JoNova
A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
OT Wasting it on Windmills. The Latest Tax Dodge
.
Energy giant nPower has admitted paying no UK corporation tax for three years despite making £766million in profits.
.
The company’s average dual fuel bill has risen by £257 in just two years – leaving households facing punishing annual payments of £1,352.
In theory, the £766million profits for the period 2009 to 2011 could have generated a tax bill of £200million rather than staying wholly with German parent company RWE and its shareholders.
.
Paul Massara, who heads the firm, admitted it had paid no corporation tax in the three years.
However, he insisted the situation was perfectly acceptable because nPower had put the cost of building wind farms against its tax liability.
Read more: nPower paying No corporations ax in Uk
110
The Stately wind farms of England,
How beautiful they stand,
To prove the financial classes still have the upper hand;
Though they often have to be rebuilt
And maintained to the hilt
Is inclined to take the gilt
Off the gingerbread.
And it certainly damps the fun
Of those who don’t have one
but they supply the money,
so we can have honey,
with crumpets and cream.
Oh, it’s just a dream
when you’re in on the scheme.
Best of all is the perk
you get paid whether they work,
(don’t tell anyone about this lurk)
or even if they do not.
And when the hoi polloi complain,
about money down the drain,
they must be made to understand
they have to stand
by the Stately wind farms of England.
Apologies to Noel.
180
Well put Graeme Lord Tennyson. Is Speedy’s tenure as Poet Laureate in danger?
90
Hey Joe,
I’ve got a better idea than wind, solar etc. My method works 24/7 and involves zero carbon dioxide. It goes like this…..
I work on a very large pyrite deposit (yep, fools gold). It is located beside the main trunk railway line very close to broken hill. It is at surface and can be mined cheaply by open cut. The pyrite just happens to have cobalt embedded in it so has some value just for the cobalt credit.
Truth is though, the only way to get the cobalt out is to ‘roast’ the pyrite. However, the breakdown of pyrite is an exothermic reaction. It gives off a huge amount of heat and in fact, once started, the reaction runs itself with no energy input and it keeps it’s temperature about 800 degrees centigrade. Using this huge amount of heat to produce steam to run a thermal power station is now quite viable!!
Result – open cut metal mine will produce all of its energy requirements AND put +++ electricity into the grid for a very positive economic boost. Also produced during the process is sulphuric acid and this, as many of you know is used to process phosphate fertiliser, many mineral processing activities and in just about every industrial application you care to think about. By the way Australia currently imports sulphur to make sulphuric acid!
This is the type of energy Australia should be looking at!
120
This is not a leg pull!
The heat generated by the break down of pyrite is quite extraordinary. There is no coal, gas or oil/diesel required apart from the initial startup power to heat the pyrite to start the reaction (at last a reason for solar or wind energy!). After that the switch is turned off and the reaction runs itself. A Thermal power generator from the excess heat produced is much the same as conventional power generators in coal thermal plants.
The deposits I’m working on which could fuel one of these plants. it is now well over 37million tonnes of pyrite rock and likely to be much much larger. Clearly, this is a long term power generator over many decades. There is unlikely to be any pollution as there are no other significant metals apart from cobalt. The high iron residue can be used for steel and cement production.
Why aren’t our CSIRO/government putting funds into this technology?
90
I’d like to tell you a story.
Some of you may have heard of Australia’s burning mountain.
Our early European explorers found an amazing burning mountain when they explored the upper hunter valley area in NSW in the mid 1800s. Near an area which has a town now called Wingen, the explorers found smoke coming from a large area of hillside. The local aborigines recalled how this mountain had been smoking for many generations and dreamtime stories abound. To this day, the smoke still comes out of the ground – it is a tourist attraction and the ‘burning’ has clearly continued uninterupted for several centuries.
This is burning coal. A fire started from lightning or bush fires several centuries ago and has continued burning underground all this time. Normally, without oxygen the fire would go out but in this case the coal has a high content of pyrite. Yes, you guessed, the pyrite has roasted to its exothermic reaction temperature and has continued burning underground all this time. Opening up the ground to allow oxygen in would let this very high heat ignite the coal which would increase the size of the fire.
No volcanoes, no wind, no solar – just a natural exothermal reaction producing energy.
Why are we not using this process for electricity generation now?
70
They’re in the killing jar, they’re finally seeing that now and are going to start desperately flinging olive branches in our direction.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2013/04/19/the-difficult-kind/
Pointman
131
That’s quite a piece Pointman. I never quite understood it like that.
Most of the people following the CAGW scare have been these nice people though. Suckered in by the few, who realised how they could capitalise on it. Who of us wasn’t taken in at some time, before the few independent thinkers who noticed, saw through the scam and had the conviction & self- confidence to speak out against it since early on.
We know who they are ( well but for – Mr FOIA anyway) and will be eternally grateful.
.
It could indeed be difficult to ensure justice prevail.
I am reminded on an account of the end of the First WW.
90
The above quote from :-
http://listverse.com/2010/02/15/11-facts-about-the-end-of-the-great-war/
http://i0.wp.com/listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/ww2-newspaper.jpg
00
“I am reminded on an account of the end of the First WW.”
And I am reminded of another:
http://mises.org/daily/4308
“Seldom, however, can the consequences of … [prohibiting international trade] … have been as devastating as in the case of the Allied … naval blockade of Germany in the First World War. This hunger blockade belongs to the category of forgotten state atrocities of the twentieth century…”‘
Yes, Germany was not beaten; they were starved into surrender. Nor did they did not forget; the permanently damaged, gaunt skeletons of their children served as a living reminder of what the Allies (British, more realistically) had deliberately perpetrated upon civilians.
I think we’re in agreement, though, that the Treaty of Versailles was a disaster.
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
62
I appreciate there were several perspectives to these tragic events.
As monckton would have it, it was the punitive reparations and a resulting resentment of bankers (who were largely Jewish) that led to WW2.
62
Some warmists have even entered the third stage; bargaining. They’re repositioning themselves and are prepared to meet us half way, to talk things out with us. Indeed, they’ve even learnt not to call us deniers to our face. Leaving aside a natural cynicism about their motives, the question arises; should we respond favourably to such peace overtures?
The answer is no and for very sound reasons. Niccolo Machiavelli, a disgracefully neglected political writer of antiquity, said something ruthless but very astute about wars. If you do decide to go to war, then you must smash and annihilate your enemy completely. Nobody must be in any doubt about who is the winner and who is the loser. If you don’t do that, you’re just laying the ground for fighting that same war again a few years down the line.
History is littered with tragic examples of ignoring this dictum. Accepting an armistice rather than insisting on a surrender at the end of World War I, helped to produce Work War II within a couple of generations. It allowed the “we weren’t defeated but betrayed” myth to grow and blossom in Nazi Germany. In more recent times, the failure to prosecute Gulf War One to the very streets of Baghdad, produced Gulf War Two and other things within a generation.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/03/16/the-climate-wars-revisited-or-no-truce-with-kings/
Popintman
190
I agree, Pointman, the foot soldiers are no better than the Hansens of this world. On Delingpole’s blogs we get a succession of vitriolic, patronising and abusive types who seem to enjoy the ‘comfort blanket’ of the consensus.
I look forward to their humiliation; the only thing is that they lack the cojones to face up up to reality by being open in the same blogs they were happy to trash.
111
Here is Hank Campbell, of RealClear Science, starting to worry, and to back off a little.
http://www.science20.com/science_20/global_warming_slowed_down_while_co2_emissions_rose_whats_rumpus-109558
But he still uses the word “denier”… and he was never among the most extreme warmists.
It’s the eliminationist rhetoric that will be the hardest to forgive.
30
Pointy Head. If there was ever a post that proves you are a (Snipped the rest of the baseless comment insult) CTS
013
Pointman,
Both your woman and you are priceless. We need both. But we must never confuse those who need the empathy with those who should never get it.
110
Nice piece, bro.
80
Pointman,
You seem to write with a certain honesty while building up to the ugly realities of life in such an eloquent manner.
I appreciate that and the irony of the subject matter mirroring your avatar (one of my favorite movies), where Kurtz laments the impossibility of men who can commit horrors but remain good people.
It’s a very deep process to sort through personalities and seemingly impossible to comprehend but worth doing for any hope of survival.
“We practice selective annihilation of mayors and government officials, for example, to create a vacuum, then we fill that vacuum. As popular war advances, peace is closer”.
Apparently said by a Peruvian General last century, it always makes me think.
30
Josh Ashton speaking at the Met Office, this month (CC advisor to 3 foreign secretarys and advisory board Tyndall Centre)
read it and realise that many of those involved at a senior level are barking mad.
http://www.e3g.org/images/uploads/Climate_Change_and_Politics_Surviving_the_Collision_John_Ashton_speech_April_2013.pdf
Is the apparent “hiatus” in the rise of globalmean temperature a sign that yourtheorymight
be wrong? Or should it make us even more concerned about climate change? Wouldn’t we
havemore reason to hesitate ifthe temperature curve just keptrising smoothly? Episodes ofClimate Change and Politics: Surviving the Collision 9
this kind are a feature of your models, and this one is surely signalling that the theory is
strong not weak. Moreover,the consequences of climate change could still be catastrophic if
the climate sensitivity were zero, as the globalmean smoothes outlocal departures.
100
Barking? No! Worshiping their climate change goddess. If prior worship fails, redouble the effort. No response? You haven’t said a strong enough prayer of confession for your sins yet. So make it even more… …oh hell, you can finish it.
They cannot let go of their fantasy. And it destroys us along with them.
90
Let’s see
The theory says that the temperature will keep rising.
He says IF the temperature keeps rising, that is proof the theory is correct.
