This entry was posted
on Wednesday, November 18th, 2009 at 8:00 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
220 Responses to “General Debate 18 November 2009”
Reposted from last night’s GD, as this is important. Anyone who still believes that Global Warming is about temperature or climate has rocks in their heads. Read on …
Ever heard of theClub of Rome?
The great prophet Algore (All credits be to him)™ is a member, along with 99 other notables including Maurice Strong – former Head of the UN Environment Programme, Mikhail Gorbachevm, Anne Ehrlich – Population Biologist, Sir Crispin Tickell – Chairman of the ‘Gaia Society’, The Dalai Lama, Stephen Schneider – Stanford Professor of Biology and Global Change. Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents of man-made global warming and a lead author of many IPCC reports, Bill Gate, Bill Clinton and others.
Look at this from their 1972 book entitled Limits to Growth:
“This is the way we are setting the scene for mankind’s encounter with the planet. The opposition between the two ideologies that have dominated the 20th century has collapsed, forming their own vacuum and leaving nothing but crass materialism.
It is a law of Nature that any vacuum will be filled and therefore eliminated unless this is physically prevented. “Nature,” as the saying goes, “abhors a vacuum.” And people, as children of Nature, can only feel uncomfortable, even though they may not recognize that they are living in a vacuum. How then is the vacuum to be eliminated?
It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.
New enemies therefore have to be identified.
New strategies imagined, new weapons devised.
The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.
The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation
Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.”
So the Club Of Rome folks are not flakes. They are heavy hitters, and back in 1972 they were openly promoting the idea that conjuring up threats and fears would help them bring about change to our global governance.
And drive that 15-year-old gas-guzzling truck all over town.
Heck, flip off a bicyclist while you’re at it.
Not interested?
Fine.
Go ahead and eschew these eco-heretical lifestyle choices; ..
.. just don’t go feeling high and mighty about it.
That’s the takeaway from a biting essay in Orion (July-Aug. 2009), written by the always provocative Derrick Jensen.
Railing against “simple living as a political act,” the radical environmentalist argues that focusing on our personal choices as a salve for eco-destruction ..
.. is not only misguided .. but also ineffective.
“Would any sane person think Dumpster diving would have stopped Hitler ..
.. or that composting would have ended slavery or brought about the eight-hour workday . . .
.. or that dancing naked around a fire would have helped put in place the voting rights act of 1957 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
Then why now .. with all the world at stake .. do so many people retreat into these entirely personal ‘solutions’?”
To prop up his provocative prose, Jensen shows how agriculture and industry are responsible for the bulk of water and energy use ..
.. as well as the majority of emissions and waste.
This is a reality that’s often overlooked on those ubiquitous “how to be green” lists, which include recommendations for individuals: shorter showers, lighter dishwasher settings, canvas bags for the grocery store.
It’s fine, Jensen says, if you live simply just because you want to.
But to pretend that doing so is “a powerful political act” distracts citizens from confronting the larger consequences of an environmentally destructive industrial economy.
It also prevents people from becoming true stewards of the earth, relying instead on “the flawed notion that humans inevitably harm their landbase.”
“Simple living as a political act consists solely of harm reduction, ignoring the fact that humans can help the earth as well as harm it,” Jensen writes.
“We can rehabilitate streams, we can get rid of noxious invasives, we can remove dams ..
.. we can disrupt a political system tilted toward the rich .. as well as an extractive economic system ..
.. we can destroy the industrial economy that is destroying the real, physical world.”
Um, yes, it is hardly a revelation that one of our biggest enemies is ourselves. Overpolluting, overpopulating, growth of anything can never be perpetual. So something has to be done or something has to give.
Linking this to global governance is weird. If we continue stuffing the planet it is likely to result in more competition for resources, conflict, potentially massive migration – this is unlikely to be conducive to single rule, probably the reverse.
Anything that get’s bigger and more powerful outgrows it’s capabilities.
The US, as the most powerful nation on earth, can’t even tidy up one backward country, and have fermented more potential problems than they have solved. And they have enough of their own problems anyway, with corrupt overpowerful (and vulnerable) financial and and political systems.
Is this world government going to be a combination of the myriad so-called enemies? The Progressive Muslim Socialist (are Jews still bogeymen?) Climate Change Industrial Military Complex?
Morning folks, what bettter way to start the day than to have a good chuckle at some of these crazy , communist, nutters
It is to be noted that the likes of philu, luc , pete, greenparty, labour party and national party, are arguably even more nutty than the following people, for the simple reason that they conceal their true agenda.
Paul Ehrlich – Author of the The Population Bomb (1968) Stanford University Biologist and Advisor to Al Gore
“The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer”
“I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”
“In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.” (1970)
“We already have too much economic growth in the United States. Economic growth in rich countries like ours is the disease, not the cure.”
John Davis
editor of Earth First! Journal
“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
“I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”
Judi Barri
Earth First
“I think if we don’t overthrow capitalism, we don’t have a chance of saving the world ecologically. I think it is possible to have an ecological society under socialism. I don’t think it’s possible under capitalism.”
David Brower
Friends of the Earth
“Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license…. All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
Keith Boulding
originator of the “Spaceship Earth” concept
“The right to have children should be a marketable commodity, bought and traded by individuals but absolutely limited by the state.”
Richard Benedict
an employee for the State Department working on assignment for the Conservation Foundation
“A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.”
Carl Amery
left wing nutter
“We, in the green movement, aspire to a cultural model in which killing a forest will be considered more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of 6-year-old children to Asian brothels.”
Lamont Cole
left wing nutter
“To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.”
Lyall Watson
The Financial Times, 15 July 1995
Cannibalism is a “radical but realistic solution to the problem of overpopulation.”
Pentti Linkola
“Everything we have developed over the last 100 years should be destroyed.”
I think you must have scored some pretty strong stuff philu, i think you are confusing me with another person because i am not a trougher commie nor have i ever been.
Admittedly, i am partially to the left of some right wingers because i do recognise the need for there to be a welfare safety-net, but it needs to be just that, a safety-net of last resort.
come on philu, you are the equivalent of a glass window , we see right through you, if only you had any shred of dignity, i could say that you are supressing it by hiding behind your dogma.
It is to be noted that philu is attacking me in response to my publishing of those legitimate, authentic quotes from significant people who are part of his “movement*”
By attacking me in response to publishing those quotes, you are defending those people*, once again exposing your extremist idealogy
* the ugly face of communism masked behind lies and scare tactics
“..d4j, Swiftman, Murray, has it not occurred to you that it might improve if you contributed something interesting rather than joining the whine club?..”
(TI is largely funded by Western governments, and has been accused of biased activities as a result. It has also been accused of lack of transparency in its own activities.)
http://www.digimonster.co.nz has launched, great deals for Kiwiblog readers! If there is something you like, flick us an email and we will bring down our already great prices.
he is unwillingly doing a service to the sane-people by being a living model of the true lack of competency , maturity and responsibility among the labour voters
transparency.org is itself corrupt, designed to create the illusion of a corruption free government, causing the masses to hand over their liberties in the name of environmentalism. Unfortunatley up until now its been the equivalent of taking candy from children..
I’ve no doubt that plenty of these idiots still hunger for a world government simply because they cannot stand the messy business of letting ordinary people get on with their lives and making their own decisions. Many scientists in particular have long held democratic capitalism in contempt because it just does not fit with their beautiful world of rational equations.
But it may also have something to do with how they make their living. I recall reading a long-ago article that pointed out that most physicists had a socialist bent, whereas most genetic biologists had a capitalist focus, and that the reason likely had to do with the fact that most physicists were dependent on government funding (either directly or indirectly) as opposed to the constant involvement of the latter with venture capitalists and the like in creating start-up companies.
So this constant pushing of many scientists towards government solutions is more a product of their particular environment than any conspiracy. Apart from anything else I’ve always thought conspiracies were the product of a small number of scheming people, whereas this is more like the group behaviour so well examined in Mackay’s book, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Considering the bilious hatred of our society expressed in the quotes above, I’m thinking less of the chapters on economic bubbles than the ones on Witch trials.
this is an example of the intellectual rigor in the link posted by swifty..
(this wingnuts presecription-for-africa:..)
“..What liberalism does to Africa: Liberalism’s smothering paternalism has arguably done considerably more damage to Africa than European colonialism. “The Western world has given Africa ‘about a trillion dollars in aid in the past 50 years’ and yet as a whole, the continent could be fairly said to have gone backwards over the last 10-15 years.” Obviously our aid is doing little for Africa, but we can’t stop, even if it would be better for them to learn to stand on their own two feet, because liberalism says it’s better to ruin millions of lives than to risk making liberals feel bad..”
Ha, so Jim Salinger and Lucy Lawless want to pay for Key to go to Copenhagen. I doubt they see the irony of sending thousands of people flying around the world to discuss reducing carbon emissions.
Key may be moving slowly but the momentum is tending in the right direction. I understand this year is the discovery and planning stage, and next year will see far more action, at least in terms of domestic affairs like reducing government waste and tightening up benefits. I just hope he grows a real pair on the AGW issue and keeps us out of Copenhagen.
Hey phool if you can produce a picture of me in “middle-ages drag” I’ll give you a thousand dollars. Till then I maintain the right to call you a lying peice crap.
I just hope he grows a real pair on the AGW issue and keeps us out of Copenhagen.
Won’t happen. Key needs this, and attending now isn’t essential. Copenhagen is likely to fizz and he’ll steer clear. For now. But he knows that $110b in lost revenue isn’t good for NZ, so the question is why is he so determined? Does he imagine NZ’s ETS subservience expediting his joining the global elite in the Club of Rome? Does he have other commercial interests (eg Bank Of America) that may profit from increased carbon trading? Who knows.
I have to say getstaffed that the signs recently haven’t been good. I keep thinking soon Key and Smith are going to stand up on their hind legs, brush the wool away from their eyes and demand absolute proof that CO2 emissions are causing global warming. I don’t know about Smith, but I am pretty sure Key doesn’t buy the bullshit, he’s just playing the long game at the moment.
“but I am pretty sure Key doesn’t buy the bullshit, he’s just playing the long game at the moment.”
I’d like to share your optimism, but cannot. Unless proven wrong, Key and the incompetent Smith will pass this absurd piece of legislation, which will send NZ down the Third World path.
Why the rush? Why the urgency? Why the secrecy in dealing with Maori?
Key should be ashamed of Smith’s behaviour (unless he condones it) and should take decisive corrective action. Will he?
Cha, giving up at slide 27. definitely sounds like a recruitment drive.
I would’ve thought that when Hassans superiors became aware of the contents of his presentation and the views that he expressed he’d be out so quickly his feet wouldn’t touch the ground.
But it’s also likely that they were maneuvering to get him “retired”. No promotions and bad performance reviews along with an assignment at Fort Hood where there would be other psychologists to take up slack as he was eased out of the way.
btw, slide 20 or 21 mentions Jinn as one of Allahs creations so not knowing what a Jinn was I googled and the result is another WTF.
Question 10: Can human beings and jinn inter-marry?
Yes and no. It depends upon how one looks at it. It is a known fact in the Qur’an in Surah Al-Israa’ (17:64) that jinn may share with us our wealth and our children. The Hadith of the Prophet (pbuh) reconfirms this concept when he says that when a man has marital relationship with his wife, he should mention the name of Allah (swt). He should seek refuge in Allah (swt) from the outcast shaitan. Otherwise, shaitan folds himself up in the man’s urethra and shall have sexual relations along with him.
Moreover, when a man goes to his wife while she is in her menses, shaitan precedes him. She shall conceive and will bring forth a sterile person (Mukhannath). Such a sterile person is considered to be child of the jinn.
The drug fucked wreck makes an assertion, i say hes full of shit and put up a grand for him to provide evidence of his claim and then he demands that I answer him?
Fuck off you dickhead, you’re a lying piece of crap, come up with something new or piss off.
The great prophet Algore (All credits be to him)™ is a member, along with 99 other notables including Maurice Strong – former Head of the UN Environment Programme, Mikhail Gorbachevm, Anne Ehrlich – Population Biologist, Sir Crispin Tickell – Chairman of the ‘Gaia Society’, The Dalai Lama, Stephen Schneider – Stanford Professor of Biology and Global Change. Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents of man-made global warming and a lead author of many IPCC reports, Bill Gate, Bill Clinton and others.
If you’ve got a reference for that, you should edit the Wikipedia page. They’ve got a list of “notable members” but the only one they’ve got from your list is Mikhail Gorbachev.
A German zoo says a pair of gay male penguins are raising a chick from an egg abandoned by its parents.
Bremerhaven zoo veterinarian Joachim Schoene says the egg was placed in the male penguins’ nest after its parents rejected it in late April. The males incubated it for some 30 days before it hatched and have continued to care for it. The chick’s gender is not yet known.
Schoene said the male birds, named Z and Vielpunkt, are one of three same-sex pairs among the zoo’s 20 Humboldt penguins that have attempted to mate.
Homosexual behavior has been documented in many animal species.
Does he imagine NZ’s ETS subservience expediting his joining the global elite in the Club of Rome? Does he have other commercial interests (eg Bank Of America) that may profit from increased carbon trading? Who knows.
Getstaffed, I understand your scepticism about climate change, but it seems to be dragging you into the bat-shit crazy world of conspiracy theories.
Do you really think John-$50M-Key would give up a lucrative banking career to return to NZ, enter politics and take a punt at becoming PM, so he could do his bit for a global conspiracy and thus make lots of money, while simultaneously screwing NZ? Seems like a long-shot for a man more accustomed to making a quick million or two on exchange rates. Also couldn’t he achieve more by doing this within banking, where he has access to enormous amounts of OPM (Other People’s Money). No need to risk his own cash? There are plenty of others in on the conspiracy who could do the political legwork.
And as for joining a global elite club, he was already well on his way via banking. Those guys live like kings already. No need to take the Helen Clark route.
As for ‘Homosexual behavior has been documented in many animal species’, indeed it has – if companionship counts. Still looking for evidence of God or evolution sucessfully implementing homosexual reproduction though.
@getstaffed:
Oh, and the Wikipedia talk page has a fuller version of this quote:
Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.”
Here’s the in-context quote, with some emphasis added by me:
Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely, sacrilegious though this may sound. In its present form, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time. Few politicians in office are sufficiendy aware of the global nature of the problems facing them and little, if any, awareness of rhe interactions between the problems. Generally speaking, informed disucssion on the main political, economic and social issues take place on radio and television rather than in Parliament, to the detriment of the latter. The activities of political parties are so intensely focussed on election deadlines and party rivalries that they end up weakening the democracy they are supposed to serve. This confrontational approach gives an impression that party needs come before national interest. Strategies and tactics seem more important than objectives and often a constituency is neglected as soon as it is gained. With the current mode of operation. Western democracies are seeing their formal role decline and public opinion drifting away from elected representatives. However, the crisis in the contemporary democratic system must not be allowed to serve as an excuse for rejecting democracy.
Would you really disagree with statements like this:
– Generally speaking, informed disucssion on the main political, economic and social issues take place on radio and television rather than in Parliament, to the detriment of the latter.
[today, of course, informed discussion is more likely to take place on blogs, rather than television.. ]
Or this:
– The activities of political parties are so intensely focussed on election deadlines and party rivalries that they end up weakening the democracy they are supposed to serve. This confrontational approach gives an impression that party needs come before national interest.
I haven’t read the book, but it seems like they’re basically saying here: “Democracy has problems; how can we fix them?” rather than “Democracy has problems comrade; let us throw it away and embrace communism!”
