to be self evident anyway.
5. If you still doubt EM, why not engage him in true debate? Demonstrate your prejudice was well founded, if you can. I wager you cannot.

I'm sorry to say that you, and most everyone here, rushed to judgement without due consideration, just because of the messenger. What is rather pathetic about this knee-jerk response, is that he was specifically asked here for his opinions.

MartinA. Why don't you employ your considerable talents to addressing some of the questions I have asked of you and gC, rather than continuing to insult me? I assume a tone troll is indeed an insult, but who can tell?

If you never expected to get an acceptable answer from EM, why did you ask him (what he thought Irish citizens were fearful about) in the first place?

Martin A. I did indeed carefully read what you wrote. You missed quoting your next line "I took him up on various points and he responded to my remarks". As my summary indicates you never took him up on anything related to his detailed reply to you, instead you resorted to discussing side issues (date of Irish Republic formation, wrong referendum results). Yet you mocked him and his detailed response when responding to golfCharlie. No one here has discussed EM's fears except to mock him.

This thread is about providing the manner by which achieving the best Brexit results may be obtained. One factor here is recognizing all of the potential problems that beset us. EM, answering your specific question identified numerous problems involving Ireland that will have to be overcome.

Now, dispassionately, review this thread since EM's detailed reply and tell me you can find a rational debate with him about the concerns he raised. My disgust is not only about tone, but of a lack of substance. Why wasn't EM questioned in rational debate about his contribution? Instead it was dismissed as more EM pessimism. We had a unique opportunity to discuss these matters with an Englishman living in NI, and BH may have thrown it away. If your evaluation of my repeated efforts to get this aspect of Brexit back on track are considered tone trolling then, in this instance, I'm proud to accept the epithet.

Be as sceptical of EM's fears as you like, but don't dismiss them simply because it was EM making them. See specifically point 3 in my 1.26pm post to golfCharlie.

I did try to look up tone troll, but could not find it on Wikip. I knew you intended it as an insult, what more did I really need?

AlanK:

You suggest people give M a hard time and did not address all of his points....

He made three.

.1) 860,000 Irish citizens live in the UK. They currently have a de facto right of residence under the Common Travel Agreement.

Do we close the border or leave it open? It depends upon how people abuse the border. If it became a back door into the UK then it would need to be closed but with visa access. If all Irish had a right to a UK visa then there would be no problem that I can see.

2) A considerable proportion of Irish trade is with the UK. 15% of their exports

Yes we trade a lot with Ireland and it will be in all of our interests to have a free trade deal. Not only with the south but all 27 nations. I do not see any other possibility occurring. I suspect there will be lots of scaremongering before we reach that state, but any alternative will hit the big hitters of the 27, effectively ruling out anything other than free trade.

3)There are considerably political implications

Pure politics with point three. Yes some people will try and make political and personal capital out of any change that occurs. But in or out these people exist who try to make other peoples lives a misery.

Point 3 needs people to tread carefully and it would help (the other two points apply as well) if commentators and their followers (EM) did not try and talk up the worst possible outcome for every possibility.

The remain newspapers are still dreaming up scare stories on a daily basis. When you read the articles you see it is all guess work of an extreme nature.

I note that the stock market, apart from the first few hours after the vote was announced, has responded very well. It only dips whenever Mr Carney (BOE governor) speaks.

Also the FTSE 100 is now above what it was before the vote.

Note, due to this unfortunate good news, we have miraculously started to use the FTSE 250 (as it is *NOW* more representative). I wonder how many google hits you get for FTSE 100 versus FTSE 250 in the last 12 months?

Always beware of doomsayers!

Steve Richards. At long last, someone has started to comment on EM's points. Thank you. I await EM's reactions with interest. The only thing I would add is that a great many Irish are as pessimistic as EM, so he may have been reporting accurately.

Alan Kendall 1:26 reference using your numbers

1. A sweeping generalisation, in keeping with EM's track record.

2. Where have EM's tears been over the decline in any European shipbuilding, particularly Harland & Wolff?

3. Given EM's track record on global warming, why should I trust his judgement on ways to cook a turkey, or over/under cook an economy?

4. You have been suckered by EM into reading predictions of doom and gloom in the Island of Ireland, for which there is no evidence. He may be right, and people are right to be worried. There will be winners and losers. But importantly for EM, he has now gained further publicity for the political cause he supports

5. I did ask EM when the report was written. No answer.

Who has confirmed their bias? The EU have said they are going to make things difficult for the UK, without seeking any mandate, Tory MPs have not chosen a new Leader to be Prime Minister, and Labour MPs have been told that their opinion on their Leader is irrelevant. But EM knows best.

Without any supporting evidence, I predict more financial collapses in the Green economy, in the UK, Eire and the rest of the EU. This will be bad news for those who lose their jobs, but many more jobs were trashed in order to create those jobs.

If you want to wager money, don't bet it on 'Green'. Red or Blue remains an uncertainty. EM still believes he has 97% support for his beliefs, which has been a crime against humanity, and a waste of time and money. He is in Denial.

Alan Kendall, I forgot to add this from EM directed at me

Why do you keep asking me loaded rhetorical questions phrased to demonstrate the depth of your climate change denial?

Jul 5, 2016 at 4:39 PM | Entropic man

When have I ever denied the climate changes?I have always maintained the climate changes, and have always said the Hockey Stick is a load of twaddle, based on historical information and my own knowledge.

EM must know that about me, so why is he making comments that are so obviously wrong?

Should I assume that everything EM posts here is as inaccurate, and deliberately so?

golfCharlie you are incourageable. You cheerfully accept your bias. You have known EM for perhaps too long to now change. Yes you did ask EM about the report, but in a most insulting manner and in terms that clearly indicated you wouldn't accept its conclusions. If you were genuinely interested you could have found out the date yourself.

With regard to your 7.25pm. you surely cannot deny asking loaded rhetorical questions?, and you know full well that his use of "climate change denial" is shorthand for "anthropogenically induced climate change denial".

I'll leave you alone, but cannot deny a slight disappointment. You are also by no means alone in your views about EM.