He says IF the temperature doesn’t keep rising, that is proof the theory is correct.
So far he hasn’t won any prize for logic, he could just be a deluded worshiper.
And IF the temperature starts falling, will he say that it is proof the theory is wrong?
If he doesn’t, then we can be sure he is barking mad.
50
At least he will respond to an email, and he deserves credit for that. I can’t believe in his position he is so daft however. Here is an exchange I have had today with Greg Hunt.
To:Mr. Greg Hunt
10:30 hrs 21 April 2013
I just watched you on the Bolt Report.
You obviously just don’t get it.
So that you can absorb this properly, I’ll lay out some facts for you:
a) After twenty years and billions of dollars of “research” THERE IS NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE THAT THERE EXISTS A CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP OF CO2 AND TEMPERATURE OR CLIMATE
b) There is evidence that increased CO2 concentrations have produced a greener climate, with healthier crops.
c) There is no evidence that CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is in any way shape or form “anthropogenic”
d) There is plenty of evidence that solar activity has a causal relationship with temperature and that the current cycle 24 and the next cycle 25 will produce cooler temperatures.
e) There is plenty of evidence that global temperatures have been in stasis for from 16 to 23 years, and that in fact colder temperature records are far more prevalent that high temperature records.
This being the case, why do you insist that CO2 is “pollution” and that you have a plan to reduce CO2?
You might as well have a billion dollar plan to kill Santa Claus in order to save the planet.
Perhaps you could announce a plan to hunt down and exterminate Sasquatch to save the planet. That would make more sense. Get it through your thick skulls. WARMER is a damned sight better than COLDER. CO2 has nothing whatsoever to do with it. CO2 is good. CO2 is part of the life cycle. The Earth’s human population actually emits more CO2 than you are out to “save”. You bastards are as bad as the fruitcakes in power now.
To me:
Many thanks for your polite and respectful views.
We will cancel the carbon tax.
On other matters let me respectfully note that Thatcher, bush, Howard and Murdoch have all in good faith come to a different conclusion on the science.
The beauty of our approach is that it is an environment policy which will help regenerate our soils and our degraded lands as well as stop waste methane from causing more Brooklyn Green landfill crises which evacuated a suburb and has cost nearly $100 m to repair.
We can hopefully all agree on that.
Respectfully,
Greg Hunt
To: Mr. Greg Hunt
” Thatcher, bush, Howard and Murdoch have all in good faith come to a different conclusion on the science”
You kidding, right? Thatcher declared in her memoirs it was a scam. Bush doesn’t know his arse from a hole in the ground, Howard identified it as a religion, and what does Rupert Murdoch have to do with it?
If you knew anything about science, you would realise that it doesn’t matter how many or who says it, it is the DATA that counts.
And the data is that there is nothing unusual about temperature or climate. Both are well within natural variation. Therefore the null hypothesis is that there is no problem. If you have ANY evidence to the contrary, then PLEASE deliver it.
To me:
Can I respectfully refer you to the Bureau of Meteorology State of the Climate Report.
I would also note that there are also over 100 Nobel Laureates in physics and chemistry (primarily) who have come to a different conclusion to yourself.
They may well be wrong and you may well be right, but my view is to be respectful of credentialed people on both sides.
I am equally in disagreement with those who use every rain event or dry spell to claim proof of extreme circumstances.
I find myself most cautious of those who declare absolute certainty in either direction in a contested space which is about directions not absolutes.
To: Mr. Greg Hunt
Apparently you are unaware of “the science”
Richard Feynman, a scientist par excellence, and not a politician had this to say about science “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/r/richard_p_feynman.html#hZuEKZ2ppirGYP1t.99
There is nothing in the temperature record over the last 150 years since the LIA that departs from natural variations over the last four billion years.
If you have evidence to the contrary, then please present it NOW.
Therefore, the ‘null hypothesis” is that there is not now, nor has there ever been, a problem with so-called “global warming” or “climate change”. (Other than the fact that they are phony scare-mongering tactics of a political scam the extent of which has until now been unknown in the history of mankind)
If you wish to argue to the contrary, it is up to YOU to come up with the evidence. It is not up to ME to try to convince you of the null hypothesis.
So, if you can provide ANY evidence whatsoever that:
a) Global mean temperatures since thermometers were invented have registered excursions beyond natural variation.
b) Carbon dioxide, in proportion to the other constituents of the atmosphere, cause global mean temperatures to depart from values driven by a myriad of of causal factors such a Milankovitch cycles, solar cycles, etc. and which are in fact not well understood.
c) Surface air temperatures greater than those currently registered pose more of danger to homo sapiens than lower temperatures.
d) That the so-called “Green House Effect” theorem has been proven unconditionally through empirical experiment
then you would be wise to submit this evidence soon, because the whole CAGW scam is crumbling like a house of cards before your very eyes, and if you insist on offering as scientific proof the rumoured ramblings of three politicians (one of whom is deceased) and an ancient journalist, you will be the laughing stock of everyone except an idiot named Julia Eilleen Gillard.
To me:
Dear Sir,
There are over 100 Nobel Laureates who come to a different conclusion to you.
I respect that they may be wrong and you may be right.
My point is that there are respectable people on both sides who come to radically different conclusions.
Respectfully,
Greg
To: Mr. Greg Hunt
You can’t be serious. When Hitler launched a campaign against Einstein called “101 scientists disagree with Einstein”, Albert simply said “Why so many. One would be sufficient if I were wrong.”
You obviously do not understand “science”. You miss the point completely, It is NOT that “100 Nobel Laureates” agree with you, or that 40,000 scientists, 1/3 of them with PhD’s agree with me. (I wonder if you include the infamous Michael Mann as one of these ‘100 Nobel Laureates’). The point is that Mother Nature does not agree with you. The radiosondes, the satellites, and the Argo buoys do not agree with you. That trumps your activists and junk science, every time.
Greg, the scam is now common knowledge. Continuing to pursue it as though it were factual can only end in tears for you.
190
Rod Stuart,
I admire your persistence, however get a doctor to have a look at your poor head after banging it on that particular brick wall 😉
80
I wonder which are the 100 Nobel Laureates and what is it this boatload of distinguished consensees actually agrees on ?
110
If the 100 Nobel Laureates aren’t actual Climate Scientists (TM), they automatically don’t count anyway, right? I’m guessing there aren’t 100 Climate Scientists that have been awarded Nobel prizes, so this point goes away.
I looked but couldn’t actually find a list on climate scientists, although there were several articles on Mann’s getting the prize.
40
He refers to them as Physics & Chemistry Laureates, rather than that bunch of Climate Scientists, who only shared in a Peace Prize with a Politician.
.
What was the weasly form of words they were so many seduced into signing ?
40
You mean the Piece Prize ?
10
The simple dispersal of such adductions as “100 Nobel Llaureates” is “Can you name one”?
10
Rod
Totally fantastic piece of work.
Great.
KK 🙂
40
Rod, is it too late to get none of the above onto the ballot?
We have selected for plausible asininity for far too long, this paragon of public service is the best the party system has too offer.Hi we are the opposition just like the existing government.
The only candidate who will get a clear majority, in a graduated “proportional” voting system really is None of the Above when they all stink on ice.
20
We have to show up and take a ballot and stick it in the box. “Spoiling” a ballot is tantamount to “none of the above”. i.e. one could either not write on it at all, or take the pencil and write “Get Fu__ed! beside the most objectionable dork.
I don’t think Elections Australia is about to give one the opportunity to place a tick beside “none are acceptable”. Come to think of it, perhaps a person could register an independent candidate named “Unacceptable”.
20
Is the way to win elections, to field. Candidates with their names changed by deed poll, to None Oftheabove ?
00
Not just barking mad, but up themselves as well.
What a pompous intellectual twit this refugee from the Foreign Office is.
No wonder the poms are becoming an irrelevancy with clowns like this running around huffing and puffing,
90
I’m sure the whole world has had news of the Boston bombers. This is how government looks after us.
The following is courtesy of Judicial Watch, quoted verbatim from President Tom Fitton’s weekly newsletter. It can be quoted freely as long as Judicial Watch is given as the source.
Wake up America and the world. Wake up!
80
I could point out what Pointman said about preparing for war if you want peace. But I won’t. Instead I’ll point out how we’re all preparing for peace while war is all around us.
70
Roy,
I have serious doubts about these two Chechens having been formally trained. The fact that they were captured on security cameras, carrying bags that were identifiable as the bomb containers, indicates that they were probably amateurs with no “trade-craft” skills to speak of. They were probably “Lone Wolf” operators, who have read the how-to manual on the internet.
Thankfully, the size and intensity of the blasts were considerably less than the volume of the bags they used could have permitted, had the bomb makers been more skilled. Bomb making instructions are available on-line, if you know where to look, and al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula actually sets out to incite young and impressionable would-be jihadists to mount attacks of this sort.
The amount of terror created by acts such as these is not proportional to the number of people killed, nor the amount of physical damage done, but to the degree of publicity given to the event.
With that thought in mind, the bombs did not have to be large and sophisticated, but they did need to be exploded somewhere in front of the television or film cameras. I hope that consideration is taken into account by security for the London Marathon, and other marathons scheduled to be run in Europe over the next few weeks.
I also hope that the news media realises that they are complicit in amplifying the level of terror produced by their incessant reruns, every time there is a new development in the investigation.
130
I’m not going to argue the matter, Rereke. It misses the point. There was a good compelling reason to deport the older one in 2009 and the opportunity was missed. And neither one should have been let into the country at all. Because of this failure three are dead and many more injured. I’m thinking it was only good luck that kept the toll of death and destruction that low. Had they been suicidal they could have done a lot more damage. It was not worth the political correctness.