Or, alternatively, “Democracy is the worst form of government apart from all the others that have been tried.”
malcolm, fair comment re Key. I can’t comprehend his motives. As for crazy conspiaracy theories, there’s plenty of evidence. It’s just so extreme that everyone dismisses it out-of-hand.
“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”
– UN Agenda 21
I have dozens of similar quotes from a range of influencial global politicians and environmentists. They’re all saying the same things, and in the grand tradition of the boiled frog, we’d rather watch the rugby or lotto results.
As for ‘Homosexual behavior has been documented in many animal species’, indeed it has – if companionship counts. Still looking for evidence of God or evolution sucessfully implementing homosexual reproduction though.
Well, homosexual behaviour has been observed in Bonobos, although this shouldn’t surprise you if you know anything about these creatures.
Still, it is an interesting question: clearly gay people cannot “naturally” have children, so it should be a trait strongly selected against. So why do we observe gay people? I recall reading an article (I’m sorry; I can’t find it — I think it was in Scientific American, though) looking at this question. The article suggested (based on some research) that there was a kind of “gayness spectrum”, where people at one end are completely gay, people at the other end are completely heterosexual, and bisexuals are (presumably) somewhere in the middle. The hypothesis put forward by the article/research is that people who were “nearly gay” made the best fathers (i.e. were most likely to raise their children to successful adulthood).
Thus gay people are a consequence of the randomness the gene pool, and they’ll keep cropping up because they’re nearly optimal.
It’s not hard to see non-optimal-for-breeding sexual behaviour on the farm, especially with young animals. Even in the ‘burbs – I don’t think any dogs have successfully crossed with a human leg.
Getstaffed, if we’re heading for an environmental catastrophe (which I know you don’t accept), what do you think we should do?
Similar “redeployment of human and financial resources” etc were undertaken during the last major world crisis; WWII. This problem is much slower burning, but the effects could be worse and longer-lasting.
Yesterday someone mentioned smog in California and how the regulations didn’t help this. That’s not true. The problem only reduced when car-markers were forced to make engines burn cleaner. E.g. cat converters, better combustion, not venting tank to air, oil vent to the intake manifold etc. Same story with acid-rain. Another problem which people think just went away. It didn’t. It went away because of a switch to cleaner coal and natural gas (due to new gas availability but also the NOx and SOx problems with coal) and flue-gas de-sulphurisation units on coal-fired power stations etc. None of this would have happened until NOx and SOx became controlled pollutants.
As you know I’m no fan of unnecessary government but some problems don’t fix themselves.
“Mob rule no subtitute for democracy”writes Brian Rudman this morn..wtf..what part of exercising our democratic freedom by marching on saturday does he not understand,or is it that the brain behind those rose coloured glasses cannot fathom or accept any viewpoint different from his own.To suggest that the protest march is a form of mob rule i feel, demonstrates more contempt for democracy than those who will participate in saturdays march will probably ever display..
Agenda 21 is a programme run by the United Nations related to sustainable development. It is a comprehensive blueprint of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the UN, governments, and major groups in every area in which humans impact on the environment.
This doesn’t sound like world government. It is a programme trying to influence and involve a wide range of groups.
Ah, hang on, in section 1521(b) (iii) Initial Formulation:
The initial framework for Agenda 21 was first put together by a working group assembled in the U.S. Air Force installation in Nevada……
Still working my way through the dribble from getstaffed
6. Why did the MSM lament the low summer Arctic sea ice a few years ago, while 6 months later the Antarctic summer sea ice was at record levels yet it was not reported?
Extract: Arctic sea ice reaches its minimum extent each September. The graph on the left charts the average September extent from 1979 to 2009, derived from satellite observations. The illustration on the right shows the Arctic sea ice minimum extent for 2009, which was the third-lowest in the satellite record.
The other indicators covered in the key indicators series are global sea levels (steadily rising), CO2 levels (scary), global average temperature (also steadily rising),and the Ozone hole (currently the fifth highest on record).
Extract: Sea ice loss and retreat of coastal glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula were studied using historical accounts, aerial photographs and satellite images. This shows that seven of the major ice shelves and 87% of the 244 marine glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years.
In spite of the above, scientists are still not positive whether Antarctica is a victim of global warming or another phenomenon, even natural causes. In fact, melting ice at Antarctica is releasing organisms which may prove to be an effective carbon sink, so that’s some good news amongst all the gloom.
And more good news is they are working hard to find out the relevant causes. In fact, it’s a good example that disproves the mad headed conspiracy theories promoted by getstaffed and others because it would be very easy for scientists to grab the raw data and trumpet it as further proof of AGW. But they don’t; they say they don’t yet know.
Again, apologies for my obsession for seeking out facts – I know that noise and filth is much easier and much more emotionally satisfying
A German zoo says a pair of gay male penguins are raising a chick from an egg abandoned by its parents.
Oh – a recycling of the old gay penguins meme.
Jolly good, a bird brained species which in the wild forms nesting pairs does so in the artificial environment of a zoo and if in this artificial environment there is a surplus of males then two males will form such a pair.
All very interesting I am sure but not very revealing about humanity – unless people are bird brained.
Syphilis — a disease once on the verge of elimination — began re-emerging as a public health threat in 2001. This is primarily because of a resurgence of the disease among men who have sex with men (MSM), though cases among women have also been increasing in recent years.
Getstaffed, sorry I meant to add that I also think the ETS is an overly complex and unworkable idea. If we can’t get a decent wholesale electricity market going in NZ we won’t get an ETS one working. The market is too small and businesses are too small to deal with it. It’s a bad idea.
My ’solution’ would be to put a tax escalator on diesel, petrol and coal and ramp it up over 15-20 years whilst correspondingly reducing income tax (after bring on the flat tax, of course) so it’s revenue neutral.
Forget about natural gas. It produces much less CO2 per unit of energy. Forget about forests – in NZ they all get harvested so the carbon credits are a zero sum thing. Deal with farming emissions by telling the farming sector that they’ve got 5 years to get some decent research going on reducing methane etc from cows and sheep. There’s plenty that can be done there.
malcolm, why agonise over tough, fictions choices about a response (solution domain) when the issue (problem domain) hasn’t been established? I contend that this issue is so rotten with the agenda or powerful players that we’ll never know if there even the slightest bit of true truth in the idea that there’s an impending environmental catastrophe.
Sovereign governments can and should promote wise use of resources, and I agree with your thoughts there re California and acid rain.
While I agree with getstaffed about why bother with a solution to an unidentified problem. If you to put a tax incentive in place it should only be at the point of taking fossil fuels out of the ground as this is the only way in which extra carbon is added to the system.
Farming and all other practises are all ultimately a carbon go round. The carbon they release was pre existing in the system and is only stored as methane for 7 years.
Luc – congratulations for digging. And that’s the point isn’t it – there’s a huge volume of contradictory ‘evidence’ and the promoter with the most letter after their name, or the biggest political dog on-side expects to win. I’d say it’s settled then – the science isn’t settled.
As for raw data, I like this quote:
“We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
- Prof. Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports
I’d love to know how many report he authored for the IPCC, and which scientisis subsequently based their analysis on his.
malcolm, why agonise over tough, fictions choices about a response (solution domain) when the issue (problem domain) hasn’t been established? I contend that this issue is so rotten with the agenda or powerful players that we’ll never know if there even the slightest bit of true truth in the idea that there’s an impending environmental catastrophe.
It will never be established in a definitive way. That’s not the sort of answer you get from stochastic modelling. You get a distribution of outcomes. And there will always be people who are not convinced, for a host of reason unrelated to the science.
Can I turn this around a little. I know you’ve looked at this issue a lot. What do you think is the probability that we’ll see moderate problems due to the climate change in the next 50 years? By moderate I mean repeated droughts in areas which previously supported their population, glaciers which moderate rivers (e.g the Ganges) disappearing and causing widespread water shortages, crop failure etc?
Heres why all your bs is not relevant to anthropogenic climate change:
Eemian, once called the Eemian Interglacial period…It is the second-to-latest interglacial period of the Ice Age. It began about 130,000 years ago…Sea levels at that time were 4-6 meters higher than they are now, indicating greater deglaciation than today (mostly from partial melting of the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica)…Central Europe (north of the Alps) is found to be 1–2 °C warmer than present; south of the alps conditions are 1–2 °C cooler than today
All this is going to happen eventually before the next ice age and it will be nothing to do with people. We should celebrate the coming warm climate and the benefits it will bring.
By moderate I mean repeated droughts in areas which previously supported their population, glaciers which moderate rivers (e.g the Ganges) disappearing and causing widespread water shortages, crop failure etc?
We already have deserts and water shortages today. There is no reason to expect a warmer, wetter and more stable climate to be a negative compared to today.
We can expect to grow grapes in scotland and there used to be hippos in the thames
Here are some excerpts I found on vegetation:
Similarity of vegetation dynamics during interglacial periods
European vegetation has oscillated between extreme situations: those of the ice ages dominated by a herbaceous treeless vegetation and those of the interglacial periods where forests occupied greatly extended ranges
during MIS 11.3, the earth’s orbit was almost circular, and seasonal insolation changes due to precession were very small. Furthermore, they stated that such changes in the earth’s orbital configuration occurred with a periodicity of ≈400 ka. Thus, in terms of insolation, MIS 11.3 would be the closest analogue to the Holocene.
record display a marked cyclic succession of warm and humid interglacials followed by dry and cold glacials
the expansion of forests in Europe just a matter of interglacial pace
Does he imagine NZ’s ETS subservience expediting his joining the global elite in the Club of Rome?
I don’t think anybody with any knowledge of The Club of Rome’s stupidities of the last thirty years would want to join them. Even Michael Cullen had similarly scathing comments to make about their mid-1970’s predictions.
As far as Key is concerned I’d expand on a comment I made last year about his approach to Kyoto/ETS:
One of the things that traders are noted for is not fighting against idiocy but figuring out how to make a buck from it. The variation here is that votes, not dollars, are at stake. But the principle is the same.
In short, John Key probably realised a long time ago that there was no point in allowing either the Greens or Labour to create a wedge issue when the fact was that they would be the ones who would have to wear the punishments inflicted by the public when the real costs of ‘fighting climate change’ turned up.
I’d say Key is still playing that game, realising as a trader would, that every other nation in the world is playing it also. Some of the warmenists have already faced up to the fact this whole approach is failing as we speak. Kyoto was a demonstrable failure and Copenhagen is already headed that way. And as an example of how we’re going round and round on this, here’s a comment I made five years ago on this forum:
One note about how “the debate has ended”. It certainly has for Kyoto. Only the politically naive could think that thing is still alive after the comments of Putin’s advisors and none other than Blair himself. Not to mention the fact that most signatories will miss their targets by a country mile – something that was obvious at least six years ago – not to mention the backsliding of the Labour government here, something that again was obviously going to happen when the costs of compliance came home to roost.
Waiting out Bush’s departure won’t help much when there are 92 Senators standing in the way and since I am not wedded to any particular party the idea that the hopeless Tories desperate gab for a piece of climate catastrophe action should somehow cause me to to jump on board here is a laughable projection of ideological blindness.
The very claim that Kyoto was but a first step on a journey is precisely what doomed it. No one was ever going to put themselves through that tortuous negotiation again only to be kicked hard by their electors back home.
Only a tiny minority are going to change their lifestyle (and that includes 90% of the warmenists) to the drastic degree implied by all of the CO2 reduction targets being sought. Few in the West will change and certainly not China or India. So we will see targets pushed off into the future, or so watered down as to be meaningless, penalties not pursued (think how useless UN economic sanctions are now when applied to specific countries), or so covered by subsidies that the demand reduction effect will never kick in at the consumer level where it ultimately has to.
On the producer side let’s take this quote from Peter Huber in City Journal:
“Ten countries ruled by nasty people control 80 percent of the planet’s oil reserves—about 1 trillion barrels, currently worth about $40 trillion…….If $40 trillion worth of gold were located where most of the oil is, one could only scoff at any suggestion that we might somehow persuade the nasty people to leave the wealth buried. They can lift most of their oil at a cost well under $10 a barrel. They will drill. They will pump. And they will find buyers. Oil is all they’ve got.”
This international Kabuki dance is simply being repeated further down the food chain as we see the effects of tackling the “polluters”. In the US the “Cap and Trade” bill is already on the back burner as various members of Congress and Senators from places like coal-dependent Indiana, Virginia and other states get frightened off – not by “big business muscle”, but by the simple fact that they will close down rapidly (as Obama explicitly claimed they would be) and thereby smash the economies of those states. The result will be the same as our ETS, such groups will negotiate loopholes and poke so many holes in the agreement that it will be worthless even if passed.
But we will play that game to avoid the pointed fingers and we will focus on trading with places like China and India rather than increasingly fucked up outfits like Europe. In the meantime:
I’m afraid the climate change crowd are now stuck with those of us who always argued that the relentless march of technological innovation, without targeted subsidies and government planning, would solve both the “problem” of ever-increasing CO2 production and provide the ability and the wealth to adapt to future environmental change – just as we have for thousands of years.
And yes, that’s me on this site from five years ago too.
If we just sit back and wait for the relentless march of technological innovation to rescue us from our excesses it is inevitable that one generation will hit the wall. It may not be ours but it may be partly due to our arrogance.
Sonny, this continuous searching for a magic bullet to disprove AGW is just so tiresome. Do you seriously imagine governments and scientists aren’t aware of all this stuff?
Extract: Overall, the last inter-glacial appears, at least during its first part, warmer than present day climates by at least 2°C in many sites, i.e., comparable to anthropogenic warming expected by the year 2100. However, the geographical coverage of reliable and well-dated temperature time-series is too sparse to provide a global estimate.
2.4.5 Summary
Current evidence indicates that very rapid and large temperature changes, generally associated with changes in oceanic and atmospheric circulation, occurred during the last glacial period and during the last deglaciation, particularly in higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. During the warming phases, and the Younger Dryas pause, there is evidence of almost worldwide, nearly synchronous events. However, as with the Holocene maximum warming and the Last Glacial Maximum, these changes appear to have occurred asynchronously between the Northern Hemisphere and at least part of the Southern Hemisphere. During the Holocene smaller but locally quite large climate changes occurred sporadically; similar changes may have occurred in the last inter-glacial. Evidence is increasing, therefore, that a rapid reorganisation of atmospheric and ocean circulation (time-scales of several decades or more) can occur during inter-glacial periods without human interference.
“Evidence is increasing, therefore, that a rapid reorganisation of atmospheric and ocean circulation (time-scales of several decades or more) can occur during inter-glacial periods without human interference.”
So basically the IPCC are also saying that climate change happens with or without human interference.
Tom, depressingly, I share your thoughts on the ETS. And similarly as regards humans changing their behaviour enough to ameliorate the worst effects of APG. But it is going to be disastrous. Here is why, courtesy of http://www.cluborlov.blogspot.com
And what of that lodestone, global sea level? This happens to be a very interesting question, because ocean levels are set to rise dramatically. According to UCLA scientists, the last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they are today was 15 million years ago. At that time, the sea level was between 20 and 36 metres higher (75 to 120 feet), there was no permanent ice cap in the arctic, and very little ice in Antarctica or Greenland. That is where we are headed. The only remaining question is, How long will it take us to get there?
