tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post265955753400884461..comments2022-12-05T03:59:41.994+00:00Comments on Ian Eiloart: Despite the lies of the Times, majority believe climate change is man made.Ian Eiloarthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15353548476698379538noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post-61581431607680926392009-11-17T08:12:44.336+00:002009-11-17T08:12:44.336+00:00So, it was a complete non-sequitor then? Your seco...So, it was a complete non-sequitor then? Your second sentence wasn't a comment on my blog post at all?<br /><br />In fact, the term "Liberal" implies that we advocate free speech. Free speech isn't a legal right in this country. Labour have banned much free speech in the guise of protecting other rights, and Tory libel laws leave this country with perhaps the least free speech Ian Eiloarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09077214178991724266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post-66768788356603269092009-11-16T15:28:56.072+00:002009-11-16T15:28:56.072+00:00I said that as a general rule "LibDems" ...I said that as a general rule "LibDems" censor & cannot be trusted to engage in reasonable discussion. That cannot be honestly disputed.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post-87349141888456006102009-11-16T15:20:15.163+00:002009-11-16T15:20:15.163+00:00@neil craig... "Censoring". Hardly. I...@neil craig... "Censoring". Hardly. I'm pointing people to the article. That's the opposite of censoring, isn't it?<br /><br />I'm also asking them to think critically about the claims and the numbers they're based on.Ian Eiloarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09077214178991724266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post-87636412863254588862009-11-16T15:18:35.952+00:002009-11-16T15:18:35.952+00:00But the times didn't ask "do you believe&...But the times didn't ask "do you believe", they asked "is it proven". I think. Actually, we don't know since they haven't accurately reported the questions that were asked. At least, I hope not. The questions in the graphic were abysmally illiterate.<br /><br />I really do think there are plenty of people who don't think "it's proven", but do Ian Eiloarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09077214178991724266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post-29098997651267549182009-11-16T15:17:44.645+00:002009-11-16T15:17:44.645+00:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ian Eiloarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09077214178991724266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post-30273908323406317752009-11-16T11:53:04.967+00:002009-11-16T11:53:04.967+00:00Sadly, I'm afraid I don't believe that (th...Sadly, I'm afraid I don't believe that (this time) The Times has been inaccurate or misleading in its reporting of the poll - the raw figures support their headline. I think you are falling into the trap of reinterpreting them and posing alternative questions along the way.<br /><br />It's quite normal in polls of this type for people to hold views that seem to be contradictory (Neil Stockleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11049181290242914014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6729041928786027552.post-1445201984878695082009-11-15T17:10:54.055+00:002009-11-15T17:10:54.055+00:00Obviously your assesment is a pack of lies & m...Obviously your assesment is a pack of lies & misinformation. However simnce you LDs believe in censoring any truth youn find inconvenient....neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.com