We have a Cabinet level Department of Homeland Security with a monster budget. We spend our time with full body scanners at airports but cannot spot the obviously risky guy trying to get into the country and send him packing. Something is desperately wrong and it isn’t with the media, not even close. God help us if we even look like we’re profiling anyone in order to protect ourselves from death and destruction. Yet these two came from a part of the world that might as well be displaying bright red neon signs saying, “Hey everyone! We’re a spawning ground for disciples of Hell! Why don’t you invite us in for tea?”
91
Yes Roy,
I didn’t want to argue either, but I don’t think I am missing the point.
I agree that US Immigration goofed in not deporting the oldest one in 2009, and in retrospect perhaps neither of them should have been issued with a visa to get into the country at all.
But where do you draw the line? Is it about ethnicity, or religion, or country of birth, or country of residence? There is bound to be a failure rate. It is unavoidable.
I agree that Homeland Security is a joke. It is the Government throwing other peoples money at a problem, in order to be seen to be doing something, and the more inconvenience caused, the more they are presumed to be responding to the “threat.” But all they do is make you feel more secure while you are in flight. They do not, and cannot stop jihadists who travel “clean”, and then buy the materials they need to build a bomb at the local supermarket and hardware store.
And how do you accurately profile everybody who wants to come into the US when they arrive at the border? You can’t.
I knew the late Frederick Dorey very well. He was the British expert on aviation security (he literally wrote the first textbook on the subject), and during his time, he carried a pistol through every international airport in the world, just to prove he could, and he never got pulled up. He didn’t fit the perceived profile of a terrorist, so they let him through. I do fit the perceived profile of a terrorist, so I get pulled over and patted down every time I fly.
But all of these things are tangential to the real question, which is, why do militants resort to such violent acts?
And the answer to that question is because they want the publicity of the deed. They want to bring “their cause” to the fore. They want people to talk about it, and they want the news coverage to be repeated endlessly, and they want the conspiracy blog sites to argue that it was all a staged conspiracy, and they want to create the impression that, in the end they will win, and you will loose. They want people to feel terrorised, in the places they live and work, and they want the publicity of being martyrs to their cause, whether they die, or are incarcerated.
The way you counter that, is to limit the publicity, to the basic facts that the incident occurred, and that there are casualties, and then let it drop from the public gaze. If you can limit the publicity, you reduce the perceived benefit to the terrorists. And if there is no benefit, why take the time, trouble, and risk, of building and deploying a bomb?
20
I’m no fan of the creepily named Department of Homeland Security, an unwelcome leftover from the George W. Bush administration that is now presided over by a complete idiot.
Even so, it seems like a little more attention should be getting paid to people coming to the United States from Chechnya or Dagestan.
There’s no way to intercept them all, of course. We still don’t know whether the Tsarnaev brothers got their newfound attachment to Islamic world domination from sources in Chechnya or Dagestan, from the plentiful sites on the web, or even from their local imam, in the mosque around the corner from their place in Cambridge.
PS. A terrorist bomber from Chechnya named Tamerlan? Isn’t that like a terrorist bomber from Mongolia named Genghis?
00
Not only is it presided over by a complete Idiot, but, the very people who shrieked about it when Bush put it into place, are the ones who voted to KEEP the worst parts of it, when it came due for possibly being dumped.
10
Rereke,
This is a free country where the press is permitted to report literally anything and everything by a very specific statement in The Constitution that says they can. It’s called the First Amendment. They can’t slander or defame and they can be held accountable in civil court for that. But if they do it right they can say almost anything about anyone or any situation with complete impunity.
The thing government must do if something really needs to be withheld from general knowledge is to keep it secret. But when the bombs go off in a very public place and are captured on national TV, there’s no way any of it stays quite. Taking pictures, listening to police radio, none of those things can be simply prohibited out of hand. So here we are with what Andrew has already pointed out.
The press here is a money making operation. Ratings are everything. So of course they will milk this for every viewer and reader they can get. High ratings bring in advertising dollars. And the money means staying solvent. Their audience is very effectively paying the bills. It’s a part of the price of having a free press.
And if it’s not that way you get the BBC and Australia’s ABC. They will always try to please those who pay the bills. Just as you do as a consultant.
I only wish they would dig into the corruption in high places that’s right in front of their noses with as much enthusiasm as they’re going to give to endless reports and opinions about two nut cases from half way around the world.
Sorry to beat this to death but that is the way it is.
And of course you can’t make it perfect.
There are many legitimate reasons to want to enter this country. But no matter how badly you want to get in, we control who we let in. We do not have to let you in if we don’t want to. And in spite of the difficulties you point out, it will always work better if you really want it to work.
You’re a sharp guy, Rereke and a worthy debating opponent — one of the best around here. But you still miss my point and the point Judicial Watch was making. We didn’t want it to work and still don’t. Had it not been that way, five people, including the dead bomber and a police officer would still be alive and the end of the marathon would have been the end of its newsworthiness.
10
PS: You are right about the benefit of squelching the publicity.
00
The thought of the government hushing up any event at all irritates me, but on balance I agree with Rereke and yourself that the fear amplification by the media about terrorism presently functions as counter-counter-terrorism.
But if these things are going to be hushed up then the reports about such attacks should also present updated risk assessments of terrorism in comparison with other risks so that the public has an informed and balanced risk assessment of their lives. If terrorism attacks were happening everywhere, you would want to know about it.
Schneier collected some thoughts about it.
I found only one chart that contains terrorism as a cause of death with sources of data specified (US government stats), which puts accidental falls as 600 times more likely than terrorism.
There’s a couple of other good ones to put all in perspective.
World 20th century: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2013/20th-century-death/
America, causes of death: http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/02/daily-chart-7
I mean if the media dutifully (hah!) obeyed your policy of not hyping up terrorist attacks they could have said:
Last Friday the chances of dying from terrorist attack in America in any single year was 0.001% and chances of dying from accidental fall was 0.6%.
As a result of this week’s events the chances of dying from terrorist attack in America in any single year has doubled to 0.002% and chances of dying from accidental fall has increased to 0.65% due to a bridge failure in Idaho on Wednesday.
Also, the idea that Muslims are the largest source of terrorist attacks is reportedly contradicted by FBI data. It’s just Islamaphobia.
There is also the issue of making a proportional response to attacks.
Terrorism as a cause of death in the united states does appear to be much greater than hot weather (0.001% per year versus 0.00007% in a lifetime). Which kinda puts all the money being spent on stopping global warming into perspective. (Hooray back on topic!)
00
When I see a statement such as this one,
in something purporting to be objective, I immediately know it’s not objective.
There is a lot wrong in this world and none of it is helped by this kind of “objectivity”. If you want to settle things down you don’t make such statements. If you want to create or enlarge your constituency for your own gratification, this is the way you talk.
This is why I put no stock in such sources as Mother Jones and UC-Berkley. The numbers may be correct but they don’t inform, they just inflame things all the more. They play directly to those with a desire to point a finger and those already pointing a finger at right wing Islamophobes in this case.
It will not solve the problem. I’m almost afraid to ask for a definition of right wing Islamophobe. I think it would be a joke. It’s an intentional pejorative like denier, that can be wielded like a club against anyone you want to discredit and put down. No need for precision in terminology when that’s your intent.
But there is something else, something that numbers don’t address — family, place, country and home, to which we all have very strong emotional attachment. It is these things that terrorists attack. They don’t attack a place or even a person, they attack us. They attack who and what we are. They don’t attack probabilities, they attack our very souls. They attack everything we stand for. They are not accidental, they are running on pure unadulterated hatred directed at an entire nation because of what it is.
In the same week as the Boston bombing a fertilizer plant in Texas blew itself to kingdom come. The death toll (last report I’ve seen) is 100 and still counting. But this doesn’t strike at us. It’s just an accident and we all know it. And there is a big difference in how we respond to the two different stimuli.
Prayers will be said for the victims of both events and American generosity will respond with help to both places. But I guarantee you that only an insignificant number will ever fear dying in a fertilizer plant explosion, though the death toll is roughly 33 times greater. What will be feared is the terrorist. And the response to both will follow the emotional impact. I promise you. It is simple human nature.
And notwithstanding all that, yes, the average human hasn’t the slightest understanding of risk assessment. But I think it really — and unfortunately — doesn’t matter. I wish it did.
So now, what do you expect our response should be? Mine was and still is a terrible anger that has not abated to this day. There! Now you know. And I have to work to keep myself from giving in to that anger. But it’s there! And I know from that, that angr burns in millions of Americans like a fire that won’t go out. Believe me, who they are doesn’t even concern me. I want them tracked down and eliminated, whether they’re animal rights groups or Islamic extremists.
Please! Before you judge us, ask yourself what you would do if hijackers had flown a big jets into your tall buildings and Parliament House in Canberra, justifying it as something demanded of them by their religion.
00
PPS: Sorry but I want it clear. It’s not that it didn’t work — we did not want it to work. Otherwise at least one bomber would have been deported.
Both should have been refused admission in the first place.
00
The DHS needs armoury of this nature ? What’s wrong with the military ? Or, is Obama and his mates building their own militia ? Just thinkin’ that this ain’t Kosher.
10
No. Not kosher.
It looks to me that Obama fears an uprising as things get worse. And he has every reason to fear it because I think the anger will be directed at him when the chickens finally come home to roost. He’ll put it down ruthlessly of course and it will be useless. But I think he knows what will happen as the inevitable occurs.
10
That what all those FEMA camps are for Roy.
In this country they call them “detention centres”.
The Nazis had names for them like Auschwitz.