The authors of the Hadley Centre report predict a rise of just 1.4 metres by 2100. The IPCC in their 2007 4th Assessment Report predicted something like half a metre by 2100 based on a combination of the fattening of the oceanic envelope caused by thermal expansion and the increased runoff from glaciers and minor ice sheets. None of this sounds particularly catastrophic just yet, but then it turns out that these predictions are not based on anything particularly relevant: the British Antarctic Survey, in 2008, made it clear that the IPCC had not included the source of nearly 100% of the world’s potential ice melt – the major ice caps of Antarctica and Greenland – simply because they had little idea of how the ice caps would behave in a heating world:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) highlighted the issue by suggesting that current knowledge is inadequate to estimate confidently the contribution that ice sheets might make to sea-level rise in coming centuries. While technology makes sea-level rise easier to observe, and we can predict some contributions to future sea-level rise with increasing certainty, we cannot yet fully predict the ice sheets’ contribution. There is thus a risk that sea-level rise could be higher than the (incomplete) estimates provided by the IPCC.
Thus, the most peer-reviewed piece of climate science ever written turns out to be completely inadequate when it comes to estimating the level of disruption associated with a very important aspect of climate change: the rising seas. If Antarctica contains 90% of the world’s land ice (sea ice, like that in the Arctic, does not directly cause the oceans to rise when it melts) and Greenland contains most of the rest, then what’s going to happen when they start to melt with a vengeance, and when are they going to start melting? Official science is mute on the subject.
So once again, getstaffed’s conspiracy theory is notable for its absence. This nonsense about slavering scientists frothing at the mouth for grants to fund their lavish lifestyles and world government plans just gets us nowhere except to a very wet hell, very quickly.
In fact, I am actually amazed that there are so many worried people, good people, who think we can turn this thing around to continue as advocates for action in the face of such clear, willful ignorance and selfishness.
“According to UCLA scientists, the last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they are today was 15 million years ago. At that time, the sea level was between 20 and 36 metres higher (75 to 120 feet), there was no permanent ice cap in the arctic, and very little ice in Antarctica or Greenland. That is where we are headed. The only remaining question is, How long will it take us to get there?”
So how many humans were around 15 million years ago contributing to CO2 levels?
Luc, you seem to be a serious guy
And as we never seem to get any answers from the main proponents of AGW
I’d like your view on what is the link between carbon emissions and exponentially rising temperatures
Take this article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8364926.stm
All it talks about are the amount of carbon in the atmosphere
Then makes an assumption that this means temperatures will rise exponentially
I’m sorry but 1+1 is not 3
I would hope that the Herald which has the country’s highest circulation would insist on a higher standard of advocacy journalism than is demonstrated by Brian Rudman. Rather than come up with a rational argument he accuses those who believe that parents rather than the State should have primacy on how their children are raised of supporting the beating of children. He also considers that the vast majority who voted NO did not understand the question let alone the issues.
I will email him and challenge him to engage in a rational debate in an open forum.
What do you think is the probability that we’ll see moderate problems due to the climate change in the next 50 years? By moderate I mean repeated droughts in areas which previously supported their population, glaciers which moderate rivers (e.g the Ganges) disappearing and causing widespread water shortages, crop failure etc?
malcolm, sorry – I was out. I see that Sonny has responded to this. Like most of us here, I’m an Google researcher, so not a scientist or expert. My opinion is that we’ll have hightened publicity of environmental changes in an attempt to support the theory that we humans need correctional ‘guidance’ to stave off impending doom.
The facts are often very different, as the fisking of the IPCC hurricane statistics, which show and increase in activity from 1970 but a decrease if a 1940’s start point is adopted. I’m looking for that chart to add to my collection.
Meantime you can read the open letter of resignation of a IPCC Climate Scientist Chris Landsea [what a great surname for a climate scientist!] citing a politicized agenda and misrepresentations of climate science.
If Antarctica contains 90% of the world’s land ice (sea ice, like that in the Arctic, does not directly cause the oceans to rise when it melts) and Greenland contains most of the rest, then what’s going to happen when they start to melt with a vengeance, and when are they going to start melting? Official science is mute on the subject.
Official science is mute on the subject because the answer is literally unknowable.
However the best evidence from satellites suggest that the Antarctica is currently accumulating ice not loosing it.
Somewhat disingenuously when discussing the Antarctic ice sheet the alarmists focus their attention on the Antartic peninsula a small part of the continent and one which lies outside the Antarctic circle for the most part – which may be loosing some ice but for the most part the continent shows no sign of melting.
Anyway it would take decades if not centuries to do so even if it were to – this is because the energy required to raise the temperature of ice to 0c is vast and then even more energy is required for the phase change from solid to liquid to occur.
Changes in climate on the scale of centuries are not a problem – people have ample time to adapt. It is rapid change that causes problems.
The Younger Dryas was a climate catastrophe that did occur when North America dumped a lot of water into the Atlantic 12000 odd years ago which bought about rapid cooling
It could happen again however there is no indication of the conditions believed to have been prevailing before that event occurred in the modern world.
You just have to accept that the future is uncertain and unknown and get on with life I’m afraid that is the nature of the beast.
Chuck Bird at 2:22 pm:
I would hope that the Herald which has the country’s highest circulation would insist on a higher standard of advocacy journalism than is demonstrated by Brian Rudman.
I thought he went way over the top in that too. I don’t think that helps his cause, which is a shame. There is a deeper issue here that at least should be explored. What are the real motives behind those who are running the march? They are being very vague about who is behind it and what the actual aim is.
getstaffed and others have concerns about moves towards a one world government overriding our democracy. There could be a more real threat closer to home, not necessarily to take over our government, just working themselves into a position of being able to manipulate our democracy as they are trying to manipulate opinion – much more subtly and effectively than Rudman.
RightNow (412) Vote: 1 0 Says:
November 18th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
“Evidence is increasing, therefore, that a rapid reorganisation of atmospheric and ocean circulation (time-scales of several decades or more) can occur during inter-glacial periods without human interference.”
So basically the IPCC are also saying that climate change happens with or without human interference.
This is the bit I don’t get – what does it matter who or what is causing it? Is it happening? Is it bad? Can we do anything about it?
Lot of good accurate scapegoating will be if we’re extinct.
So basically the IPCC are also saying that climate change happens with or without human interference.
Well, yeah. The climate has been very different in the past. No one is disputing that.
The thing is that, in the past (as far as scientists can tell), CO2 concentrations have always increased after global temperatures increased. This time, they’re increasing before, which is a strong suggestion that the CO2 increase is due to human activity. That in itself doesn’t prove AGM, but it does suggest that what is happening now has not happened before (or, at least, not in the same way).
All it talks about are the amount of carbon in the atmosphere
Then makes an assumption that this means temperatures will rise exponentially
I’m sorry but 1+1 is not 3
Well, CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Broadly, what happens (as I understand it) is that the sun’s light zips through the atmosphere without having much effect. It hits the earth, which warms up. The earth then radiates heat in the form of infrared light. This infrared then heads back out towards space. Some of it gets to space and is lost to us forever. Some of it hits molecules of greenhouse gasses (such as CO2, methane, water vapour, and others). It’s absorbed, and the gas molecules then re-emit it in all directions. Some of this is re-emitted back towards space and lost, but some of it heads back towards earth, or elsewhere in the atmosphere.
Thus, the greenhouse effect helps keep heat from the sun in the Earth’s atmosphere. Without it, we wouldn’t be here.
So, it’s actually straightforward and noncontroversial to say that increasing CO2 in the atmosphere will increase the global temperature. But it’s also straightforward and noncontroversial to say that crashing a spaceship into the moon will increase the mass of the moon and lead to it orbiting the earth faster … but no one cares, because the change is so insigificant.
So the big question is why a small increase in CO2 would lead to a (relatively) big jump in temperature, when CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are very low, and when water vapour is a much more significant greenhouse gas. Well, that’s the tricky bit. AFAIK, the idea is that a small increase in CO2 concentrations causes a small amount of warming, which increases water evaporation (leading to more water vapour), and also decreases the ocean’s ability to store CO2 (leading to more atmospheric CO2). So small increases in human emissions lead to larger increases in greenhouse gasses which lead to less heat escaping to space and thus a warmer planet.
Obviously, that last paragraph is one area that the anti-AGW types like to attack.
Good video of the recent protests against Al Gore and his lies and propaganda during a recent appearance by Al in Austin Texas.
800 attended Gore’s speech. 200 protested outside the hall.
Good to see the populace at large at last rising up against the left’s political oppression. No more passive acceptance of rights destroying leftist bullshit.
No more lies. No more propaganda. No more big government. No more socialism cloaked in the deceit of environmentalism.
Be pro-active.
Stand up to the charlatans and liars and frauds and socialists.
Yep bb, there are sure to be all sorts of things claimed on that one but the DL must be low down the PM priority list, there’s not much NZ can do for him and vice versa. I suspect many people meeting DL do so for the “celebrity” association thing. Can’t see why else from here.
“So small increases in human emissions lead to larger increases in greenhouse gasses which lead to less heat escaping to space and thus a warmer planet.” “Obviously, that last paragraph is one area that the anti-AGW types like to attack.”
Well, yes, because that assumption (on which the AGW enviro-statist religion is based) has already been debunked my MIT propeller-heads Lindzen & Choi. (involving data collected over 20 years).
We can take some comfort in the thought that the melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet would take at least 100 years once it reached that temperature. But it accounts for just 10% of the global ice volume, the other 90% being locked away in the seemingly impermeable heart of Antarctica. Or not: the East Antarctic ice sheet (that’s the big blob that surrounds the South Pole just off-centre) seems to be quite stable, and should remain that way for the next few centuries, but West Antarctica (the peninsula that reaches north toward South America) is not stable at all.
The WAIS (West Antarctic Ice Sheet) is largely below sea level, having over several million years pushed down and scoured out the bedrock beneath it, but because of its huge area, the part of it that is above water still manages to comprise around 10% of the total Antarctic ice volume. If this were to melt then the oceans would rise by another 5 metres, in addition to the thermal expansion of 1.4 metres, plus whatever has been sloughed off the Greenland ice sheet, giving us 13.6 metres, or close to 45 feet. (Is your head still above water? Please check again now.)
“Mob rule no subtitute for democracy”writes Brian Rudman this morn..wtf..what part of exercising our democratic freedom by marching on saturday does he not understand…
There are many people within the media – particularly those who write “columns”, where they’re paid more to interview their word processors than are most journalists who actually research and report the news – who think their place in life is to lecture the masses on what’s “best” for them and berate them when they don’t agree. Similar traits can be found in many members of academia, almost anyone on a quango (e.g. the Law Commission) and absolutely everyone who gets themselves into politics nowadays – even if it’s only by virtue of toadying to a handful of party powerbrokers for a list ranking.
Any attempt to extend power to people not part of the elites is characterised as “mob rule”. Implicit in that description, however, is the assumption that the real majority are in silent agreement with the elites and that the protesters are but a dissatisfied subset of the population rather than a representative sample of it.
Well done for calling him on it, sbk. I hope you write to the Herald (for publication) making that point. Because every time one of these people writes a “we know best” piece it needs to be exposed for what it is, so that people become aware that it is their right to have direct input into their future, not merely a privilege to be granted (and withheld) on a whim through processes such as Select Committees etc.
I suspect many people meeting DL do so for the “celebrity” association thing
I’d say more for the ’stick it to China’ thing. Which is good for warm fuzzies. Key makes a good point that he doesn’t see every religious leader that comes to town, so why this guy – well he’s about the equivalent of the Pope isn’t he? Wouldn’t he see the Pope?
I sent the following to Brian Rudman. It will be interesting if I get a response.
Brian, I am disappointed that the Herald employs a journalist even an advocacy journalist who is incapable of producing a logical argument and has to resort to name calling. You have failed to produce a scrap of evidence that the anti-smacking law has saved one child from serious abuse. All as you can do is call the majority of good parents and grandparents child beaters. I emailed the Herald forum on the topic of Saturday’s march. My comment was not posted despite many posted later being up.
I challenge you to debate this issue on an open forum like the general debate on Kiwiblog or better still call Leighton Smith. I doubt if you will because most bullies are cowards and will only engage if they have an advantage. Bullying does not have to be physical. If the Herald is going to run a campaign of misinformation on the issue of the smacking law they should run the blog fairly and only censor the posts for bad language or defamation.
And it doesn’t seem a smart way to encourage readership by abusing eighty something percent of readers in your article. That approach is not going to change many/any minds.
Good link Angus. More confirmation that the models used by the IPCC are hopelessly inaccurate.
I had a look at the latest alarmist story on http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10610112&pnum=0 which reckons the worst case scenario is now likely. As usual it is predicated on their models:
“Our understanding at the moment in the computer models we have used – and they are state of the art – suggests that carbon-cycle climate feedback has already kicked in,” she said.
“These models, if you project them on into the century, show quite large feedbacks, with climate amplifying global warming by between 5 per cent and 30 per cent. There are still large uncertainties, but this is carbon-cycle climate feedback that has already started,” she said. (She being Professor Corinne Le Quere – member of the Global Carbon Project, set up “to slow the rate of increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”)
Soon there has to be a reconciliation between the alarmist’s models and the observed data, currently they’re on different planets. Thankfully public opinion seems to be tending more towards scepticism that a) climate change is catastrophic and b) that humans have a significant impact on climate change.
@ rightnow “So how many humans were around 15 million years ago contributing to CO2 levels?”
None, so far as we know.
And that’s the point. There were no humans so it wasn’t our concern. The planet has undergone huge transformational periods all on its own, but over huge time spans. Now, in the space of less than 10,000 years, and really mainly since the industrial era, we have set in train the events that will, in the broadest sense, replicate the atmospheric C02 conditions and, more scarily, sea levels of all those years ago. Now it is true that there have been short sharp events in history, but these have been localised rather than global and bear no relation to the current circumstances, so far as I can tell.
A second “well done” to John Key (in the spirit of big bruv’s 3.09pm) – he’s not giving Lucy Lawless and Greenpeace any oxygen, and nor should he. Greenpeace loses any credibility IMHO when its members commit criminal/terrorist acts in the name of publicity.
@rightnow again: this is really weird. You quote a report that proves there is some degree at least of human induced global warming as somehow proving the opposite. The frank statement of the uncertainty range is also good science. The unfortunate fact for you is that as more information than ever comes to hand, we will find the situation is more dire than the minimum 5% scenario.
I guess its just lucky you lot aren’t anywhere near the reins of power. Poor old Rodney’s 3% doesn’t give him much input, thankfully.
And you should have a trawl through the website mentioned in the article. And you guys like good photos: here’s a nice one
Luc, I think the Medieval Warm Period was a global climate event in our recent history. What is significant about this is it was approximately 800 years ago. Significant because increases in atmosperic CO2 concentrations appear to follow global warming periods by approximately 800 years. How about that, I didn’t even have to invest in a state of the art computer model to give you the simplest explanation there is about why CO2 has increased in the atmosphere since the industrial era.
RE Krudman: the man’s always been a whining bleeding-heart piece of dogshit. The fact people complain about Garth George over and over but never say anything about Krudman, along with the rest of the wankers the Huruld sees fit to print, speaks volumes.
Luc, you clearly have misunderstood:
“@rightnow again: this is really weird. You quote a report that proves there is some degree at least of human induced global warming as somehow proving the opposite.”
I quoted a report that makes claims based on a computer model. That is no proof, it is what we commonly refer to as conjecture.
Tell me something Luc, do you believe the ‘hockey stick graph’ to be good science?
You’re wasting your time emailing any of the amoral scum who produce the Herald. They will never engage. They’re cowards, and they’re propagandists and liars without a principle among the lot of them.
They’re Progressives, and they’re on a mission to impose their totalitarian Utopian vision on all of us. To control us. To crush dissent under the jackboot of socialism.
There is only one way to deal with the Herald. Don’t buy it. Don’t advertise in it. Don’t ever buy anything from anyone who advertises in it. Cutting the left’s financial throat is the only way we will ever make progress. Appealing to them as principled human beings is an utter waste of time and effort.
