Paul Burgess v Jim Dale
December 18, 2023
By Paul Homewood
The latest clash between Paul Burgess and Jim Dale on GB News.
Last week Dale agreed that he would bring some data to prove his regular assertions that catastrophic events such as droughts are on the increase.
Needless to say, he did not. Instead all he had was ad-hom attacks:
19 Comments
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Paul is getting better in front of camera and Jim is getting worse. Thks to Nana Akua and GBNews for this regular Saturday slot.
I regularly find myself facing Jim, or Doughnut McCarthy. I also offered to provide him with data regarding extreme events, from the IPCC, so did Lois Perry, several times. I have also offered proxy temperature records from the past pre-direct records, as regards now versus then and the hottest in 125,000 year standard lie repeated by activists from their common play book.
Also archeological records re the MWP and RWP from the Alps, Norway, Greenland, etc,. He will never discuss observations of reality as regards climate, now or in the past. Just changes the subject as soon as challenged to a couple of extreme events around the World that are current, appeals to authority and attacks the teller of facts, because he hasn’t got any.
Does not understand the concept of global climate versus weather, cherry picking versus global change, not significant. Does not understand global climate is controlled at sea where al the heat and natural feedback is, etc. May also chuck in famine when in fact agriculture is at record levels, growing faster than population. etc. He doesn’t do facts. Neither do any of these activists. Because, of cousre, they don’t know any and can’t have a different truth to the observed science we know and and national records and science measure. Facts that deny them are so inconvenient to their case.
The format of these shows rarely allow for facts to be properly debated, with references people can check for themselves, of course. So that makes doing science rather hard, but not impossible.
Dale is one of the morons who parrot the mantra that says “the science is settled, and we are all doomed if we don’t take action now!” None of these people actually look into the “science,” but I would really like to see them answer the simple question “what happens if we get no wind in a cold winter fortnight?” The answer will be that a lot of people will die, if we don’t burn fossil fuels.
During Matthew Hancock’s tenure as Minister for Energy his actually happened. The Grid was kept running by using every means, but mainly by running down gas reserves. We were within a couple of weeks of the Grid shutting down when Qatar sent us a couple of LNG tankers. Eventually our luck will run out.
JF
I have started commenting on another blog which primarily centres around the oil supply with some rather shady statistic analysis. Another thread on the blog frequently draws plaudits about the impending switch to EV’s and unreliables that are going to save the world form climate change
The personal attacks are quite something. A recent difference of views centred on EV use. A Bloomberg puff piece claimed that 1.8 million b/d of oil had been saved by the switch to EV’s. I pointed out that that would require a 7 % reduction is gasoline demand globally and there was no evidence to support such a figure based on consumption, or the size of the EV car parc.
Moreover on one of their sacred blogs that is always correct, it confirmed that EV’s are driven less than ICE’s. No surprise.
I am now a troll. Yippee. You can take a horse to water but you cannot force it to drink.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
Upton Sinclair.
“…a lot of people will die, if we don’t burn fossil fuels.”
That, of course, is one of Mr Global’s desired outcomes.
‘If we drink we will die
If we don’t drink we will die
So we might as well say “What the hell!”
And raise our glasses high
Whatever your name
You’ll be dying just the same
So you might as well say, “What the hell!”
and join us in a drink
Hey!’
Taras Bulba, 1962
If Dale was honest and accepted the real data he would not be able to make money with his consultancy company. The amount of money that is wasted on Dale and his activist ilk is astounding. And because of all these global warming grifters, it makes killing it off very hard.
Can someone please ask Jim Dale what his qualifications actually are.
I understand he did a stint in the Royal Navy working in their meteorological dept. but I have never seen, nor can I find any reference to a higher academic qualification of his.
He seems to be on Linkedin but I gave up my subscription to that years ago so have no access.
In fact, I just found a reference to him in NEWA (The National Expert Witness Agency is an independent publisher whose sole purpose is to promote expert witnesses).
The bio on him, written by him, states: “I gained my meteorological observer qualification in the Fleet Air Arm of the British Royal Navy and served on various ships and land based stations until late 1985”
I did manage to get some information about him from Linkedin where his service in the RN was from 1978 – 1985 (7 years). His description: “Travelled the world getting paid to look at the sea and the sky. Good job if you can get it!”
No reference to being an officer and no references to qualifications which is highly unusual for an ‘academic’.
Jim Dale, a perfect example of the Dunning–Kruger effect?
And this year’s Thunberg prize for the greatest ignoramus and boor goes to…
JIM DALE!!!!!
who’s Jim Dull?
No, it’s DALE.
Well, OK, who is he?
Oh, I dunno. Some sort of arrogant mouthy berk. Pretends to know something about climate change… Knows sfa, in reality. Never heard of Feynman either.
Says it all then.
Yup.
Jim Dale exhibiting the classic signs and symptoms of groupthink. With that name, perhaps he should be acting in carry on films, because he can’t construct a rational argument.
I suppose the positive here is that a sceptic is “debating” with a frantic which is never going to happen on the BBC
Paul Burgess is doing a sterling job and fair play to Nana Akua (an absolute diamond in my opinion) for having him on at all to put a sceptic point of view.
Whenever Jim Dale is on GB News and spouts off some bullshit I always email in with the facts to oppose him. Only ever get standard acknowledgement, hope some of it goes through to the editors.
If I had Paul Burgess’ email address I would copy him in to provide him with ammunition, although he is well informed and has picked sensible points to put in front of the GB News audience.
Paul, if you are reading this – try the “how much warming computer models calculate would be prevented by 2050 if the UK ceased to emit anything from 2012?”. That’s one of the numbers that got traction in the Netherlands I think.
The answer is: “… if we had achieved the total decarbonisation of our UK economy in 2012 the impact on temperature would be….0.006 degC in 2050, nearly 40 years later”. A difference that could not be measured by any known technology.
Having watched the video clips I have emailed GB News to complain about Jim Dale’s slander of Gregory Wrightstone. And Jim Dales general conduct, especially shouting over Paul all the time.
Ironic that Gregory Wrightstone is a strong proponent of the scientific process and often refers to a basic tenet of English law: Audiatur et altera pars or “Let both sides be fairly heard.”
Look up Jim Dale’s day job. You will see why he rides the climate narrative horse so hard!
Great to see Paul Burgess getting a mention on here. He is doing a tremendous job. Please keep plugging him. I hope as many as possible will write in to GBNews and ask for him to be given more air time. Their email address is: gbviews@gbnews.com