00
I am still waiting to hear who planted the 3rd bomb.
10
…and in the end Rereke realised that he loved Big Brother.
He should have taken the red pill.
Here are some photos you aren’t supposed to study.
This suspicious guy had a backpack identical to the bomb remains, he was not one of suspects rounded up on Friday, what happened to him? http://i.imgur.com/E38zMz1h.jpg
Note another similar backpack sitting at the base of the camera scaffold. http://i.imgur.com/DsbeO8K.jpg
Note the presence of Craft International mercenaries at the bottom of this photo, who are standing right across from the bag. http://i.imgur.com/1QzeEqsh.jpg
In a later photo the same two mercenaries are seen across the road. http://static.prisonplanet.com/p/images/april2013/180413photo1.jpg
Also later when it is overcast if you zoom in on the scaffold base the bag should be visible but now it is gone. http://i.imgur.com/hLyRaiOh.jpg
After the explosion there is another character dressed similarly to the mercenaries crouching in a doorway near the bomb site with a black backpack. What is he doing? http://i.imgur.com/UwSwzZD.jpg
The official story is still 2 bombs, but a police frequency scanner in Boston recorded a voice saying “There’s devices… definitely devices here,” between 17 and 25 seconds into this clip.
The FBI has a history of encouraging and entrapping terrorism defendants, they had prior contact with these two in 2011, there were many mercenaries on the scene whose existence is not even acknowledged, the security level was unprecedented for any marathon, and witnesses saw a bomb drill taking place earlier in the day which was later officially denied.
Sounds like a set up. Is that so far fetched given the available facts?
41
Andrew,
Firstly, I am no fan of big brother, in fact I am a disciple of Ayn Rand.
But I do confess to being a mercenary, in that I provide a valuable service to anybody who is prepared to pay my fee, and I do so without engaging in politics and without regard to the belief system of my client. Most Consultants, whether they work for PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Boston Consulting Group, or Kroll Inc., will admit to the same.
Secondly, the concept of Agents Provocateurs is hardly new. The Chinese used them as early as 500 b.c. I would be surprised to discover that they were not being used by the US security apparatus.
However, The fact that bombs were constructed, and were then able to be detonated, with the result that people were killed or injured, means that the whole thing went seriously off the rails, which in turn shows a serious degree of ineptitude on the part of those managing the operation. They should be held accountable, but it probably won’t happen in public.
As I said to Roy (above), and not wanting to trivialise the loss of life and injury, but the publicity surrounding incidents such as this, including the articles you refer to, actually aids the terrorists in achieving their aims, which is to raise awareness about whatever cause they are promoting, be it religious or political.
50
Yes, yes it did.
In other words, don’t attempt to solve the underlying problem, we like our billion dollar counter-terrorism budget too much, and if you link to these articles then you’re with the terrorists.
Right. Got it.
For someone so Randish that’s a pretty big Bushism.
Since the surviving suspect (oddly enough) can’t talk and no group has claimed responsibility for the attack, there is no known motive and no cause that any article can report. The suggestion that linking to any article about the attack raises awareness of the cause is therefore presently false.
01
Andrew,
That is not what I meant.
Let me spell it out. Terrorists blow things (often themselves) up to make a point (sounds dumb, but that is the way it is). If, for the sake of argument, nobody noticed, or nobody cared, then they would loose the motivation to do it. Publicity of the event is everything as far as the terrorists are concerned.
In the States, terrorist incidents seem to happen in real time, and that is because the terrorists have learnt to commit their acts of terror in front of any available television camera. We have film of airplanes flying into buildings, and people being gunned down in shopping malls, and now bystanders at the finish line of a road race.
Now, I take Roy’s point that it is news, and people have a right to be informed that it happened. But that can be done (as the Brits do) through an interview with the local official in charge. Also, the Brits would show the bomb crater, and burn marks up the wall, or whatever, but they would suppress any images of people being hit by shrapnel, and perhaps dying. And certainly they would not show images of people jumping out of office windows.
Yes, the US has the First Amendment. But I am not aware that it is mandatory. Terrorism is all about frightening people. So showing the graphic details over and over, simply raises the level of fear in the community – it amplifies the feeling of terror. Who then is the terrorist, after all of the reruns have been aired? The fact that the media feel the need to constantly rerun these images indicates a moral sickness in society, in my foreign opinion. I hate to think what effect those images have on the relatives of the people who died in the WTC.
If the media could look past the ratings, and step up to the moral responsibility they have to society, then the US would become a much better, and less fearful, place than it is.
10
Okay well there was some miscommunication at some level then, because as long as denying the terrorists publicity is just one tactic in a holistic approach to the problem then yes I totally agree with you there (as I said elsewhere in response to Roy).
It was the silencing of the terrorists’ goals that I had more of an objection towards (which impedes understanding the enemy), rather than keeping disturbing images out of the media which indeed seems prudent.
10
And of course it’s not mandatory. But as I said, the government doesn’t run the press here. So it must be a money making operation. And that’s what drives the ever more spectacular coverage.
I don’t like it but the best I can do is turn it off when it gets overboard.
00
Andrew,
Red pill?
Mother Jones and the University of California-Berkley…has a nice ring to it, so authoritative and all.
Those are two sources so biased that they have two left arms. I keep wondering how they can get anything done. Then there’s rt.com, which, for anyone not knowing it, is Russia Today. Their reporting is somewhat like scepticalscience in that you need to be very careful what you believe because you know their interest doesn’t intersect with the interests of the United States.
For the record, greasing the way for someone already intent on committing a crime if he has the means is the classic law enforcement sting. It has been done since long before terrorists and is quite legal. It’s legal even if you target no specific individual but just throw out the bait to see who bites.
Setting someone up for a fall who did not have any intent by fostering that intent is entrapment and quite illegal. Any reasonable proof of entrapment gets indictments thrown out all the time and if it gets to a jury they don’t like it either. Juries by and large would rather not convict. And both police (FBI) and prosecutors know this.
Why say all this? Because it’s very hard to tell whether entrapment is going on when all you get is information filtered through the lens of a journalist, whoever it may be. And the sources you quote leave me with a definite bad taste in my mouth.
Is the process being politicized when it comes to high profile stuff like terrorism? I’ve no doubt it is. The president makes all the hay he can from it for sure.
As for a third bomb… …no opinion from me. Many things get said in the heat of the moment that are outright mistaken. Actually many things are said when things have calmed down a bit that are mistaken.
Unless I have the time to dig for every detail (I don’t) what I want to hear next is a very short list.
– What actually happened?
– Why did it happen?
– What are the charges against the surviving bomber?
– What is the jury’s verdict?
– What is the sentence if convicted?
All but the why of it can be answered in a very short paragraph. I’ll judge the trustworthiness of the information for myself as I always do.
40
At first I wasn’t going to mention this. But after a little thought I decided I would say the following.
If I were making policy for the FBI and if the FBI was conducting a drill at the Boston Marathon, I would most definitely want to prevent that from being known. All the publicity does is compromise the efforts to be prepared for, to detect and cope with exactly what happened.
00
Somehow, denying the existence of the drill after it happened increased the operational security of the drill while it was happening?
Today I Learned that in RoyWorld, effects can precede their causes.
But that faulty logic doesn’t matter much now as I cannot locate any 2nd confirmatory source that the police had denied on Monday that a bomb drill took place. By Wednesday they were acknowledging a bomb drill occurred on Monday morning. No coverup about that any more.
The fact is that the drill was announced to runners and onlookers at the Athelete’s Village near the start line, who were told to not be afraid of the bomb sniffer dogs because it was just a drill. In this other thread two other spectators also recall a training exercise with dogs at the Athlete’s Village.
When asked directly about the bomb detection drill in a press conference on Wednesday, the official response was that the security preparations were normal for such a large event and that they “received no specific intelligence that anything was going to happen”.
At least 2 mercenaries photographed prior to the blast and a whole van load of them turn up within minutes of the blasts, yet the FBI doesn’t have the prerogative to hire any mercenaries! How did *that* conversation go? “We are the FBI and the country’s topmost counter-terrorism unit, but we know we’re not good enough and neither is SWAT so let’s hire Craft goons.” No I don’t believe that either. Who hired them and for what?
Spotters on roofs. Bomb sniffer dogs. Four hundred national guards. Private mercenaries. One veteran marathon runner has never seen such a high security presence in any prior public marathon event. According to one article the only time there was a security presence larger than this at the Boston marathon was the first race after the 9/11 attacks.
But the FBI received “no specific intelligence” about bombs on Monday.
An unusually massive response to no stimulus at all. That’s difficult to believe.
00
Andrew,
So it looks kinda like Al Gore’s graph of the Vostok ice cores then? 😉
But seriously, your objection goes away because I didn’t know the drill had been announced at the start. As I said yesterday, I’m not spending my time trying to follow every detail of this or of anything else. I look at some trusted sources for a good overall picture of the world. But frankly, the day by day foibles of even such an intrusive Federal Agency is about as interesting as reading the men’s room wall. Today’s news looks like yesterday’s which looks like last week’s which looks… …like last year’s and, what changes? Only a pitiful few worthwhile details are in there somewhere.
I’m still of the opinion that not having the activities of those doing the drill might be something I wouldn’t want called to attention. Why tell someone there for his own intelligence gathering who to watch?
Even if it’s announced publicly I can understand someone denying it later, just because of the usual inability of a large group of people to keep their story straight. It happens all the time. And it gets worse when a reporter is in the information chain somewhere. I saw an FAA investigator interviewed for TV news over a crash a few years ago. The investigator gave out only what information he should and politely sidestepped the rest. After that recorded interview played the the news anchor, who had obviously seen the whole several minutes, proceeded to put words into the investigator’s mouth that were never said. Confusion is the price of ignorance.