Put the Herald out of business. There is no alternative.
Luc, what point you think anecdotal evidence really proves?
Go on provide us a link to a picture of a polar bear swimming you know you want to.
Do you really think it proves anything when the empirical evidence shows that global temparatures are falling and the radiation escaping into space is increasing
FFS Red, now you are suggesting you force out of business anyone you deem to the left of you. That’ll really make progess. Ah, yeah, you are against anything progressive.
And rightnow, what do you think informs the models? Guesses plucked out of thin air? Or is that thickening air. As I have pointed out before, lots of cool stuff, like trips to the moon, were only ever models before they were actually carried out.
Just look at it like this: what if you are wrong and all the dire consequences currently forecast as worst case scenarios actually came about? Some legacy for your kids and their kids, huh?
Every objection you guys bring up here is readily disproved with a little work, like reading reports which, I know, is boring stuff.
Luc, the models are always dependent on what goes into them, and that is why I have no faith in them. Garbage in garbage out. The garbage going in has as much credibility as the hockey stick graph until it is released for scrutiny.
What if the sceptics are wrong? Well by reducing our carbon emissions by 50% by 2050 (globally, if India and China come on board) then we could make 6% difference to projected temperature rise (a .94 degree rise instead of a 1 degree rise). And it would only cost NZ $100 billion by 2050 to be a part of it.
Just got around to seeing what the fuss is with Rudman’s column. I thought I better read it first.
Great column! Well researched, factually correct: maybe just a tad kind on the poor bastards who can’t control their anger, as we witness here with monotonous repetition.
Get over it guys. Let it go. Move on. Its gone for good!
The hockey stick graph? That seems to be standing the test of time. Here is the final para of Wikipediaarticle:
“In a paper on 9 September 2008, Mann and colleagues published an updated reconstruction of Earth surface temperature for the past two millennia.[63] This reconstruction used a more diverse dataset that was significantly larger than the original tree-ring study. Similarly to the original study, this work found that recent increases in northern hemisphere surface temperature are anomalous relative to at least the past 1300 years, and that this result is robust to the inclusion or exclusion of the tree-ring dataset. In a PNAS response[64], McIntyre and McKitrick made various claims, including that Mann et al. used some data with the axes upside down. Mann et al. in reply say that McIntyre and McKitrick “raise no valid issues regarding our paper” and the “claim that “upside down” data were used is bizarre” [2].”
Bizarre is the best word to describe much of the noise generated here
I understand the recommendation is to reduce by some 85%. It’s obvious that some pretty extensive sticks and carrots are going to be required. Let’s hope we elect governments who will do what needs to be done.
Luc, can’t you do any better than Wikipedia? Mann commenting on his own conclusions (which he already held before he went manufacturing the supporting evidence) is laughable as support for the hockey stick graph. He is a leading IPCC trougher, he depends on AGW alarmism for his sinecure.
Bizarre is the best word to describe your continued masochistic posts showing you’re nothing but a parrot of the IPCC.
“We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”
- Prof. Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports
I’d love to know how many report he authored for the IPCC, and which scientists subsequently based their analysis on his.
Ok found his publications. Prolific! I guess each one needs to be read with a wary eye on whether he’s being effective or honest. I hope the scientists who based their analysis on Prof. Schneider’s publications exercised similar scrutiny. But I doubt it.
I hope red uses this blog as an outlet for his frustration, and when he logs off, he actually remembers how great life can be, a cold beer on a warm summers day, sharing a joke with good mates, wrapped up warm with the significant other etc…..I’d hate to think that he spent 24/7 like he does here. That’s no way to spend our limited life span.
Ah yes, but everything simply serves to reinforce your predetermined beliefs – and I use the term belief deliberately as in: belief n. esp without proof
“So, to be clear on this, are there *any* validated models that show significant deviation of climatic conditions from the consensus predictions regarding the effect of anthropogenic forcings?
[Response: No, there are not. To clairfy though, some deviations are seen in different models, and these may well be 'significant' scientifically, but assuming you are talking about the general sense of the response (at the global scale), all models show very similar behaviour. - gavin]”
So basically all the ‘validated’ models show very similar behaviour. My question is ‘do any of the validated models match empirical evidence’?
Actually the sloppily published report included a discredited version of the hockey-stick which had been clipped from Wikipedia(!). It was then quickly (and quietly) replaced with another.
New subject;
Now here is a guy who climbed a tree, as part of his normal days work and proceeded to cut the branch off lower than where he was apparently standing or sitting. Now naturally he fell out of the tree when the branch collapsed.
He was drug tested and then sacked. But!! the ERA has given him his job back DDUUUUrh??????
What fucking idiots.
Worker who fell out of tree gets job back
Wednesday, 18, Nov, 2009 1:27PM
A Christchurch vegetation worker sacked after falling out of a tree, then testing positive for cannabis use, has won a case to get his job back.
The Employment Relations Authority has ordered Transfield Services to reinstate Stuart McLeod.
That is because under the company’s own policies he should have been referred to a substance abuse professional for an assessment, before he could be fired.
The ERA has acknowledged there is nothing wrong with Transfield’s safety policies. It says Mr McLeod’s five metre fall at work was solely because of his own carelessness in cutting the tree . . . below where he was attached to it.
But it says Transfield did not do an assessment to find out if Mr McLeod’s claim of infrequent drug use was true, and in dismissing him presumed unfairly that his dope smoking led directly to the accident.
….the “claim that “upside down” data were used is bizarre”..
Luc needs to be a little less trusting of arguments from authority – although that is rather a left-wing characteristic. The following transcript is from an interview with one Dr Atte Korhola in a recent Finnish news program.
Dr. Korhola is professor of environmental change at the University of Helsinki, and an expert in lake sediment studies – which form one of the proxy sources for Mann – and he has this to say:
Atte Korhola:
“Some curves and data have been used upside down, and this is not a compliment to climate science. And in this context it is relevant to note that the same people who are behind this are running what may be the world’s most influential climate website, RealClimate.
With this they are contributing to the credibility of science – or reducing it. And in my opinion this is alarming because it bears on the credibility of the field, and if these kinds of things emerge often – that data have been used insufficiently or even falsely, or if data series have been truncated or they have not been appropriately published (for replication), it obviously erodes the credibility, and this is a serious problem.”
VO: The author of the September study, Darrell Kaufman, admitted his mistake two weeks ago and sent a correction to the journal Science. But the main author of a previous study, Michael Mann, the father of the original hockey stick, still sticks to the claim that a hockey stick was found at the bottom of lake Korttajärvi.
This would hardly be the first time that Mann and co. have screwed up on statistics. Mann was of course, replaced as the lead author for the IPCC paleoclimate reconstructions after the shit hit the fan in the original hockey stick. After McKitrick and McIntyre pointed out some problems with that anaysis, the US Congress Energy and Commerce Committee called on Dr Edward Wegan to look at it. He also consulted outside statisticians, including the Board of the American Statistical Association. When he was does he had this to say about the analysis in particular:
“Our committee believes that the assessments that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade in a millennium and that 1998 was the hottest year in a millennium cannot be supported,”
Data can be fixed up of course and mistakes corrected. But what got my attention were these two statements from Dr Wegman:
“The paucity of data in the more remote past makes the hottest-in-a-millennium claims essentially unverifiable.”
and one on Mann making a basic error that:
“may be easily overlooked by someone not trained in statistical methodology. We note that there is no evidence that Dr. Mann or any of the other authors in paleoclimate studies have had significant interactions with mainstream statisticians.”
Perhaps a course in remedial stats would help – I’m sure Dr Wegman would not mind – though I’m not sure if Dr Mann’s ego could take it.
But the problem goes a lot wider than the RealClimate guys. Here’s what Wegman had to say about the broader climate-change and meteorological community, which relies so much on statistical techniques in their studies:
“there are a host of fundamental statistical questions that beg answers in understanding climate dynamics.”
Which is a nice way of saying that although the studies may have been peer reviewed, the reviewers were often unqualified in statistics, which are rather the centrepiece of all this stuff when trying to link cause and effect. Wegman recommended that:
“[I]f statistical methods are being used, then statisticians ought to be funded partners engaged in the research to insure as best we possibly can that the best quality science is being done,”
He figured that one place to start would be with the American Meteorological Society, which has a committee on probability and statistics:
“I believe it is amazing for a committee whose focus is on statistics and probability that of the nine members only two are also members of the American Statistical Association, the premier statistical association in the United States, and one of those is a recent PhD with an assistant-professor appointment in a medical school.”
He also cited the rather amusing fact that the American Meteorological Association’s 2006 Conference on Probability and Statistics in the Atmospheric Sciences, had only eight presenters out of 62 who were members of the American Statistical Association!!!
Large, complex field this AGW. Best to stick to one’s finely focused specialities – and to seek help in those areas where one is not a specialist.
Sounds like an unqualified denier to me! Dr. Edward Wegman is a professor at the Center for Computational Statistics at George Mason University, chair of the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, and board member of the American Statistical Association. He received his Ph.D. degree in mathematical statistics from the University of Iowa. In 1978, he went to the Office of Naval Research, where he headed the Mathematical Sciences Division with responsibility Navy-wide for basic research programs. He coined the phrase computational statistics, and developed a high-profile research area around this concept, which focused on techniques and methodologies that could not be achieved without the capabilities of modern computing resources and led to a revolution in contemporary statistical graphics. Dr. Wegman was the original program director of the basic research program in Ultra High Speed Computing at the Strategic Defense Initiative’s Innovative Science and Technology Office. He has served as editor or associate editor of numerous prestigious journals and has published more than 160 papers and eight books.
What did Pete George/Cerium say the other day? Scientists. Peer reviewed. Supported by observations.
You’re wasting your time emailing any of the amoral scum who produce the Herald. They will never engage. They’re cowards, and they’re
propagandists and liars without a principle among the lot of them.
How do you know they won’t engage?
…..
…..
The Editor
New Zealand Herald
Auckland
Dear Sir,
You’re all lying amoral moronic progressive propagandist scum. Every last one of you. You’re on a vile treacherous mission to impose a totalitarian utopia and crush us under your socialist jackboot. But we’re onto you. You are slime. You will not rest a slimy rest until you’ve completed your evil and vile mission. How can you sleep at night? No doubt in a leftist swamp-bed furnished by your cowardly communist overlords.
You have not a skerrick of honour and are a disgrace to the fine tradition of traditional tradition media. You’re deceitful dumb elitist cunning mainstream and all wankers. I never buy your filthy paper or read your filthy lies. And if I did I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t even eat fish and chips off your mindless moronic lies and deceit. Your bottomless chasm of socialist totalitarian bile.
Could you please reply and address the points I have made at your earliest convenience? You cowardly craven communist morons.
Yours Sincerely,
Anonymous
1 RedBaiter Lane
RedBaiterville
RedBaiterLand
Hey mal “Kirsty” is a good story for the Herald, just ask fugley! Checkmate lefty sewer scum.
Come on lefty filth answer the question.
Sorry Dad4justice, I have absolutely no idea what you’re on about. Can you explain your cryptic comment? What was your question?
It’s so partisan around here. I have no association with Billyborker. I didn’t write my last comment for his benefit, although I’m glad it gave him some small joy on this lovely evening. Whoever he is. I suspect he harbours funny economic ideas about wealth sharing and slices-of-fixed-sized-pies etc which would make me laugh.
I’m starting to agree starboard, it seems a bit pointless, no one seems interested in considering alternate views. Just buy some gumboots and forget it.
So what else is there? Israeli settlements are a snub to the US. But anything on the US is only passing interest, we’ll only be distant observers there.
Why does it have to be “sides” Tom? Dalai Lama, yeah, riveting.
Be daring, look outside your comfort zone.
Why do some of those on the right blame everything on “the left”? Seems a bit stupid to me.
“I’m waiting for Dad4justice to get his enigma machine out and decode his last message.”
Billy Borker / Fugley / MyNameIsJack likes to imply that D4J is the killer of Ashburton teenager Kirsty Bentley in 1999, as D4J lives south of Christchurch. Billy even assumes the name of D4J’s daughter on occasions too. A real charmer for sure.
Quote of the day
Key on Radio NZ this morning.
Quote:
“Look, who knows what the price of carbon will be tomorrow, next week or in twenty years time. We just don’t know”.
Quote:
“They are wrong. They can’t tell what the deficit will be in December so how do they know what carbon prices will be in 2030 or 2040?”
Inspires confidence in both Treasury and the PM doesn’t it.
starboard, care to explain why you hold such a low opinion of my idealogy, as evidenced by your response in the previous general debate?
Please point out exactly which you have issue with and why
a) Complete overhaul of the welfare system with proper investigation into corruption/fraud by benefeciries/WINZ
b) Removal of MMP/ETS/WFF/(insert socialist oppression vehicle)
c) Criminal investigation of the past and present political parties, namely Labour and Green, with emphasis on conflicts of interest within the hierarchy
d) Societal condemnation of abusive and negligent parents
e) Death penalty for murder and treason, with a clause that allow for extensive toture of the condemned, at the request of the family of the victim
f) Longer, harsher sentences for crimes with victims, all across the board
g) Proper application of manslaughter
“Aren’t you just a little bit flattered Red to have malcolm obsessing over you ?”
The novelty of Progressives obsessing was something I grew tired of some years ago Angus. They’ve always been out there. Mad Mal is just the latest manifestation of RDS (Redbaiter Derangement Syndrome). Just as boring, self obsessed and desperate as all of the others. Yawn…
Billy Borker / Fugley / MyNameIsJack likes to imply that D4J is the killer of Ashburton teenager Kirsty Bentley in 1999, as D4J lives south of Christchurch. Billy even assumes the name of D4J’s daughter on occasions too. A real charmer for sure.
I see. Thanks, I didn’t know that. A very low and scummy thing to do. Billyborker / Fugley? / MyNameIsJack, is that true?
What does it take to ban philu? He is a parasite at Kiwiblog.
He’s actually a character, Swiftman. I like him.
No man is an island. entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were; any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
DPF states his objection to the death penalty is his belief that it is hypocritical of the state to take lives whilst outlawing the very same thing. This is elementary grade thinking, to equate cold blooded murder, with execution as a means of protecting society, deterrence and relief on the tax payer.
In my opinion, the toture clause, would be a perfect means of detterance, out of pure fear, fear is the only thing that scum respond to, they dont care about rule books and comfy prisons, you have to beat them at their own game to prevail.
It would also be greatly satisfying to people who, like myself, would love to personally toture and beat to death anyone found guilty, beyond doubt, of murder of a close loved one.
Well, that you have frequently sought such a lowlife out as a friend just could be validation of the old adage that ‘you can tell a man by the company he keeps’.
…when the fuck are the nats going to do something about the dpb lifestylers…govt are quick to jump on joe average and tax the shit out of them…..how about focusing on the takers for once…take note whore…Im talkin about you and your filthy ilk…
Well, that you have frequently sought such a lowlife out as a friend just could be validation of the old adage that ‘you can tell a man by the company he keeps’.
I’ve never conversed or responded to anything Billyborker has written. And I’ve only just realised that apparently he is the same person as Fugley (who I’ve never seen on here) and MyNameIsJack. And I’ve never talked to him either. I wouldn’t know him from a bar of soap.
IIRC most of what Billyborker/MyNameIsJack writes is utter rubbish and I put it into the Philu category (i.e. I mostly skip it). And if what Angus says is true then I think he’s a nasty creep.
I’m sure you’d agree RedBaiter, there’s a difference between a bit of fun and a bit of scum.
“And it’s also a bit stink trying to associate me with him/it.”