As for the rest of your argument, I think you know I’ll say a couple of things. I’m no fan of DHS. They’re all about pleasing their boss(es) who are the president (who wants visible activity he can crow about) and the people, who are largely ignorant of what real security would be — and what the real risk is in the first place. And then (and obviously) DHS doesn’t ask me for permission to do anything, neither do they tell me afterward. So,
May or may not be the truth.
00
Worrying about this oversight itself overlooks the HUGE number of attacks that have been prevented in the USA and UK by preemptive arrest.
Part of the reason why the stupidly named but unavoidable “War on Terror” (in reality a war being waged against us and all societies not conforming to the demands of one large ideology) is that people only see those successful attacks on our soil. The daily toll of incidents in places like Thailand goes unreported. The huge number of of foiled attacks is totally unregistered into public consciousness.
In one instance, British security foiled a plan involving a gigantic amount of agricultural chemicals. Hidden cameras recorded one of the plotters inspecting the gigantic sack of the stuff (unaware it had been covertly replaced by an inert substitute). Hundreds would have been murdered had that gang not been stopped. But nobody notices the non-casualties alive today.
00
Over on E.M. Smith’s blog is this comment on the US lack of security on the Mexican border. Seems Janet Napolitano is intentionally letting terrorists into the USA. And the ‘Fast and Furious’ report finds DHS missed warning signs, Napolitano in the dark Meanwhile the US government is concentrating on
terrorizingsearching little girls and little old grandmas and sticking fingers up the private parts of women who are ‘bleeding’ during that time of the month because the extra padding. Or as the lady put, she had not realized …her glad-rag would be a matter of national security.One is left to wonder if this is about national security or about ‘conditioning’ people to accept the unacceptable invasion of their privacy since DHS decided to abandon the border fence mandated by law, remove border patrols, ship assault guns over the borders and make an additional 11 million unscrutinized illegals, who have already broken our law just by being in the country, citizens.
There is one Security fence that has proven effective.
Note that the money spent so far on TSA would have easily paid for a well designed fence over the entire length of the border.
TSA has cost about $60 billion since its inception. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas,… said that building a border-length fence would take “10 to 15 years and $30 billion” and would not be cost-effective.
So Mr. Perry groping Grandmas, little girls and Miss America is going to be cheaper and make the USA saFer than building the fence? One is forgiven for wondering if it is having his supplier cut off and not USA security that is on his mind.
The real reason the USA does not want the border closed is PROFIT.
00
The point, those who should have questioned, could have prevented the hysteria and were paid to do both, instead actually created the fear, promoted it as zealots and continue to protect the scam from criminal investigation.
I refer of course to our “public servants”, for whom careers of lying, stealing and incompetence have been most lucrative.
That behaviour of waste and dishonesty has been rewarded for at least two generations, we are now broke thanks to the activities of our bureaucracies.
Poverty is coming to rescue us from our stupidity, indeed as Pointman highlights. the actual saviour is the economic collapse groupthink and mass delusion has created.
Oh well. the cycles are writ harsh in history, next stage,, stockpile medicine, dry goods and defensive tools for the mob will be out to play.
I expect a frantic effort on the part of the PR organizations to divert attention and blame to some defined scapegoats, WWF, Greenpeace and the other troughers will be using the Bart defence.
But the theft by legislation will now accelerate until the collapse of governments, these looters know no other way and as long as they are not punished they will continue.
My prediction, If wealth can be identified and located, govt will seek to steal it.
Finally a truly safe prediction,Your faith/respect for your government will never be higher than it is today.
80
So after one of the biggest man-hunts in US History….
Al Gore, Mann and Hansen are still free to peddle their lies!!
🙂
160
I guess that’s why they call it a Man Hunt. That trio haven’t the cojones between them.
110
Although most politicians are greedy incompetents not all are.
These words from a UK MP, Peter Lilley, should be a must read.
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2013/4/20/the-low-carbon-fairy-story.html
Do we have enough of his calibre to form a soccer League team?
Do we have enough teams to make a Premier League?
60
Liberals slippery carbon lies
Greg Hunt on Bolt this morning …. I couldn’t see the screen and thought Andrew had a Labor minister on
What a weak effort. If he speaks for the Liberal party then we are absolutely stuffed. Un#%+¥##believable
Refused to answer a direct question … didn’t know or yet again doesn’t bloody care.
150
This is what bothers me too….
Greg Hunt could easily join the Greens with his views on Climate Change!
Dennis Jensen needs to be promoted in the LNP.
He is the only Politician with the convictions required to stand up to the green agenda!
130
The leftist media would like to render the familiar Islamic correlation, evident with the Boston bombing, as just more tedious coincidence. Nicer to blame it on the US or on Chechnya/Russia. Deflecting the finger to the latter is quite acceptable within political correctness, now that Russia has turned its back on communism.
50
I would appreciate an explanation from the local warmbots about this new NASA study
http://principia-scientific.org/supportnews/latest-news/163-new-discovery-nasa-study-proves-carbon-dioxide-cools-atmosphere.html#.UVYwRz4bXF4.facebook
82
crakar24,
Good article – the video from ScienceAtNASA in the paper is very interesting.
CO2 and NO are responsible for shedding the majority of heat back into space from the thermosphere. More CO2 – more heat reflected back to space.
The warmbot trolls are absent, it seems.
50
not quiet i got a thumbs down which means they dont like what i said but dont know what to say in response typical pathetic effort, my how stupid they must feel
62
So NASA has done an about face?
http://climate.nasa.gov/causes
00
More like two faces.
00
Aren’t a warmbot, but it doesn’t take a warmbot to get a skeptical view of the murmurings of PSI’s chief agitator.
NASA are talking about charged particles traveling down from space, NOT about long wave IR light traveling upwards from the ground.
It’s interesting (and unexpected to me) that the thermosphere could reject 95% of the particle energy in some quasi specular-reflection kind of way instead of it being ~60% in the isentropic re-emission case I expected, but still it doesn’t imply anything for the IR CO2 GHE down in the troposphere.
I’m interested in how the 95% figure was arrived at, but too late at night to start now.
10
Bolt has posted a transcript of the Hunt interview:
Bolt Report today
ANDREW BOLT: Unbelievable. But that wasn’t actually the answer to my question. Why are we spending billions to make no difference to global temperatures, which have paused for 16 years anyway?
GREG HUNT: The 1990s had the highest of any of the years. The last decade has been the highest decade on record. So people will have different views –
ANDREW BOLT: But it hasn’t risen, that’s my point, and it won’t make a difference. Why are we spending billions to make no difference?
GREG HUNT: Well, the first thing here is that, as Rupert Murdoch said, we think we should give the planet the benefit of the doubt… ETC
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/bolt_report_tomorrow12/#commentsmore
why on earth would he bring up rupert murdoch as justification???
flipping unbelievable… looks like i will be voting informally for a long, long time.
81
Heard Greg Hunt on the Bolt Report regarding climate change … this bloke desperately needs to get an education or … gonski !
160
Now in other news – The ALP Economic vandal of the year has found it impossible to find a way to spread the ~7,500,000,000.00 budget hole across the forward estimates (even he can’t fathom having forward estimates that extend out to 100 years+.
But hey – it won’t stop him or Guilleard continuing to make mult-billion dollar promises – after all – they know that they won’t be doing the next budget.
40
.
Guess who wins the Warmbot Idiot of the Week?
This is its comments alone in the last thread.
1. and the French grid would have experienced blackout in the middle of each summer had they not imported power from the renewable-supplied German grid.
2. except for UNreliable nuclear, which has to be switched off at times of highest summertime demand due to unavailability of sufficient water at the correct temperature…
3. The fact is, Graeme, wind power is reliable.
4. another amazing fact is that wind power is now far cheaper per MWh to invest in than is coal.
5. Also, his “power is needed at a constant rate” is clearly not a statement made by somebody who has even the first clue about electricity markets.
6. The science is what informs the opinions given us by the likes of CSIRO, BoM and NASA.
7. CSIRO and NASA have good websites where the science of climate change is explained in simple terms suitable for the layperson to understand
Amazing Windmills work when it hot and pick up the slack from silly nuclear. Even at night time when solar doesn’t work 🙂
And Aussie Renewable Energy – This bloke states it is cheaper to invest in than all other forms???
Have a look at the current renewable energy stocks on the ASX – if they are still listed?
Great win of Warmist Idiot Comments of the Week by — the Biggest Dill we’ve had here yet.
A brand new member or appendage called:
And listen to me Stupid Ceptic, your name calling of LAYPERSON and SIMPLE is going to come back on you so big, the dentist won’t have to open your mouth.
110
Well I guess it is cheap to invest in, when their shares are tanking. With other people’s money anyway.
50
Joe, that just allows you to buy shares in a company which can’t afford to build or operate efficient renewable energy infrastructure. You can then watch the shares go down then de-list then into the hands of an administrator!
20
Dave……..sooooooooooooooooooooright. Please feel free to see my spat with the twat on nuclear numbnuttery in the previous thread. He was saying nuclear reactors inherently depend on river water for operation and are shut off in warm weather. What a complete pillock septic is.
To be fair, he probably isnt stupid, just mindless and callow, prone to repeating the repeater-points programmed into him at Green web-sites. Thats why I say hes like a [snip-let’s not compare anyone this way-Mod]
The problem is, even basal intelligence is no defence against idiocy when in the hands of the gullible.
40
Why not compare him that way. Its not a slander but an accurate analogy.
The Hitler Jugend comprised cadres of young, impressionable kids, their heads filled with the ideology that exploited them.
People like Septic are young impressionable and their heads filled with the ideology of opposition to human industry, masquerading as Environmentalism (note he opposes every form of electricity generation except the ones that are not viable, perhaps not aware of this because hes only repeating what hes told to repeat and actually believes nuclear power plants require rivers to run through them).
Hitler jugend helped propogandise, spied for, promoted and ultimately died for a genocidal state. A shocking movie exists showing the guy who lead them introducing these kids to Hitler in Berlin a few days before it fell. Its shocking because whilst most of those kids would have died in those days of fighting, the guy in charge remained a free man and living in healthy retirement until just over a decade ago. Much like Rachel Carson.
The Septics of this world propogandise for, promote and are happy to know others willdie for the success of an Ecologically themed ideology that has already resulted in more deaths than NAZIsm, Communism and every plaque in history combined. He even comes on here trying to excuse the fact.
The analogy is very sound.
Whats more…Septics ilk continually compare us to apologists for NAZIs by calling us “deniers” in a deliberate elicitation of “Holocaust denier”. We are by now entitled to call these maggots anything we like.
Perhaps its less visceral in Australia. Butwe are in the teeth of it here. Its still freezing. I have still had my budget crippled by 60% Green taxes on my heating. Ive only just last week by an inch avoided being literally crippled by an a\#$%^$@e on a bike in the city where bikes have taken over. I feel very angry about these creatures and their slavish adoration of what can only be called Fascism.
That’s what it is.
90
Ace
I know what you mean about the “bike” problem only too well, having someone close to me heavily involved in cycling “organizations” in Victoria the green agenda is unashamedly pushed onto the public at any opportunity.
Oh if anyone cycles and is offended I DON’T CARE! as many years ago I did road and track cycling and got sick of the arrogant attitude of club cyclists back then, my view now is if you want to behave like a vehicle and have your own space on the road with your own road laws then PAY BLOODY REGISTRATION!
If you get a chance at a café and a group of cyclists are there trying to act European have a listen to the conversation, I’ll guarantee it’ll consist of,
– How many times a horrible car almost killed them today.
– Climate change and anything associated with pro Greens & Labor.
– Why don’t they have their own roads and everyone should be forced to cycle.
– How sustainable not wearing under ware is.
– How much fuel they save by cycling and driving a FRIGGIN PRIUS!
Well you get the picture (end rant).
40
Yep.
And their culture is also steeped in over-tones of NAZISM: remember how insistent the NAZIs were about healthy physical activity,outdoor pursuits, hiking and indeed biking…….. fitness…the very word reeks of Fascism.
20
Uhuh.
Right.
Because the first thing I think of when I think of Hitler’s Nazi regime is “What a bunch of fitness freaks!”
Reminds me of something Mussolini never said: “Fascism should be more properly known as Gymnasium, because it is the merging of Weight and Cardio power.”
😀
03
Physical fitness and naturism are strong threads running through German culture which the NAZIs deliberately accentuated. “A healthy mind in a healthy body” was adopted as one of their mottos. They didnt just murder Jews, Gypsies, Communists etc but the physically unfit. The systematic murder of the disabled began in German hospitals before the other forms of genocide. NAZI rallies (like those of other totalitarian systems up to todays North Korea) made great use of mass displays of physical fitness (see the films of Leni Reifenstahl). The imagery of NAZIsm is riddled with displays of fit “ideal” Aryan bodies. Its part of the hypocrisy of NAZIsm that its leadership were themselves so unfit. In the midst of this, cycling renains today acentral thread in the German preocupation with naturism and Volk culture, as can be seen each May on Herrentag when gangs of men ritualistically ride around the countryside on bikes bikes decorated with bouquets of some plant or other (I forget which, though Ive photographed the social phenomenon).
So, yes, I am right, and what I said is entirely consistent with any thorough, orthodox account of NAZIsm. At least what I was taught in the school curriculum of the Seventies. Although it is also true of all totalitarian systems that they place great emphasis on physical fitness.
20
…BTW, as for Mussolini, he DID actually pose half naked in pretension of physical prowess for propaganda movies.
It might be added that the fitness theme is also tied to the sublimated homo-erotic aspect of both Italian and German Fascism.
10
I believe the appropriate onomatopoeia is “Whoosh.”
Did you take too many meds yesterday or not enough?
By that logic the olympics and capitalism must reek of fascism too. (It’s the fallacy of logical abduction.) Don’t be such a prat.
You know full well I was referring to physical fitness because that’s what YOU were talking about. If all the Nazis had done is encourage physical fitness we might not even remember them today. It’s not what they are known for, it’s not the first thing that most people remember about the Nazis, nor should it be, and yes I am right about that. Keeping one’s self fit never hurt anyone. It was their eugenics and military adventures that made the most adverse impact on history.
I could have left your ridiculous statement hanging there:
“healthy physical activity,outdoor pursuits, hiking and indeed biking…….. fitness…the very word reeks of Fascism.”
Instead I decided to save it by spinning it into a joke, but you just couldn’t or wouldn’t see it. Well thank you Sir Buzz Killington.
04
McRae…………..you just dont get it. I’m not advancing any OPINIONS in the above. I am merely referring to ORTHODOX ACCOUNTS of NAZIsm. All I did was list a shedload of facts and your response is the crap you wrote above.
That you think these are just my opinions shows that you are simply ignorant of the history. Maybe you are a highly qualified engineer, car mechanic or public relations guru, accountant or other specialised pro. I dont know. But in the broad sense you are clearly poorly educated.
What you say about “if all we remembered them for” can be applied in all sorts of ways. “If all we remembered them for was the Swastika and Hugo Boss uniforms…”. Which would be just as true, but just as irrelevant. That we tend to remember them for other things doesnt make those details untrue. And yes, their uniforms were in fact designed by Hugo Boss. And I dont suppose you knew that either.
Patently you are some kind of cyclist / fitness freak/ sport fan and you somehow take what I have written personally. How else to explain your shrill spinning like an over-sprung top in response to apassing off-hand and pretty much un-controversial observation.
Well since you ask for it, male physical fitness culture is also very, very, very, GAY!
21
Good grief, Ace, I actually think you are not just trying to wind me up, you really didn’t understand.
No I didn’t ever think your statements of history were “just your opinion”, you invented that strawman as a platform for further puffery, as you tend to do. Yes, Hitler’s choice of fashion designer is just as irrelevant to a moral evaluation of the Nazi regime as the spectacle of their public workout sessions, ah what’s the point. I could explain my remark a third time with different words but you would just find some new way to misinterpret them too and build prattishness on prattishness in a cycle of irrelevant self-justified hatred.
Hope [snip] you wake up on the right side of bed, with your insecurities slightly less brittle.
And war, what’s it good for?
You may continue declaring your brilliance to yourself if you wish, but I’ll close with that brilliantly reliable generalisation clearly worth defending with slabs of vitriol and red herring:
“fitness…the very word reeks of Fascism.”
[please] ED
00
A regime which believes in mass sterilisation of the physically unfit and the clinical murder of many cases (long before the death camps) is quite obviously one to which the concept of physical fitness is among central elements. How can you know so little about the Third Reich? The phrase “fitness” is very definitely steeped in associations with Fascism. All your tweaky noises wont change that. Attacking me wont change that. Anyone who knows anything about it knows it to be true and will undoubtedly see your hollow comments as indicative of some strange personal denial on your part.
As for according me the status of “brilliance”…thats another thing in your mind, nothing I said, but a very peculiar “argument” to adduce when clearly shown to be without insight into the topic under discussion. It suggests that in your mind only someone who you think capable of “brilliance” would ever dare confront your hollow arrogance. That says a lot about your perception of yourself and says nothing whatsoever about my perception of myself.
Funny that, it means you have unwittingly (I should say, witlessly) illustrated the exact characterisation of the kind of people we were talking about at the top of this thread.
00
It must be something about the CO2 then because we have those same cyclists here. They must pay more tax than I do because they sure think they own the road. I can’t figure out whether it’s the C or the O2. But that’s got to be what’s doing it.
10
“We have the same cyclists here…”
Maybe the same type, same attitude, but theres a difference of scale and relative impact among locations. I thought bikes were bad in other places Ive been to and live in but in Water World you discover what happens when cyclists are allowed to have their way. It becomes literally, a physical impossibility of standing in any paved public space (apart from certain crowded tourist spots) without being in danger of being mown down by a bike.
I mean literally that, you cannot find a single space in which to stand where you are not in danger of being struck by a bike. Even leaning against a wall is little guarantee the barstewards wont skim you. Between parked cars (who drive on the sidewalk too).
Maybe you could avoid them one way. At least some of the time. By standing on the tram-lines.
20
Less than 8 months ago Greens Leader Christine Milne arguing about the future of the European carbon price said “There are some saying that you could have a European price as high as $50.” http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3578074.htm
It is bad enough having the Greens sharing power with Labor, can you imagine what a mess they would get us into if they ever managed to get into power in their own right?
40
Cold facts: Minnesota April 20, 2013
Coldest low temperature for April EVER -14F! Yes that is the minus sign…… the previous record was 0F. in 1928.
Most snowfall for the month of April to boot……
http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/397144
/group/homepage/
And what would the beginning of a modern ice age look like: http://images.intellicast.com/WxImages/CustomGraphic/scover.gif
60
I just realized that the second link updates daily. Use this link to see snow cover for April 20 2013: http://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/ARCHIVE/USA/2013/ims2013111_usa.gif
PS, we’re due for another 6-9 inches of snow tonight. We have already exceeded the April all time record snowfall by over 10 inches and the yearly normal by 40 inches…….