Get off the grass. You commie bastards are all tarred with the exact same brush, There is not a principle or a moral or a standard amongst the lot of you. We on the right know that. We’ve been dealing with you scum for years, and we know exactly what you are capable of, what you will do if you think it is warranted, and what inhuman amoral thugs you always are. Don’t come the raw prawn with me Pete. You’re all cast in the same Progressive mould. There is not a line you will not cross. You have no moral boundaries. None at all.
Baiter is a good example of the genuine frustration and lack of trust inherent in our people, the blame obviously lies with the anti-capitalist/freedom movement.
My previous post should say “anti capitalist / anti freedom movement”
As for starboard, your beliefs are admirable, however you leave me confused as to the intention behind your previous post asserting that im a “tosser”
Regardless, water under the bridge, those who uphold core values like personal responsibility and morality must stick together, anything but is only giving power to the troughers
In response to my post condemning the woman who so kindly swore at me for suggesting she keep an eye on her near-infant child wandering the street behind her.
Pete, you’re just a boring fuckwit. Over the ten years I have been writing on the internet, I’ve had the same things you say, exactly the same things, said by legions like you. It cuts no ice. I continue to win. You lose. You have no argument. I see the sand drifting away from under your feet, as every year your ideology grows more and more unpopular, and you become fewer and fewer. The only thing that changes is the degree of desperation you display.
You only have the same old same old. Cliched outrage and attempts at ridicule and personal destruction. You’re so fucken dumb you cannot even see its strategy that’s reached the end of its useful life years ago. Keep it up tho. I enjoy seeing you losers and your fumbling ineptitude when it comes to rationality and poilitcal discourse. It helps signal how right I am. You’re all such predictable stupid one dimensional brain damaged dumbfucks.
ah yes I remember…well for one..if child gets run over tough titties..the parent should have been watching…its no business of yours and if you yelled and frothed at me I would have told you to get fucked … your view on asians bothered me…I like asians..they are generally good people and your rantings offended me…and your name is Tan !! ??
Over the ten years I have been writing on the internet,
I see the sand drifting away from under your feet
The only thing that changes is the degree of desperation you display.
Cliched outrage and attempts at ridicule and personal destruction.
You’re such predictable stupid one dimensional
You’ve achieved what in ten years? Same old same old. Won what? Life isn’t a win or lose game, until we all lose.
I’m not desperate for anything. I don’t desperately hope someone else will do my dirty work and take over the country.
Life’s ok for me. Country’s ok for me. Government’s ok(ish) for me.
What’s stupid about having what you want? Better than wishing for what you can’t have.
I think you misintepreted my post, and i cannot blame you as i believe it was poorly worded, as i was frustrated at the time
It was not meant to be an attack on all asians, just on asians who are negligent of the safety of their children, and too damned arrogant to accept that they are putting their children in grave danger.
I singled out asians incorrectly, because parents of all ethnicities fall under the umbrella of child neglect.
The fact remains that almost every instance where i have observed a child literally risking his/her life because of the neglect/non attention of their so called parents, that child is of asian decent. I accept that it is possible that this is more to do with the demographic of the area in which i reside.
I disagree with you that it is none of my business, because witnessing a child being gravely neglected is equal or arguably even more serious to witnessing a woman being raped, or a man being beaten to death. In all instances i would get personally involved, whether it be aggresively in the form of direct assistance or passively by notifying police / notifying the irreponsible parent that their behaviour is unacceptable.
How many hundred posts do you make here a week? You’re as desperate as every other scumbag leftist, panicking and prevaricating and lying and obfuscating and ducking and diving as they feel the heat of truth. You’re on your way out you political troglodyte. Get used to it.
In what amounts to a victory for Phill Goff & co , our democracy has eroded to the point where i feel uncomfortable voicing my opinion directly and transparently.
I see the thread has deteriorated into its usual noise and filth while I have been out and about. You guys really should grow up. Mike, what sort of credibility do you think you have with gormless questions like that.
And just to show he is not perfect either here is an extract
“In 2001, Lindzen published a paper speculating that as the Earth warmed, water vapor would decrease in the upper atmosphere, allowing heat to escape back into space more efficiently, and thereby reducing overall temperature.
The paper met with vigorous criticism. Eventually, he disavowed the idea. “That was an old view,” Lindzen said about his five-year-old hypothesis. “I find it insane that I am still forced to explain this.”
and another which shows how that guy is perhaps just an attention seeker
“Despite Lindzen’s acknowledgment that the planet is warming, most of his writing in the media and for various think tanks is spun to imply a far more fundamental disagreement within the scientific community. His most recent Wall Street Journal editorial, for example, includes admissions that the Earth has warmed over the last century, that humans are influencing the climate, that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that its levels continue to rise. The editorial’s title was, “There Is No ‘Consensus’ On Global Warming.”
Now no more on global warming tonight from me. But I will respond tomorrow to whatever follows. I must say GB is turning into a wonderful research tool for the contrary arguments and it may be worthwhile doing a bit of a paper on it and submitting it for publication somewhere. Maybe the Herald, since according to some here it has turned from fundamentalist conservatism into trendy leftie land.
I could title it, lets see, ” The Call of the Wild”?
What’s stupid about having what you want? Better than wishing for what you can’t have.
Absolutely! That’s the key to being content, and contentment leads to happiness. Yearning after what you don’t have (but apparently need) is the feeling advertising is designed to activate, and this tends to drive happiness away. I’m an economic rightie, but even I can see that rampant consumerism is the source of plenty of misery as the clever convince the gullible to hand their money over.
I do not “advocate” for extreme toture of prisonors, that is a world apart from my suggestion that the option be given exclusively to the family of the innocent victims of henious brutal murderers that you people so passionatley defend and champion
Pete – re 2012. Check out this – Worldshift 2010, by Dr Ervin Laszlo, Founder and President of The Club of Budapest, Author of WorldShift 2012: Making Green Business, New Politics & Higher Consciousness Work Together.
The window of opportunity for shifting our current path and breaking through to a peaceful
and sustainable world may be no more than a few years from now. This timeline coincides
with the many forecasts and prophecies that speak of the ending of the current cycle of
human life on this planet, and the possible dawning of a new consciousness, by the end of
the year 2012.
poor old d4j was once besotted by a young woman by the name of Kirsty, last name I will not reveal, but it wasn’t Bentley. Anyhoo, I can’t blame him for being besotted, she was a charmer, attractive, intelligent, athletic and going places. Sadly for d4j, she chose to go those places with me, and the pooor old sould has never quite gotten over the heartbreak of losing her to me.
Stop your lying you sick fucken up scumbag!
Your internet lies are a credit to the putrid and depraved lefty sewer rats!!
I have NEVER lost anything to such a cowardly creep as you fugley. Police will catch you in time!
The IPCC assumes CO2 concentration will reach 836 ppmv by 2100, but, for almost eight years, CO2 concentration has headed straight for only 570 ppmv by 2100. This alone halves all of the IPCC’s temperature projections. Pages 5-6.
Since 1980 temperature has risen at only 2.5 °F (1.5 °C)/century, not the 7 F° (3.9 C°) the IPCC imagines. Pages 7-9.
Sea level rose just 8 inches in the 20th century and has been rising at just 1 ft/century since 1993. Sea level has scarcely risen since 2006. Also, Pacific atolls are not being drowned by the sea, as some have suggested. Pages 10-12.
Arctic sea-ice extent is about the same as it has been at this time of year in the past decade. In the Antarctic, sea ice extent – on a 30-year rising trend – reached a record high in 2007. Global sea ice extent shows little trend for 30 years. Pages 13-15.
Hurricane and tropical-cyclone activity is at its lowest since satellite measurement began. Page 16.
Solar activity has declined again, after a large sunspot earlier in the month. The Sun is still very quiet. Pages 17-18.
Science Focus this month studies the effect of the Sun on the formation of clouds. IT’S THE SUN, STUPID! Pages 22-23.
As always, there’s our “global warming” ready reckoner, and our monthly selection of scientific papers. Pages 24-27.
And finally, a Technical Note explains how we compile our state-of-the-art CO2 and temperature graphs. Page 28.
“I have NEVER lost anything to such a cowardly creep as you fugley. Police will catch you in time!”
Maybe I should give you his name D4J, and the address on Main Street, Oxford, North Canterbury he lives. Then you can go and smash his face in, in person.
SPPI is funded by tobacco and oil interests. It’s junk science.
The US is rated the 19th most corrupt country in the world, according to a new report. That’s just gotta be crap. The place reeks of corruption. and the SPPI is but one example. The US Supreme Court even split down strictly party lines to decide a president!
Look above for my earlier posts on the Arctic and Antartica.
That peer reviewed scientific data . . .
Yeah.
Ok.
Sure.
*roll eyes*
Whatever.
If you want to garner even some form of credibility on this site, desist with the platitudinous white-liberal-guilt-progressive-minded talking points.
( As if your revisionist take on Islam & the Crusades isn’t a strong enough emetic)
I agree with some of Lazlo’s ideas but not others – especially not ends/starts of ages and cycles and target dates for great or terrible things. Time is an ongoing thing, sure there are cycles but our (or Mayan) calendars are meaningless with nature.
Note in the Mayan link:
Mainstream Mayanist scholars argue that the idea that the Long Count calendar “ends” in 2012 misrepresents Maya history. To the modern Maya, 2012 is largely irrelevant
To me 2012 is just another spin around the sun, no one can predict what good or bad or ordinary things may happen in that particular year or any other year. Event predictions have been totally unreliable. No one can foretell the future.
No one in mainstream climate science is predicting any year for anything specific for effects of climate change, it’s all just a bunch of possibilities and probabilities. There are certain things, the climate will fluctuate, there will be storms and droughts and floods. If there are significant climate changes for any reason it could be sudden or gradual, sooner or later, no one knows for certain.
revisionist history has a long and proud history, dating all the back to perhaps 700BC – the time period of the earliest tracts of that wonderful work of historical accuracy, the Bible.
I don’t claim t be the font of all knowledge. I enjoy valid objections and concede when I have clearly mispoke or simply have been proved factually incorrect. Credibility is neither here nor there amongst a bunch of anonymous ranters to cowardly to put their names up for all to see.
And it doesn’t take a lot to find that all the objections raised by the AGW deniers are dealt with in the high profile works like the IPCC reports and those of majr institutions like the NOAA and NASA (and whose works are often distorted and misrepresented).
What puzzles me more is the psychology behind this line of thinking. A seeming willingness to strum a ukulele while the storm clouds gather.
Hurf: And as far as the corruption chart goes, I would say the US is kindly dealt with because the worst corruption there is the legalised corruption by which members of the Houses of Congress raise their funds. But that’s just an opinion.
And it doesn’t take a lot to find that all the objections raised by the AGW deniers are dealt with in the high profile works like the IPCC reports and those of majr institutions like the NOAA and NASA (and whose works are often distorted and misrepresented).
So do you deny that Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC said: “Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.”
Against that backdrop if you choose to blindly accept anything emanating from the IPCC, despite evidence of data tampering, selective data-set adoption and other junk-science activities then you are a fool.
Given your quote from Schneider above I thought you might enjoy this (hat tip: Not PC). May favourites were all the ones where he goes on about global cooling, back in 1978, before his big career change, he declared
“There is a finite possibility that a serious worldwide cooling could befall the Earth within the next 100 years.”…….
and
“….our calculations suggest a decrease in global temperature by as much as 3.5 degrees Celsius. Such a large decrease in the average temperature of Earth, sustained over a period of a few years, is believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”
Not PC has a hilarious list of “when we were cooling” vs “when we were warming” quotes from him. The common theme is apocalyptic. Of course it’s not surprising when you read this comment from him:
Looking at every bump and wiggle of the record is a waste of time – it’s like trying to figure out the probability of a pair of dice by looking at the individual rolls. You’ve got to look at averages. So, I don’t set very much store in looking at the direct evidence.
Classic stuff – looks like he needs a remedial stats course from Wegman as well! You’ll note that the question that Julian Simon asked in general is never asked by the warmists:
Does this sort of person ever stop and ask himself such questions as: Why should anyone believe me now if I was so wrong then? Would it have been a good thing if I had then been more effective in getting the public’s attention? What about if I had stretched the truth then as I now advocate doing – would that have been a good thing?
November 18th, 2009 at 8:01 am
Reposted from last night’s GD, as this is important. Anyone who still believes that Global Warming is about temperature or climate has rocks in their heads. Read on …
Ever heard of theClub of Rome?
The great prophet Algore (All credits be to him)™ is a member, along with 99 other notables including Maurice Strong – former Head of the UN Environment Programme, Mikhail Gorbachevm, Anne Ehrlich – Population Biologist, Sir Crispin Tickell – Chairman of the ‘Gaia Society’, The Dalai Lama, Stephen Schneider – Stanford Professor of Biology and Global Change. Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents of man-made global warming and a lead author of many IPCC reports, Bill Gate, Bill Clinton and others.
Look at this from their 1972 book entitled Limits to Growth:
So the Club Of Rome folks are not flakes. They are heavy hitters, and back in 1972 they were openly promoting the idea that conjuring up threats and fears would help them bring about change to our global governance.
Concerned? Yes, I think we should be.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:16 am
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/simple-living-for-the-environment-is-for-suckers/
November 18th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Only 8:23 and General Debate buggered already.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Surely it is way past time to ban phool. He has hijacked the general debate threads for months now.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Hmmm. Looks like phil drank the bong water AND snorted the Ajax last night.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:26 am
You’re here – there’s still hope.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:26 am
Um, yes, it is hardly a revelation that one of our biggest enemies is ourselves. Overpolluting, overpopulating, growth of anything can never be perpetual. So something has to be done or something has to give.
Linking this to global governance is weird. If we continue stuffing the planet it is likely to result in more competition for resources, conflict, potentially massive migration – this is unlikely to be conducive to single rule, probably the reverse.
Anything that get’s bigger and more powerful outgrows it’s capabilities.
The US, as the most powerful nation on earth, can’t even tidy up one backward country, and have fermented more potential problems than they have solved. And they have enough of their own problems anyway, with corrupt overpowerful (and vulnerable) financial and and political systems.
Is this world government going to be a combination of the myriad so-called enemies? The Progressive Muslim Socialist (are Jews still bogeymen?) Climate Change Industrial Military Complex?
And the UN can’t even sort out Somalia!
November 18th, 2009 at 8:27 am
Oh look it’s mal and petey from PC Swampland.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:28 am
# Redbaiter (7842) November 18th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Only 8:23 and General Debate buggered already.
Your exact words.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:36 am
A serious WTF after viewing this powerpoint presentation by Nidal Malik Hasan to senior Army doctors in June 2007.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:42 am
What does it take to ban philu?
He is a parasite at Kiwiblog.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:48 am
“..# Redbaiter (7842) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 1 Says:
November 18th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Only 8:23 and General Debate buggered already.
..”
that’s a bit rough on old stuffed..?..there red..
i know his comment is yet another of his repeat-comments..(from ysterdays gen-thread)
(why does ol’ stuffed do that..?..does anyone know..?..)
but ‘buggerered’..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 8:48 am
He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone….
November 18th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Pete: You cast it as soon as you opened your trolling trap.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Morning folks, what bettter way to start the day than to have a good chuckle at some of these crazy , communist, nutters
It is to be noted that the likes of philu, luc , pete, greenparty, labour party and national party, are arguably even more nutty than the following people, for the simple reason that they conceal their true agenda.
Paul Ehrlich – Author of the The Population Bomb (1968) Stanford University Biologist and Advisor to Al Gore
“The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines. Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. Population control is the only answer”
“I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”
“In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.” (1970)
“We already have too much economic growth in the United States. Economic growth in rich countries like ours is the disease, not the cure.”