20
Not to worry, Mark. It’s all because of warming that is secretly accumulating somewhere and will eventually burst upon the scene to fry us all like fish in a frying pan. The gods of global warming have spoken it. Thus it will come to pass. 😉
On the other hand, let him whose prophesies come true be the real prophet. I think the humble thermometer is way out ahead of the computer models.
50
OT As if to support or to distract from the tanking of Renewable investments, the Gruandian is trumpeting some pronouncements from that monument to Fabian folly, the London School of Economics.
Suggesting that the assets of Energy companies with reserves of Coal ,Oil & Gas should be devalued as artificially imposed Carbon penalties will make them worthless (they wish).
Unburnable carbon 2013: Wasted capital and stranded assets
20
Boston bombing doubt.
http://therebel.org/americas/126-united-states/606176-boston-must-see-100-proof-it-was-a-staged-event
http://www.bbmisc.com/tempor/showthread.php?20697-Boston-Bombing-Actor
03
There is no doubt… that the guy who made that first video is the most stupid person on the face of the planet. I just wanted to reach through the screen and punch him in the face he was so infuriatingly stupid and insensitive. His existence is an embarrassment to the country.
You must be similarly blind and gullible for having posted the link.
Those were real people losing their legs and lives, not actors, there is no evidence to the contrary and the size of the explosion left no room for faking the blast or the victims. The two pictures are of the same scene at the same place only with two victims removed by rescuers between the first and second photo. How he cannot see this is just mind numbing stupidity of infuriating proportions.
That is real crackpot territory and would advise steering well clear.
20
I agree fully these are crackpots. The second link provides a most gruesome image of a victim with most of his legs gone, being wheeled by a helper. The idiot that posted the photo suggests that there is no way the “tourniquet” shown could stop the bleeding and therefore the image is faked. Well the dumbass didn’t notice it isn’t a tourniquet the helper is holding it’s actually what is left of the artery of his lower leg. (yes it isn’t for the faint of heart to see.)
00
abc just had Overpeck on “Breakfast”, saying “deniers” aren’t scientists, they just work for “special interests”, while discussing the following:
22 April: SMH: Tom Arup: 20th century ‘hottest in 1400 years’
Warming over the 20th century produced the hottest global average temperatures in 1400 years, a major scientific research project has found.
In a paper published in the journal Nature Geoscience on Monday, an international team of scientists reconstructed temperatures over the past 2000 years using proxy records such as tree-ring measurements, pollen sampling, coral reefs, ice cores and historical records.
The study found that the global warming that began in the late-19th century reversed a long cooling trend across the planet that lasted well over 1000 years.
One of the authors of the paper, Dr Steven Phipps from the University of NSW’s ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science, said: “The striking feature about the sudden rise in 20th century global average temperature is that it comes after an overall cooling trend that lasted more than a millennium…
The paper says the findings do not consider uncertainty associated with the temperature estimates, and the reconstruction for each area covered different periods within the 2000 years, depending on the availability of data.
In Australia and Asia, the reconstructed temperature was highest during 1971–2000 than at any other period over the studied timelines…
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/20th-century-hottest-in-1400-years-20130421-2i8jb.html
11
I saw the same thing in an AAP story repeated by Nine news, and was going to spam it here, but I see Pat is one step ahead as usual.
Still it does not mention that temp/CO2 correlation does not imply human causation.
Plus the study spanned 2000 years, yet they admit the CWP is the warmest in only the last 1400 years. Is this an implicit admission the Roman Warm Period was as warm as the Current one? Hmmm.
I call this kind of article an Alarmist Sandwich.
Starts with the alarmist headline.
Has some attempt at balanced reporting in the middle.
Finishes with alarmist aftertaste.
( This kind of sandwich is best served with a glass of Red whine! )
20
Climate audit is all over this one! Steve MacIntire summary of the australasian reconstruction:-
Australia: this is the Gergis reconstruction. There are only two long series (both tree ring). As is well known, Gergis picked data according to ex post correlation to temperature (contrary to the representation in the disappeared article). The present network is little changed from the network in the disappeared article, with the precise differences remaining to be explained. The network is about half tree ring data and about half is short coral (nearly all O18) data. The blade in the Gergis stick comes almost entirely from coral O18 data – for which corresponding medieval information is lacking. The reconstruction is thus a sort-of splice of low-amplitude tree ring data with high amplitude coral O18. Coral specialist literature nearly always uses Sr data as a measure of temperature. The 20th century increase in coral Sr data is much less than O18 data: however, Gergis screened out the Sr data and almost exclusively used coral O18 data.
10
on Bolt yesterday:
21 April: Bolt Report today
ANDREW BOLT: Unbelievable. But that wasn’t actually the answer to my question. Why are we spending billions to make no difference to global temperatures, which have paused for 16 years anyway?
GREG HUNT: The 1990s had the highest of any of the years. The last decade has been the highest decade on record. So people will have different views –
ANDREW BOLT: But it hasn’t risen, that’s my point, and it won’t make a difference. Why are we spending billions to make no difference?
GREG HUNT: Well, the first thing here is that, as Rupert Murdoch said, we think we should give the planet the benefit of the doubt…
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/bolt_report_tomorrow12/
Rupert Murdoch is your guide, Hunt? or was that a warning to Bolt?
Guardian re the now-infamous Murdoch prediction on where the oil price would go, if only we’d invade Iraq:
11 Feb 2003: Guardian: Julia Day: Murdoch backs ‘courageous’ Blair over Iraq
He (Murdoch) reiterated that the “greatest thing to come out of this [war]” would be cheap oil, which he believes would benefit the world economy more than any tax cut ever could…
Mr Murdoch said the price of oil would be the war’s main benefit on the world economy.
“The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy, if you could put it that way, would be $20 a barrel for oil. That’s bigger than any tax cut in the any country.”
Today a barrel of Brent crude costs $31.68 while US light crude costs $34.53. During the last war on Iraq in 1991, the price of oil doubled to $40 a barrel…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/feb/11/iraqandthemedia.news
11
Global un-warming …its worse than we thought:
http://notrickszone.com/2013/04/21/coming-ice-age-according-to-leading-experts-global-mean-temperature-has-dropped-1c-since-1990/
20
here’s the audio, no transcript as yet:
just before the halfway mark, Overpeck is asked about sceptics; he responds that these sceptics/deniers, who are not climate scientists, these people work for special interests, they cherry-pick, etc…
(AUDIO) 22 April: ABC RN Breakfast: First global study reconstructing continental temperatures over 2000 years
And today, a new study by 78 scientists from 24 countries further implicates human greenhouse gas emissions. The scientists reconstructed global temperatures over the past 2000 years, indicating that the 20th century produced the hottest average worldwide temperatures in 1400 years…
Guest: Jon Overpeck, Professor of Geosciences and Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Arizona, USA; lead author for the the IPCC 5th Assessment Report, and currently on sabbatical at the University of Melbourne where he’s a Visiting Fellow of the Victorian Centre for Climate Change Adaptation Research
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/global-study-reconstructs-temperatures-over-2000-years/4642898
00
this may be a milder version than ABC, but the whole point of this study is to show it is in alignment with the IPCC’s data, so don’t be fooled:
23 April: Australian: AFP: Earth was cooling until a century ago when it began to warm
Sceptics have claimed bouts of cooling or warming before the Industrial Revolution – including two episodes in Europe called the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age – are proof that climate variations are natural, not man-made.
The new study does not wade into the debate about greenhouse gases, but points to two planetary trends.
The first is a clear, prolonged period of cooling. It may have been caused by a combination of factors, including an increase in volcanic activity, with stratospheric ashes reflecting the sunlight, or a decrease in solar activity or tiny changes in Earth’s orbit, both of which would diminish sunlight falling on the planet.
The cooling – between 0.1-0.3C per thousand years, depending on the region – went into reverse towards the end of the 19th century, and was followed by an intensifying period of warming in the 20th, the paper said…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/earth-was-cooling-until-a-century-ago-when-it-began-to-warm/story-e6frg8y6-1226625646030
10
If you wish to read something to get that low blood pressure up and pumping …
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/20th-century-hottest-in-1400-years-20130421-2i8jb.html
20
Seems they didn’t bother to read Mother Nature’s fine print.
~1400 years is the time separating Dansgaard-Oeschger oscillations. After the temperature spike (Up to 16C during glacials) comes the FALL…. Link and link
During inter-glacials the name is Bond events.
We are at the half precession point and solar insolation is declining graph
The real OH S…T is the fact that warm spikes can occur AFTER “..transition to a glacial state had already taken place….”
The above paper looked at 57 globally distributed deep Ocean Drilling Cores.
Boettger, et al (Quaternary International 207 [2009] 137–144) abstract
And a very recent paper from last fall.
So melting of the Arctic coupled with increase Ice in the Antarctic (Bipolar Seesaw) just might not be the signs of ‘Global Warming’the Mass media has been screaming about…
This is where the real controversy on climate is. Are we looking at glaciation or double insolation peaks (‘double precession-cycle’) like MIS-11. Either way we are looking at lower solar insolation compared to the Holocene Optimum for another ~ 60,000 years (with the oceans cooling) and ‘Global Warming’ is just not in the cards unless you count the Dansgaard-Oeschger spikes every 1400 to 1500 years.
00
Lets brainwash the students starting in grade one about climate change.
Lets brainwash the students starting in grade one about climate change. An elementary school, Malaspina, in Prince George, British Columbia, Canada, is going to turn the lights off on earth day.
I suppose trying to imitate North Korea. But the rules, there are after all rules about this, allow for some wiggle room
.
“We can still use our Projectors and our computers and if its not feasible to have all the lights out, then having the lights down or putting on only half the lights is also part of that” school principle Anjula Corbin said.