John Davis
editor of Earth First! Journal
“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
“I suspect that eradicating small pox was wrong. It played an important part in balancing ecosystems.”
Judi Barri
Earth First
“I think if we don’t overthrow capitalism, we don’t have a chance of saving the world ecologically. I think it is possible to have an ecological society under socialism. I don’t think it’s possible under capitalism.”
David Brower
Friends of the Earth
“Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license…. All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.”
Keith Boulding
originator of the “Spaceship Earth” concept
“The right to have children should be a marketable commodity, bought and traded by individuals but absolutely limited by the state.”
Richard Benedict
an employee for the State Department working on assignment for the Conservation Foundation
“A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.”
Carl Amery
left wing nutter
“We, in the green movement, aspire to a cultural model in which killing a forest will be considered more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of 6-year-old children to Asian brothels.”
Lamont Cole
left wing nutter
“To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.”
Lyall Watson
The Financial Times, 15 July 1995
Cannibalism is a “radical but realistic solution to the problem of overpopulation.”
Pentti Linkola
“Everything we have developed over the last 100 years should be destroyed.”
http://www.peopleforglobalwarming.com/Stupid_Quotes.htm
November 18th, 2009 at 8:57 am
senzazine tries to make basic-sense..
fails..
again..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:00 am
A real three ring circus, phool and two other assholes.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:00 am
Mike, they’re not all commies ..
- Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, patron of the World Wildlife Fund
November 18th, 2009 at 9:01 am
oh look..!..it’s that ’strange’ tan..!
the greenie who became an actite/virulent anti-green..
y’know what tan..?
i reckon you always were an actite..
and were ‘pretending green’..
as an intelligence gathering exercise..
and your ‘conversion’..
was just playing with your ‘outing’..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:05 am
will you be playing ‘dress-ups’ today..?..
or is it only on weekends.
muzza..?
(psst..!..he’s really into middle-ages drag..
when men wore flowing robes..and it was ‘ok’..)
you yearn for those ‘free-er-times’..
don’t you muzza..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:06 am
I think you must have scored some pretty strong stuff philu, i think you are confusing me with another person because i am not a trougher commie nor have i ever been.
Admittedly, i am partially to the left of some right wingers because i do recognise the need for there to be a welfare safety-net, but it needs to be just that, a safety-net of last resort.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:07 am
d4j, Swiftman, Murray, has it not occurred to you that it might improve if you contributed something interesting rather than joining the whine club?
November 18th, 2009 at 9:08 am
come on philu, you are the equivalent of a glass window , we see right through you, if only you had any shred of dignity, i could say that you are supressing it by hiding behind your dogma.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:11 am
It is to be noted that philu is attacking me in response to my publishing of those legitimate, authentic quotes from significant people who are part of his “movement*”
By attacking me in response to publishing those quotes, you are defending those people*, once again exposing your extremist idealogy
* the ugly face of communism masked behind lies and scare tactics
* term people is used loosely
November 18th, 2009 at 9:14 am
“..if only you had any shred of dignity, i could say that you are supressing it by hiding behind your dogma..”
tan tries to make basic sense..
fails..
again..
(i withdraw and apologise on the mistaken i.d.thing..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:16 am
fond of a cliche/slogan..are you tan..?
saves the need to think..eh..?
and good to ‘hide behind’..eh..?
why..!..you could even pretend to be a ‘thinker’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:17 am
“..d4j, Swiftman, Murray, has it not occurred to you that it might improve if you contributed something interesting rather than joining the whine club?..”
dream on.!..
tiger..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Something positive – NZ judged the least corrupt country.
The score is based on perceptions of the degree of corruption as seen by business people and country analysts.
http://www.transparency.org/news_room/latest_news/press_releases/2009/2009_11_17_cpi2009_en
(TI is largely funded by Western governments, and has been accused of biased activities as a result. It has also been accused of lack of transparency in its own activities.)
Still good publicity for NZ.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Swiftman
No, no, lets not try and ban the phool
His innane rantings do provide us more intelligent mortals with humour
Further, it makes us feel good about ourselves that we are not lazy, drug crazed, envious and hateful individuals
Even further, he provides us with a comparable model that shows that the fruits of our labour are worthwhile
Thank f— I am me!
November 18th, 2009 at 9:28 am
http://www.digimonster.co.nz has launched, great deals for Kiwiblog readers! If there is something you like, flick us an email and we will bring down our already great prices.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:28 am
I didn’t read his initial post, or any of his other posts for that matter so will take your word for it.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:30 am
At 8.23 exactly.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:30 am
he is unwillingly doing a service to the sane-people by being a living model of the true lack of competency , maturity and responsibility among the labour voters
transparency.org is itself corrupt, designed to create the illusion of a corruption free government, causing the masses to hand over their liberties in the name of environmentalism. Unfortunatley up until now its been the equivalent of taking candy from children..
November 18th, 2009 at 9:30 am
http://awesternheart.blogspot.com/2009/11/five-terrible-cruelties-of-liberalism.html
A must read (except for philu as it’s WAY over his head)
Hat-tip to crusader rabbit
November 18th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Philu, you mean Shaun/Shawn Tan.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:38 am
6785 sarcastic posts Philu and not a solution among them
I used to enjoy to GD but find little in them anymore
November 18th, 2009 at 9:39 am
When are you going to flush the turd stinking up your blog David?
November 18th, 2009 at 9:43 am
I’ve no doubt that plenty of these idiots still hunger for a world government simply because they cannot stand the messy business of letting ordinary people get on with their lives and making their own decisions. Many scientists in particular have long held democratic capitalism in contempt because it just does not fit with their beautiful world of rational equations.
But it may also have something to do with how they make their living. I recall reading a long-ago article that pointed out that most physicists had a socialist bent, whereas most genetic biologists had a capitalist focus, and that the reason likely had to do with the fact that most physicists were dependent on government funding (either directly or indirectly) as opposed to the constant involvement of the latter with venture capitalists and the like in creating start-up companies.
So this constant pushing of many scientists towards government solutions is more a product of their particular environment than any conspiracy. Apart from anything else I’ve always thought conspiracies were the product of a small number of scheming people, whereas this is more like the group behaviour so well examined in Mackay’s book, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Considering the bilious hatred of our society expressed in the quotes above, I’m thinking less of the chapters on economic bubbles than the ones on Witch trials.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:47 am
this is an example of the intellectual rigor in the link posted by swifty..
(this wingnuts presecription-for-africa:..)
“..What liberalism does to Africa: Liberalism’s smothering paternalism has arguably done considerably more damage to Africa than European colonialism. “The Western world has given Africa ‘about a trillion dollars in aid in the past 50 years’ and yet as a whole, the continent could be fairly said to have gone backwards over the last 10-15 years.” Obviously our aid is doing little for Africa, but we can’t stop, even if it would be better for them to learn to stand on their own two feet, because liberalism says it’s better to ruin millions of lives than to risk making liberals feel bad..”
i didn’t bother reading any more..
why would you..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:50 am
“..When are you going to flush the turd stinking up your blog David?..”
muzza waxes lyrical/shows his literary-bent..
(muzza..!..why don’t you tell us why you like playing dress-ups in middle-ages drag..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:51 am
Menawhile Tim Murphy is on a hiding to nothing.
http://asianinvasion2006.blogspot.com/
November 18th, 2009 at 9:53 am
On a lighter note, did anyone else notice this unfortunately worded headline on STUFF?
“Family of woman tied up defend rest home”
Where is comma man when you need him???
Gosh, the lengths that these rest homes will go to to get their defence sorted. HEH (insert winking smiley thing here if you are blog-literate)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Ha, so Jim Salinger and Lucy Lawless want to pay for Key to go to Copenhagen. I doubt they see the irony of sending thousands of people flying around the world to discuss reducing carbon emissions.
Key may be moving slowly but the momentum is tending in the right direction. I understand this year is the discovery and planning stage, and next year will see far more action, at least in terms of domestic affairs like reducing government waste and tightening up benefits. I just hope he grows a real pair on the AGW issue and keeps us out of Copenhagen.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Pete George (2117) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 1 Says:
November 18th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Something positive – NZ judged the least corrupt country. …
Pete, I saw that too and I was trying to think, where did we stand on the rankings when Labour were in government?
November 18th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Hey phool if you can produce a picture of me in “middle-ages drag” I’ll give you a thousand dollars. Till then I maintain the right to call you a lying peice crap.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:10 am
Won’t happen. Key needs this, and attending now isn’t essential. Copenhagen is likely to fizz and he’ll steer clear. For now. But he knows that $110b in lost revenue isn’t good for NZ, so the question is why is he so determined? Does he imagine NZ’s ETS subservience expediting his joining the global elite in the Club of Rome? Does he have other commercial interests (eg Bank Of America) that may profit from increased carbon trading? Who knows.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:16 am
I have to say getstaffed that the signs recently haven’t been good. I keep thinking soon Key and Smith are going to stand up on their hind legs, brush the wool away from their eyes and demand absolute proof that CO2 emissions are causing global warming. I don’t know about Smith, but I am pretty sure Key doesn’t buy the bullshit, he’s just playing the long game at the moment.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Corruption index history:
2009 – 9.4 (1st)
2008 – 9.3 (1st equal)
2007 – 9.4 (1st equal)
2006 – 9.6 (1st equal)
2005 – 9.6 (2nd equal, Iceland f1st)
2004 – 9.6 (2nd, Finland 1st)
2003 – 9.5 (3rd equal, Finland 1, Iceland 2)
2002 – 9.5 (2nd equal, Finland 1st)
2001 – 9.4 (3rd, Finland 1, Denmark 2)
November 18th, 2009 at 10:28 am
Philu: You have gone too phar!
Phlease phuck off phor a phwile.
GD depherately needs pheace for its pheriodic dephilustrating.
Put the last string of phull stops to your endless, disjointed philippics.
Get out into the phresh air. Pheel the breeze. Phorget us for phwee phqile.
Toodaloo.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Cha, giving up at slide 27. definitely sounds like a recruitment drive.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:40 am
“..Hey phool if you can produce a picture of me in “middle-ages drag” “..
are you saying ..muzza..you don’t get dressed up in ‘flowing gowns/robes/’slips’/costumes/stockings/w.h.y..
.. from the middle ages..?
i thought you had to wear them to play with yr trebuct.(?)
(to get ‘in the mood’..as it were..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 10:41 am
“but I am pretty sure Key doesn’t buy the bullshit, he’s just playing the long game at the moment.”
I’d like to share your optimism, but cannot. Unless proven wrong, Key and the incompetent Smith will pass this absurd piece of legislation, which will send NZ down the Third World path.
Why the rush? Why the urgency? Why the secrecy in dealing with Maori?
Key should be ashamed of Smith’s behaviour (unless he condones it) and should take decisive corrective action. Will he?
November 18th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Philuistine….. go back to your treasured bong.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:57 am
@Pete:
I’m sorry; this is a right-wing blog and the adulteress story is inconsistent with conservative principles. You’ll have to come up with something better.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:58 am
I would’ve thought that when Hassans superiors became aware of the contents of his presentation and the views that he expressed he’d be out so quickly his feet wouldn’t touch the ground.
But it’s also likely that they were maneuvering to get him “retired”. No promotions and bad performance reviews along with an assignment at Fort Hood where there would be other psychologists to take up slack as he was eased out of the way.
btw, slide 20 or 21 mentions Jinn as one of Allahs creations so not knowing what a Jinn was I googled and the result is another WTF.
Question 10: Can human beings and jinn inter-marry?
Yes and no. It depends upon how one looks at it. It is a known fact in the Qur’an in Surah Al-Israa’ (17:64) that jinn may share with us our wealth and our children. The Hadith of the Prophet (pbuh) reconfirms this concept when he says that when a man has marital relationship with his wife, he should mention the name of Allah (swt). He should seek refuge in Allah (swt) from the outcast shaitan. Otherwise, shaitan folds himself up in the man’s urethra and shall have sexual relations along with him.
Moreover, when a man goes to his wife while she is in her menses, shaitan precedes him. She shall conceive and will bring forth a sterile person (Mukhannath). Such a sterile person is considered to be child of the jinn.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:02 am
You’re a lying piece of crap phool.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:16 am
you didn’t answer the question..muzza..
(inquiring minds want to know..)
and..do you go ‘au natural’..?
(when you do ‘dress-ups’..?.)
y’know..!..for that ‘rough-feel’..?
(mmmm!!!..’rough feel!’..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Hmm, I’m already blocking everything by philu. Maybe the next step is to block every post referring to ‘philu’ or ‘phool’.
<clickety-click>
Ahh, much better. Hey, no one invent a new nickname for him, eh?
November 18th, 2009 at 11:22 am
Phool, your world is enabled by engineers, consider that before slagging us off.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:24 am
The drug fucked wreck makes an assertion, i say hes full of shit and put up a grand for him to provide evidence of his claim and then he demands that I answer him?
Fuck off you dickhead, you’re a lying piece of crap, come up with something new or piss off.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:26 am
you can run repton..
but you cannot hide..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 11:31 am
@getstaffed:
If you’ve got a reference for that, you should edit the Wikipedia page. They’ve got a list of “notable members” but the only one they’ve got from your list is Mikhail Gorbachev.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:31 am
a simple yes or no will suffice..muzza..
(but i think we already know..eh..?..)
tho doth protesteth/bluster..!..somewhat..!
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 11:32 am
Now there’s an idea!
A German zoo says a pair of gay male penguins are raising a chick from an egg abandoned by its parents.
Bremerhaven zoo veterinarian Joachim Schoene says the egg was placed in the male penguins’ nest after its parents rejected it in late April. The males incubated it for some 30 days before it hatched and have continued to care for it. The chick’s gender is not yet known.
Schoene said the male birds, named Z and Vielpunkt, are one of three same-sex pairs among the zoo’s 20 Humboldt penguins that have attempted to mate.
Homosexual behavior has been documented in many animal species.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525137,00.html?sPage=fnc/scitech/naturalscience
November 18th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Getstaffed, I understand your scepticism about climate change, but it seems to be dragging you into the bat-shit crazy world of conspiracy theories.
Do you really think John-$50M-Key would give up a lucrative banking career to return to NZ, enter politics and take a punt at becoming PM, so he could do his bit for a global conspiracy and thus make lots of money, while simultaneously screwing NZ? Seems like a long-shot for a man more accustomed to making a quick million or two on exchange rates. Also couldn’t he achieve more by doing this within banking, where he has access to enormous amounts of OPM (Other People’s Money). No need to risk his own cash? There are plenty of others in on the conspiracy who could do the political legwork.
And as for joining a global elite club, he was already well on his way via banking. Those guys live like kings already. No need to take the Helen Clark route.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:39 am
I have called you a lying piece of crap phool. That seems to not a leave you a lot of wiggle room.
Thats certainly new Pete. phool has a pcp focus thing going on and its gotten very repetative, so thanks for that.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Why/how are the pengiuns gay? Who told them?
As for ‘Homosexual behavior has been documented in many animal species’, indeed it has – if companionship counts. Still looking for evidence of God or evolution sucessfully implementing homosexual reproduction though.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:41 am
@getstaffed:
Oh, and the Wikipedia talk page has a fuller version of this quote:
Here’s the in-context quote, with some emphasis added by me:
Would you really disagree with statements like this:
– Generally speaking, informed disucssion on the main political, economic and social issues take place on radio and television rather than in Parliament, to the detriment of the latter.
[today, of course, informed discussion is more likely to take place on blogs, rather than television.. ]
Or this:
– The activities of political parties are so intensely focussed on election deadlines and party rivalries that they end up weakening the democracy they are supposed to serve. This confrontational approach gives an impression that party needs come before national interest.
I haven’t read the book, but it seems like they’re basically saying here: “Democracy has problems; how can we fix them?” rather than “Democracy has problems comrade; let us throw it away and embrace communism!”
Or, alternatively, “Democracy is the worst form of government apart from all the others that have been tried.”
November 18th, 2009 at 11:43 am
I heard about that. I also recall reading that the penguins later split up when one of them moved in with a female. Such is life ^O^.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:47 am
still not answering that question..eh muzza..?
why the avoidance..?
are you ‘ashamed’ of yr penchant for ‘rough-clothes’..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 11:48 am
malcolm, fair comment re Key. I can’t comprehend his motives. As for crazy conspiaracy theories, there’s plenty of evidence. It’s just so extreme that everyone dismisses it out-of-hand.
– UN Agenda 21
I have dozens of similar quotes from a range of influencial global politicians and environmentists. They’re all saying the same things, and in the grand tradition of the boiled frog, we’d rather watch the rugby or lotto results.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:57 am
@getstaffed:
Well, homosexual behaviour has been observed in Bonobos, although this shouldn’t surprise you if you know anything about these creatures.
Still, it is an interesting question: clearly gay people cannot “naturally” have children, so it should be a trait strongly selected against. So why do we observe gay people? I recall reading an article (I’m sorry; I can’t find it — I think it was in Scientific American, though) looking at this question. The article suggested (based on some research) that there was a kind of “gayness spectrum”, where people at one end are completely gay, people at the other end are completely heterosexual, and bisexuals are (presumably) somewhere in the middle. The hypothesis put forward by the article/research is that people who were “nearly gay” made the best fathers (i.e. were most likely to raise their children to successful adulthood).
Thus gay people are a consequence of the randomness the gene pool, and they’ll keep cropping up because they’re nearly optimal.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
It’s not hard to see non-optimal-for-breeding sexual behaviour on the farm, especially with young animals. Even in the ‘burbs – I don’t think any dogs have successfully crossed with a human leg.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Getstaffed, if we’re heading for an environmental catastrophe (which I know you don’t accept), what do you think we should do?
Similar “redeployment of human and financial resources” etc were undertaken during the last major world crisis; WWII. This problem is much slower burning, but the effects could be worse and longer-lasting.
Yesterday someone mentioned smog in California and how the regulations didn’t help this. That’s not true. The problem only reduced when car-markers were forced to make engines burn cleaner. E.g. cat converters, better combustion, not venting tank to air, oil vent to the intake manifold etc. Same story with acid-rain. Another problem which people think just went away. It didn’t. It went away because of a switch to cleaner coal and natural gas (due to new gas availability but also the NOx and SOx problems with coal) and flue-gas de-sulphurisation units on coal-fired power stations etc. None of this would have happened until NOx and SOx became controlled pollutants.
As you know I’m no fan of unnecessary government but some problems don’t fix themselves.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
“Mob rule no subtitute for democracy”writes Brian Rudman this morn..wtf..what part of exercising our democratic freedom by marching on saturday does he not understand,or is it that the brain behind those rose coloured glasses cannot fathom or accept any viewpoint different from his own.To suggest that the protest march is a form of mob rule i feel, demonstrates more contempt for democracy than those who will participate in saturdays march will probably ever display..
November 18th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
This doesn’t sound like world government. It is a programme trying to influence and involve a wide range of groups.
Ah, hang on, in section 1521(b) (iii) Initial Formulation:
November 18th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Still working my way through the dribble from getstaffed
6. Why did the MSM lament the low summer Arctic sea ice a few years ago, while 6 months later the Antarctic summer sea ice was at record levels yet it was not reported?
Let’s talk about the Arctic first: http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/index.cfm
Extract: Arctic sea ice reaches its minimum extent each September. The graph on the left charts the average September extent from 1979 to 2009, derived from satellite observations. The illustration on the right shows the Arctic sea ice minimum extent for 2009, which was the third-lowest in the satellite record.
The other indicators covered in the key indicators series are global sea levels (steadily rising), CO2 levels (scary), global average temperature (also steadily rising),and the Ozone hole (currently the fifth highest on record).
Here’s a link for Antarctica science: http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=1041
Extract: Sea ice loss and retreat of coastal glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula were studied using historical accounts, aerial photographs and satellite images. This shows that seven of the major ice shelves and 87% of the 244 marine glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years.
In spite of the above, scientists are still not positive whether Antarctica is a victim of global warming or another phenomenon, even natural causes. In fact, melting ice at Antarctica is releasing organisms which may prove to be an effective carbon sink, so that’s some good news amongst all the gloom.
And more good news is they are working hard to find out the relevant causes. In fact, it’s a good example that disproves the mad headed conspiracy theories promoted by getstaffed and others because it would be very easy for scientists to grab the raw data and trumpet it as further proof of AGW. But they don’t; they say they don’t yet know.
Again, apologies for my obsession for seeking out facts – I know that noise and filth is much easier and much more emotionally satisfying
November 18th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
A German zoo says a pair of gay male penguins are raising a chick from an egg abandoned by its parents.
Oh – a recycling of the old gay penguins meme.
Jolly good, a bird brained species which in the wild forms nesting pairs does so in the artificial environment of a zoo and if in this artificial environment there is a surplus of males then two males will form such a pair.
All very interesting I am sure but not very revealing about humanity – unless people are bird brained.
However of more consequence to human welfare is this just in from the CDC
November 18th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Getstaffed, sorry I meant to add that I also think the ETS is an overly complex and unworkable idea. If we can’t get a decent wholesale electricity market going in NZ we won’t get an ETS one working. The market is too small and businesses are too small to deal with it. It’s a bad idea.
My ’solution’ would be to put a tax escalator on diesel, petrol and coal and ramp it up over 15-20 years whilst correspondingly reducing income tax (after bring on the flat tax, of course) so it’s revenue neutral.
Forget about natural gas. It produces much less CO2 per unit of energy. Forget about forests – in NZ they all get harvested so the carbon credits are a zero sum thing. Deal with farming emissions by telling the farming sector that they’ve got 5 years to get some decent research going on reducing methane etc from cows and sheep. There’s plenty that can be done there.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
malcolm, why agonise over tough, fictions choices about a response (solution domain) when the issue (problem domain) hasn’t been established? I contend that this issue is so rotten with the agenda or powerful players that we’ll never know if there even the slightest bit of true truth in the idea that there’s an impending environmental catastrophe.
Sovereign governments can and should promote wise use of resources, and I agree with your thoughts there re California and acid rain.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
http://www.english-for-students.com/Dribble-and-Drivel.html
November 18th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
While I agree with getstaffed about why bother with a solution to an unidentified problem. If you to put a tax incentive in place it should only be at the point of taking fossil fuels out of the ground as this is the only way in which extra carbon is added to the system.
Farming and all other practises are all ultimately a carbon go round. The carbon they release was pre existing in the system and is only stored as methane for 7 years.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
This is pretty shocking.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3074754/BMX-riders-quit-after-death-threats-thefts
A BMX club is having to abandon their track because of some thugs and vandals – pre-teen.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Luc – congratulations for digging. And that’s the point isn’t it – there’s a huge volume of contradictory ‘evidence’ and the promoter with the most letter after their name, or the biggest political dog on-side expects to win. I’d say it’s settled then – the science isn’t settled.
As for raw data, I like this quote:
- Prof. Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports
I’d love to know how many report he authored for the IPCC, and which scientisis subsequently based their analysis on his.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
It will never be established in a definitive way. That’s not the sort of answer you get from stochastic modelling. You get a distribution of outcomes. And there will always be people who are not convinced, for a host of reason unrelated to the science.
Can I turn this around a little. I know you’ve looked at this issue a lot. What do you think is the probability that we’ll see moderate problems due to the climate change in the next 50 years? By moderate I mean repeated droughts in areas which previously supported their population, glaciers which moderate rivers (e.g the Ganges) disappearing and causing widespread water shortages, crop failure etc?
November 18th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Luc,
Heres why all your bs is not relevant to anthropogenic climate change:
Eemian, once called the Eemian Interglacial period…It is the second-to-latest interglacial period of the Ice Age. It began about 130,000 years ago…Sea levels at that time were 4-6 meters higher than they are now, indicating greater deglaciation than today (mostly from partial melting of the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica)…Central Europe (north of the Alps) is found to be 1–2 °C warmer than present; south of the alps conditions are 1–2 °C cooler than today
All this is going to happen eventually before the next ice age and it will be nothing to do with people. We should celebrate the coming warm climate and the benefits it will bring.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Thanks Cha
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2009/11/10/GA2009111000920.html
slides 43, 44 are the nub.
Why Hasan wasn’t put on administrative leave I don’t now.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Sorry Getstaffed, I just asked you a question but I need to pop out now. I will be back later though. Cheers.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Ryan, it’s a loose cause.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Scorpio, yeah, that’s bad. And sad. I don’t think it’s uncommon for BMX tracks have problems with vandalism.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Yeah, yeah, but “dribble” sometimes sounds so right. Besides, maybe he was being literal, hope he was wearing gloves.
November 18th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
We already have deserts and water shortages today. There is no reason to expect a warmer, wetter and more stable climate to be a negative compared to today.
We can expect to grow grapes in scotland and there used to be hippos in the thames
Here are some excerpts I found on vegetation:
Similarity of vegetation dynamics during interglacial periods
European vegetation has oscillated between extreme situations: those of the ice ages dominated by a herbaceous treeless vegetation and those of the interglacial periods where forests occupied greatly extended ranges
during MIS 11.3, the earth’s orbit was almost circular, and seasonal insolation changes due to precession were very small. Furthermore, they stated that such changes in the earth’s orbital configuration occurred with a periodicity of ≈400 ka. Thus, in terms of insolation, MIS 11.3 would be the closest analogue to the Holocene.
record display a marked cyclic succession of warm and humid interglacials followed by dry and cold glacials
the expansion of forests in Europe just a matter of interglacial pace
November 18th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
I don’t think anybody with any knowledge of The Club of Rome’s stupidities of the last thirty years would want to join them. Even Michael Cullen had similarly scathing comments to make about their mid-1970’s predictions.
As far as Key is concerned I’d expand on a comment I made last year about his approach to Kyoto/ETS:
I’d say Key is still playing that game, realising as a trader would, that every other nation in the world is playing it also. Some of the warmenists have already faced up to the fact this whole approach is failing as we speak. Kyoto was a demonstrable failure and Copenhagen is already headed that way. And as an example of how we’re going round and round on this, here’s a comment I made five years ago on this forum:
Only a tiny minority are going to change their lifestyle (and that includes 90% of the warmenists) to the drastic degree implied by all of the CO2 reduction targets being sought. Few in the West will change and certainly not China or India. So we will see targets pushed off into the future, or so watered down as to be meaningless, penalties not pursued (think how useless UN economic sanctions are now when applied to specific countries), or so covered by subsidies that the demand reduction effect will never kick in at the consumer level where it ultimately has to.
On the producer side let’s take this quote from Peter Huber in City Journal:
This international Kabuki dance is simply being repeated further down the food chain as we see the effects of tackling the “polluters”. In the US the “Cap and Trade” bill is already on the back burner as various members of Congress and Senators from places like coal-dependent Indiana, Virginia and other states get frightened off – not by “big business muscle”, but by the simple fact that they will close down rapidly (as Obama explicitly claimed they would be) and thereby smash the economies of those states. The result will be the same as our ETS, such groups will negotiate loopholes and poke so many holes in the agreement that it will be worthless even if passed.
But we will play that game to avoid the pointed fingers and we will focus on trading with places like China and India rather than increasingly fucked up outfits like Europe. In the meantime:
November 18th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
If we just sit back and wait for the relentless march of technological innovation to rescue us from our excesses it is inevitable that one generation will hit the wall. It may not be ours but it may be partly due to our arrogance.
November 18th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Sonny, this continuous searching for a magic bullet to disprove AGW is just so tiresome. Do you seriously imagine governments and scientists aren’t aware of all this stuff?
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/075.htm
Extract: Overall, the last inter-glacial appears, at least during its first part, warmer than present day climates by at least 2°C in many sites, i.e., comparable to anthropogenic warming expected by the year 2100. However, the geographical coverage of reliable and well-dated temperature time-series is too sparse to provide a global estimate.
2.4.5 Summary
Current evidence indicates that very rapid and large temperature changes, generally associated with changes in oceanic and atmospheric circulation, occurred during the last glacial period and during the last deglaciation, particularly in higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. During the warming phases, and the Younger Dryas pause, there is evidence of almost worldwide, nearly synchronous events. However, as with the Holocene maximum warming and the Last Glacial Maximum, these changes appear to have occurred asynchronously between the Northern Hemisphere and at least part of the Southern Hemisphere. During the Holocene smaller but locally quite large climate changes occurred sporadically; similar changes may have occurred in the last inter-glacial. Evidence is increasing, therefore, that a rapid reorganisation of atmospheric and ocean circulation (time-scales of several decades or more) can occur during inter-glacial periods without human interference.
November 18th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
“Evidence is increasing, therefore, that a rapid reorganisation of atmospheric and ocean circulation (time-scales of several decades or more) can occur during inter-glacial periods without human interference.”
So basically the IPCC are also saying that climate change happens with or without human interference.
November 18th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Tom, depressingly, I share your thoughts on the ETS. And similarly as regards humans changing their behaviour enough to ameliorate the worst effects of APG. But it is going to be disastrous. Here is why, courtesy of http://www.cluborlov.blogspot.com
And what of that lodestone, global sea level? This happens to be a very interesting question, because ocean levels are set to rise dramatically. According to UCLA scientists, the last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they are today was 15 million years ago. At that time, the sea level was between 20 and 36 metres higher (75 to 120 feet), there was no permanent ice cap in the arctic, and very little ice in Antarctica or Greenland. That is where we are headed. The only remaining question is, How long will it take us to get there?
The authors of the Hadley Centre report predict a rise of just 1.4 metres by 2100. The IPCC in their 2007 4th Assessment Report predicted something like half a metre by 2100 based on a combination of the fattening of the oceanic envelope caused by thermal expansion and the increased runoff from glaciers and minor ice sheets. None of this sounds particularly catastrophic just yet, but then it turns out that these predictions are not based on anything particularly relevant: the British Antarctic Survey, in 2008, made it clear that the IPCC had not included the source of nearly 100% of the world’s potential ice melt – the major ice caps of Antarctica and Greenland – simply because they had little idea of how the ice caps would behave in a heating world:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) highlighted the issue by suggesting that current knowledge is inadequate to estimate confidently the contribution that ice sheets might make to sea-level rise in coming centuries. While technology makes sea-level rise easier to observe, and we can predict some contributions to future sea-level rise with increasing certainty, we cannot yet fully predict the ice sheets’ contribution. There is thus a risk that sea-level rise could be higher than the (incomplete) estimates provided by the IPCC.
Thus, the most peer-reviewed piece of climate science ever written turns out to be completely inadequate when it comes to estimating the level of disruption associated with a very important aspect of climate change: the rising seas. If Antarctica contains 90% of the world’s land ice (sea ice, like that in the Arctic, does not directly cause the oceans to rise when it melts) and Greenland contains most of the rest, then what’s going to happen when they start to melt with a vengeance, and when are they going to start melting? Official science is mute on the subject.
So once again, getstaffed’s conspiracy theory is notable for its absence. This nonsense about slavering scientists frothing at the mouth for grants to fund their lavish lifestyles and world government plans just gets us nowhere except to a very wet hell, very quickly.