I suppose the projectors have to run otherwise how would you scare the kids with Gore’s movie.
After going for one hour during last year’s version, the school is aiming to survive the whole day on as little electricity as possible.
Wow try to survive for one whole day, but the computers and propaganda projectors will be running. I wonder if the plug will be pulled on the teachers coffee maker and refrigerator.
There will be an assembly to talk about climate change and cut down on the carbon emissions for climate change.
This principle even has the fact covered that BC gets it power from hydro and a tiny bit of heavily subsidized wind power by saying, “how even though electricity can seem like a renewable resource, building dams or windmills to create that electricity uses non-renewable resources and puts carbon in the atmosphere”
This is how our children are being taught these days, mould them while young.
50
Okay I will confess. I was also brainwashed into climate change when I was in Grade 9 at school, just as any other people who went through high school in Queensland during the 90s were. If they put it in curriculum at my private school then I assume it was in the State school curriculum too.
If this topic of educational brainwashing comes up again on this blog I may even treat you guys to a scan of a page from an old school notebook that I still have in which all required propaganda was dutifully regurgitated on command.
And here I am today, a climate skeptic!
Note to the IPCC: your brainwashing didn’t last because you did not foresee the popularity of the Internet. Care to try again?
60
Cool!
KK 🙂
30
An open thread is just the place for this story.
For those sceptical of the apparent divinity of peer review, get yourselves over to Bishophill and take a look at the heartburn experienced by Prof Rick Trebino – a physicist – just in trying to get a comment to a dodgy paper published.
As one who (in a previous life) also suffered from an incompetent review process, though not to the same vicious extent, I totally empathise.
10
You would think that a country as big and powerful as the USA could afford some competent speach writers, or elect a President with at least half a brain, so that he doesnt come out looking like a complete prat.
Just how disingenuous can you get to say the same insincere clap trap to a whole bevy of world leaders, including our own Juliar G… (but with her it wouldnt matter. she is as thick as Obama).
His comments just cant be true of all of them.. with up shot that this is what is now on European TV!!!
http://www.youtube.com/v/erYpXzE9Pxs%26
Not a good look
20
Another glimpse of Obama for your amazement, enlightenment and of course, entertainment.
If you know anything of Rachael Maddow you’ll have to forgive her for being the presidents critic here, since she’s one of his most ardent supporters who daily and shamelessly carries water for him on MSNBC — the cable news channel with ratings lower than the sewers under the studio she broadcasts from.
I’m serious, this is so strange I don’t know a word for it. She helped put this guy into office so if she’s really disappointed in him, why not some real buyer’s remorse? It’s all a gigantic joke to them, a game they play with no regard for reality.
All I can say is, once a fool, always a fool (both of them). There’s never a dull moment when following Obama around.
20
Well, nuts, the URL didn’t change with the change of material so here is the right one.
Everything is setup differently, probably to confuse guys like me, right? 😉
10
ICE AGE ABRUPT CLIMATE CHANGE
In the last thread, Graeme No.3 @ April 22, 2013 at 1:56 pm mentioned this:
http://climategate.nl/2013/04/19/on-the-post-retirement-revolutionaries-of-climate-science/
…. I must say Salby has a point challenging the accuracy of the ice core measurements….Supposedly a 100 ppm rise in CO2 was accompanied by 8-9 ℃ rise in temperature at the end of the ice age…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actually the rise at the end of the Wisconsin Ice Age and the beginning of the Holocene happened in ONE YEAR. So there is no way in Hades it was the result of CO2.
More on ‘Abrupt Climate Change’
Richard B. Alley of the U.Penn. was elected to the National Academy of Sciences. He chaired the National Research Council on Abrupt Climate Change for well over a decade and in 1999 was invited to testify about climate change by Vice President Al Gore. In 2002, the NAS (Alley was chair) published a book “Abrupt Climate Change”
. From the opening paragraph in the executive summary:
More at WUWT by Geologist William McClenney
McClenney also said elsewhetre
This is the big problem, that no one has the foggiest idea of what causes these abrupt climate changes. They have been too busy trying to come up with a reason to blame CO2 so they can implement a world wide Carbon tax and so the World Bank can get a large chunk link and the UN can implement their Agenda 21 plans for the return of feudalism.
30
I recall that the Vikings gave up on Greenland in 2 years.
The evidence that climate changes abruptly has been around for some time.
20
Agreed that CO2 has no part in climate change. I was merely trying to use the believers assumptions to show they were wrong, that the modern behaviour of temperature and CO2 doesn’t follow their script.
I am a little sceptical about all those claims of very abrupt climate change (there have been others over 5, 10 , 20 years) because all too often those claims were supposed to bolster the coming “tipping point” disaster. Certainly the initial change was quite rapid, but it took centuries for a lot of the ice to melt. The ‘high point’ of the switchover (the Holocene Maximum) was about 2500 years after the switch.
10
Ive just re-watched “Silent Running’.
interesting. It represents the point in the rise of Environmentalism at which the “hero” of a movie can be shown to feel himself justified in murdering people in order to further conservationist ideals.
Viewed from the present it is actually quite disturbing to look into the mind-set, unchallenged, of Seventies Greens. Its now metastised, part of the chilling fabric of our everyday lives.
30
I remember that awful thing, Silent Running. What’s most disturbing to me is that anyone had the gall to think it would pay me back for my ticket purchase.
20
I think its far from unique in that regards.
20
Hello folks I know it most likely is simple but how do you stop followup comments?
00
After the Moon rocket engine story, here’s another:
http://blogs.airspacemag.com/daily-planet/2013/04/moon-rocket-engine-reaches-space-at-last/
The engines for the Russian Moon rocket finally make space!
Word is some of the engineers who worked on the engines back then were watching at the launch site. Cool!
00
A version of the engine designed for the Soviet N1 moon booster has been the main engine for the US Atlas 5D booster for years. The engine was very good. It was quality control that destroyed the booster (four times). The Atlas 5D is one of the main satelite launchers in use today, relying on this Russian engine.
10
The Next Big Thing: H20
Water is the new gold, and a few savvy countries and companies are already banking on it.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/04/15/the_next_big_thing_h20
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/nestle-ceo-peter-brabeck-letmathe-human-beings-have-no-right-to-water-by-andrew-gavin-marshal/
00
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/the-financialization-of-food-and-the-profitability-of-poverty-by-andrew-gavin-marshall/
“…….Again, looking at the issue of climate change, we have seen countless international conferences held by global plutocrats, governments, international organizations, banks and corporations and global NGOs and environmental organizations like the World Wildlife Fund and Conservation International, whose boards of directors are dominated by individuals from banks, corporations and oil conglomerates. And we phase surprise that nothing productive is done. The ‘solutions’ we are given for complex problems are based around ideas of carbon credits, carbon trading, carbon caps and carbon markets, effectively commodifying the entire atmosphere, turning pollution itself into a profitable enterprise, and thus, making the problems that much worse. We are told that there are ways to simply ‘Green’ the economy, to promote the interests of state-capitalism and the environment simultaneously. But in a system which has always subjugated the environment and the population at large to the powerful interests which dominate, we are fools to assume they have changed their interests.
A great deal of press was given to the 2009 Copenhagen Conference, and the fact that it ended in failure. The focus was on “who” screwed it up: it was China, it was America, it was Canada! Everyone was pointing the finger at one another. The reality, however, was far more revealing, not only of the failure of Copenhagen, but of the true intent and the result of pursuing environmental issues through the institutions of power which have created the environmental problems in the first place.
The Copenhagen conference was viewed by elites as a means to advancing their institutional power to a more global level, as internal UN documents revealed that the focus was on a “green economy,” noting: “moving towards a green economy would also provide an opportunity to re-examine national and global governance structures.”[2] The document stated that “linkages between environmental sustainability and the economy will emerge as a key focus for public policymaking and a determinant of future market opportunities,” and one top official stated that the environmental, food, and economic “crises provide a unique opportunity for fundamental restructuring of economies so that they encourage and sustain green energy, green growth and green jobs.”[3]
It sounds well enough, but its focus on “market opportunities” for the “green economy” ignores entirely the nature of “market opportunities” being one of the most significant factors in creating environmental crises in the first place. With a focus on advancing issues of “global governance” in order to address environmental issues, the role of dominant institutions in creating the environmental crisis is overlooked, and thus, the ‘solution’ is to enhance the power of those very same institutions to global levels, further removing power from populations and communities (where the real solutions to environmental issues lie). In short, if the issue of ‘power’ – and the global distribution of power between institutions and populations – is not addressed, the ‘solutions’ offered are, at best, little more than band-aids on broken arms.
China received a great deal of the blame for the failure of the Copenhagen talks, but there is more to this story. Perhaps the most significant factor was due to what was called the ‘Danish Text,’ a leaked Danish government document written in secret between the rich and powerful nations to serve as a framework for their actions and intentions at the conference. The agreement would have handed more power to the rich nations, and sideline the UN in any final agreement, as well as “setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.” In other words, with true Western cultural state-capitalist logic: find the problem, acknowledge the problem, then double the problem! The text was drafted by a select coterie of representatives from Denmark, the U.K. and the United States, and the draft “hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.”[4]
Thus, one of the central institutions of world power – the World Bank – which has advanced the interests of Western banks and corporations across the ‘developing’ world, promoting privatization, deregulation, exploitation, resource extraction, and ultimately, environmental degradation, would then be given the responsibility of ‘solving’ the environmental crisis. And how would it do this? The World Bank would be given control over the dispersal of funds in the same way that it has handled the dispersal of loans in the past. Here’s a hint: it comes with “strings attached…….”
00