In fact, I am actually amazed that there are so many worried people, good people, who think we can turn this thing around to continue as advocates for action in the face of such clear, willful ignorance and selfishness.
November 18th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
“According to UCLA scientists, the last time carbon dioxide levels were as high as they are today was 15 million years ago. At that time, the sea level was between 20 and 36 metres higher (75 to 120 feet), there was no permanent ice cap in the arctic, and very little ice in Antarctica or Greenland. That is where we are headed. The only remaining question is, How long will it take us to get there?”
So how many humans were around 15 million years ago contributing to CO2 levels?
November 18th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Nice series of pictures on the NZ Herald website showing hippos killing a crocodile
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/image.cfm?c_id=2&gal_cid=698&gallery_id=108282
November 18th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Luc, you seem to be a serious guy
And as we never seem to get any answers from the main proponents of AGW
I’d like your view on what is the link between carbon emissions and exponentially rising temperatures
Take this article
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8364926.stm
All it talks about are the amount of carbon in the atmosphere
Then makes an assumption that this means temperatures will rise exponentially
I’m sorry but 1+1 is not 3
November 18th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
I would hope that the Herald which has the country’s highest circulation would insist on a higher standard of advocacy journalism than is demonstrated by Brian Rudman. Rather than come up with a rational argument he accuses those who believe that parents rather than the State should have primacy on how their children are raised of supporting the beating of children. He also considers that the vast majority who voted NO did not understand the question let alone the issues.
I will email him and challenge him to engage in a rational debate in an open forum.
November 18th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
malcolm, sorry – I was out. I see that Sonny has responded to this. Like most of us here, I’m an Google researcher, so not a scientist or expert. My opinion is that we’ll have hightened publicity of environmental changes in an attempt to support the theory that we humans need correctional ‘guidance’ to stave off impending doom.
The facts are often very different, as the fisking of the IPCC hurricane statistics, which show and increase in activity from 1970 but a decrease if a 1940’s start point is adopted. I’m looking for that chart to add to my collection.
Meantime you can read the open letter of resignation of a IPCC Climate Scientist Chris Landsea [what a great surname for a climate scientist!] citing a politicized agenda and misrepresentations of climate science.
November 18th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Chill Luc
Official science is mute on the subject because the answer is literally unknowable.
However the best evidence from satellites suggest that the Antarctica is currently accumulating ice not loosing it.
Somewhat disingenuously when discussing the Antarctic ice sheet the alarmists focus their attention on the Antartic peninsula a small part of the continent and one which lies outside the Antarctic circle for the most part – which may be loosing some ice but for the most part the continent shows no sign of melting.
Anyway it would take decades if not centuries to do so even if it were to – this is because the energy required to raise the temperature of ice to 0c is vast and then even more energy is required for the phase change from solid to liquid to occur.
Changes in climate on the scale of centuries are not a problem – people have ample time to adapt. It is rapid change that causes problems.
The Younger Dryas was a climate catastrophe that did occur when North America dumped a lot of water into the Atlantic 12000 odd years ago which bought about rapid cooling
It could happen again however there is no indication of the conditions believed to have been prevailing before that event occurred in the modern world.
You just have to accept that the future is uncertain and unknown and get on with life I’m afraid that is the nature of the beast.
November 18th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Chuck Bird at 2:22 pm:
I would hope that the Herald which has the country’s highest circulation would insist on a higher standard of advocacy journalism than is demonstrated by Brian Rudman.
I thought he went way over the top in that too. I don’t think that helps his cause, which is a shame. There is a deeper issue here that at least should be explored. What are the real motives behind those who are running the march? They are being very vague about who is behind it and what the actual aim is.
getstaffed and others have concerns about moves towards a one world government overriding our democracy. There could be a more real threat closer to home, not necessarily to take over our government, just working themselves into a position of being able to manipulate our democracy as they are trying to manipulate opinion – much more subtly and effectively than Rudman.
November 18th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
In the Thames?
November 18th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
This is the bit I don’t get – what does it matter who or what is causing it? Is it happening? Is it bad? Can we do anything about it?
Lot of good accurate scapegoating will be if we’re extinct.
November 18th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Well, yeah. The climate has been very different in the past. No one is disputing that.
The thing is that, in the past (as far as scientists can tell), CO2 concentrations have always increased after global temperatures increased. This time, they’re increasing before, which is a strong suggestion that the CO2 increase is due to human activity. That in itself doesn’t prove AGM, but it does suggest that what is happening now has not happened before (or, at least, not in the same way).
Well, CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Broadly, what happens (as I understand it) is that the sun’s light zips through the atmosphere without having much effect. It hits the earth, which warms up. The earth then radiates heat in the form of infrared light. This infrared then heads back out towards space. Some of it gets to space and is lost to us forever. Some of it hits molecules of greenhouse gasses (such as CO2, methane, water vapour, and others). It’s absorbed, and the gas molecules then re-emit it in all directions. Some of this is re-emitted back towards space and lost, but some of it heads back towards earth, or elsewhere in the atmosphere.
Thus, the greenhouse effect helps keep heat from the sun in the Earth’s atmosphere. Without it, we wouldn’t be here.
So, it’s actually straightforward and noncontroversial to say that increasing CO2 in the atmosphere will increase the global temperature. But it’s also straightforward and noncontroversial to say that crashing a spaceship into the moon will increase the mass of the moon and lead to it orbiting the earth faster … but no one cares, because the change is so insigificant.
So the big question is why a small increase in CO2 would lead to a (relatively) big jump in temperature, when CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are very low, and when water vapour is a much more significant greenhouse gas. Well, that’s the tricky bit. AFAIK, the idea is that a small increase in CO2 concentrations causes a small amount of warming, which increases water evaporation (leading to more water vapour), and also decreases the ocean’s ability to store CO2 (leading to more atmospheric CO2). So small increases in human emissions lead to larger increases in greenhouse gasses which lead to less heat escaping to space and thus a warmer planet.
Obviously, that last paragraph is one area that the anti-AGW types like to attack.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Good video of the recent protests against Al Gore and his lies and propaganda during a recent appearance by Al in Austin Texas.
800 attended Gore’s speech. 200 protested outside the hall.
Good to see the populace at large at last rising up against the left’s political oppression. No more passive acceptance of rights destroying leftist bullshit.
No more lies. No more propaganda. No more big government. No more socialism cloaked in the deceit of environmentalism.
Be pro-active.
Stand up to the charlatans and liars and frauds and socialists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_ozCbwgrjg&feature=related
November 18th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
A little something to put in your arsenal in the event a mouth-breather states that Nazis were traditionalist Christians.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Well done John Key
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3075509/Key-won-t-meet-Dalai-Lama
November 18th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Sorry. Wrong link. Its in Baton Rouge Florida.
Austin one here if you need it-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18umAmTqziE
November 18th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Yep bb, there are sure to be all sorts of things claimed on that one but the DL must be low down the PM priority list, there’s not much NZ can do for him and vice versa. I suspect many people meeting DL do so for the “celebrity” association thing. Can’t see why else from here.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
“So small increases in human emissions lead to larger increases in greenhouse gasses which lead to less heat escaping to space and thus a warmer planet.” “Obviously, that last paragraph is one area that the anti-AGW types like to attack.”
Well, yes, because that assumption (on which the AGW enviro-statist religion is based) has already been debunked my MIT propeller-heads Lindzen & Choi. (involving data collected over 20 years).
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2009m8d18-Carbon-Dioxide-irrelevant-in-climate-debate-says-MIT-Scientist
November 18th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Andrei
from http://www.cluborlov.blogspot.com This guy speaks to us at a lay level. He is a software engineer.
October 2009
We can take some comfort in the thought that the melting of the Greenland Ice Sheet would take at least 100 years once it reached that temperature. But it accounts for just 10% of the global ice volume, the other 90% being locked away in the seemingly impermeable heart of Antarctica. Or not: the East Antarctic ice sheet (that’s the big blob that surrounds the South Pole just off-centre) seems to be quite stable, and should remain that way for the next few centuries, but West Antarctica (the peninsula that reaches north toward South America) is not stable at all.
The WAIS (West Antarctic Ice Sheet) is largely below sea level, having over several million years pushed down and scoured out the bedrock beneath it, but because of its huge area, the part of it that is above water still manages to comprise around 10% of the total Antarctic ice volume. If this were to melt then the oceans would rise by another 5 metres, in addition to the thermal expansion of 1.4 metres, plus whatever has been sloughed off the Greenland ice sheet, giving us 13.6 metres, or close to 45 feet. (Is your head still above water? Please check again now.)
more if you go to his blog
November 18th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
sbk notes:
There are many people within the media – particularly those who write “columns”, where they’re paid more to interview their word processors than are most journalists who actually research and report the news – who think their place in life is to lecture the masses on what’s “best” for them and berate them when they don’t agree. Similar traits can be found in many members of academia, almost anyone on a quango (e.g. the Law Commission) and absolutely everyone who gets themselves into politics nowadays – even if it’s only by virtue of toadying to a handful of party powerbrokers for a list ranking.
Any attempt to extend power to people not part of the elites is characterised as “mob rule”. Implicit in that description, however, is the assumption that the real majority are in silent agreement with the elites and that the protesters are but a dissatisfied subset of the population rather than a representative sample of it.
Well done for calling him on it, sbk. I hope you write to the Herald (for publication) making that point. Because every time one of these people writes a “we know best” piece it needs to be exposed for what it is, so that people become aware that it is their right to have direct input into their future, not merely a privilege to be granted (and withheld) on a whim through processes such as Select Committees etc.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
I suspect many people meeting DL do so for the “celebrity” association thing
I’d say more for the ’stick it to China’ thing. Which is good for warm fuzzies. Key makes a good point that he doesn’t see every religious leader that comes to town, so why this guy – well he’s about the equivalent of the Pope isn’t he? Wouldn’t he see the Pope?
November 18th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
what does it matter who or what is causing it? Is it happening? Is it bad?
The first depends on the last. So find an answer to the last!
November 18th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
I sent the following to Brian Rudman. It will be interesting if I get a response.
Brian, I am disappointed that the Herald employs a journalist even an advocacy journalist who is incapable of producing a logical argument and has to resort to name calling. You have failed to produce a scrap of evidence that the anti-smacking law has saved one child from serious abuse. All as you can do is call the majority of good parents and grandparents child beaters. I emailed the Herald forum on the topic of Saturday’s march. My comment was not posted despite many posted later being up.
I challenge you to debate this issue on an open forum like the general debate on Kiwiblog or better still call Leighton Smith. I doubt if you will because most bullies are cowards and will only engage if they have an advantage. Bullying does not have to be physical. If the Herald is going to run a campaign of misinformation on the issue of the smacking law they should run the blog fairly and only censor the posts for bad language or defamation.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
Good on ya Chuck.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
And it doesn’t seem a smart way to encourage readership by abusing eighty something percent of readers in your article. That approach is not going to change many/any minds.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Good link Angus. More confirmation that the models used by the IPCC are hopelessly inaccurate.
I had a look at the latest alarmist story on http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10610112&pnum=0 which reckons the worst case scenario is now likely. As usual it is predicated on their models:
“Our understanding at the moment in the computer models we have used – and they are state of the art – suggests that carbon-cycle climate feedback has already kicked in,” she said.
“These models, if you project them on into the century, show quite large feedbacks, with climate amplifying global warming by between 5 per cent and 30 per cent. There are still large uncertainties, but this is carbon-cycle climate feedback that has already started,” she said. (She being Professor Corinne Le Quere – member of the Global Carbon Project, set up “to slow the rate of increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”)
Soon there has to be a reconciliation between the alarmist’s models and the observed data, currently they’re on different planets. Thankfully public opinion seems to be tending more towards scepticism that a) climate change is catastrophic and b) that humans have a significant impact on climate change.
November 18th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
@ rightnow “So how many humans were around 15 million years ago contributing to CO2 levels?”
None, so far as we know.
And that’s the point. There were no humans so it wasn’t our concern. The planet has undergone huge transformational periods all on its own, but over huge time spans. Now, in the space of less than 10,000 years, and really mainly since the industrial era, we have set in train the events that will, in the broadest sense, replicate the atmospheric C02 conditions and, more scarily, sea levels of all those years ago. Now it is true that there have been short sharp events in history, but these have been localised rather than global and bear no relation to the current circumstances, so far as I can tell.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
A second “well done” to John Key (in the spirit of big bruv’s 3.09pm) – he’s not giving Lucy Lawless and Greenpeace any oxygen, and nor should he. Greenpeace loses any credibility IMHO when its members commit criminal/terrorist acts in the name of publicity.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10610129
November 18th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
@rightnow again: this is really weird. You quote a report that proves there is some degree at least of human induced global warming as somehow proving the opposite. The frank statement of the uncertainty range is also good science. The unfortunate fact for you is that as more information than ever comes to hand, we will find the situation is more dire than the minimum 5% scenario.
I guess its just lucky you lot aren’t anywhere near the reins of power. Poor old Rodney’s 3% doesn’t give him much input, thankfully.
And you should have a trawl through the website mentioned in the article. And you guys like good photos: here’s a nice one
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=41251
November 18th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Luc, I think the Medieval Warm Period was a global climate event in our recent history. What is significant about this is it was approximately 800 years ago. Significant because increases in atmosperic CO2 concentrations appear to follow global warming periods by approximately 800 years. How about that, I didn’t even have to invest in a state of the art computer model to give you the simplest explanation there is about why CO2 has increased in the atmosphere since the industrial era.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
To get all quibbly for a moment, the last most definitely depends on the first. If it’s not happening, there is no further question to ask.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
RE Krudman: the man’s always been a whining bleeding-heart piece of dogshit. The fact people complain about Garth George over and over but never say anything about Krudman, along with the rest of the wankers the Huruld sees fit to print, speaks volumes.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Luc, you clearly have misunderstood:
“@rightnow again: this is really weird. You quote a report that proves there is some degree at least of human induced global warming as somehow proving the opposite.”
I quoted a report that makes claims based on a computer model. That is no proof, it is what we commonly refer to as conjecture.
Tell me something Luc, do you believe the ‘hockey stick graph’ to be good science?
November 18th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Chuck Bird-
You’re wasting your time emailing any of the amoral scum who produce the Herald. They will never engage. They’re cowards, and they’re propagandists and liars without a principle among the lot of them.
They’re Progressives, and they’re on a mission to impose their totalitarian Utopian vision on all of us. To control us. To crush dissent under the jackboot of socialism.
There is only one way to deal with the Herald. Don’t buy it. Don’t advertise in it. Don’t ever buy anything from anyone who advertises in it. Cutting the left’s financial throat is the only way we will ever make progress. Appealing to them as principled human beings is an utter waste of time and effort.
Put the Herald out of business. There is no alternative.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Luc, what point you think anecdotal evidence really proves?
Go on provide us a link to a picture of a polar bear swimming you know you want to.
Do you really think it proves anything when the empirical evidence shows that global temparatures are falling and the radiation escaping into space is increasing
Now children repeat after me
Carbon emissions = exponentially rising temperatures
Carbon emissions = exponentially rising temperatures
Carbon emissions = exponentially rising temperatures
1+1=3
1+1=3
1+1=3
November 18th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
FFS Red, now you are suggesting you force out of business anyone you deem to the left of you. That’ll really make progess. Ah, yeah, you are against anything progressive.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
And rightnow, what do you think informs the models? Guesses plucked out of thin air? Or is that thickening air. As I have pointed out before, lots of cool stuff, like trips to the moon, were only ever models before they were actually carried out.
Just look at it like this: what if you are wrong and all the dire consequences currently forecast as worst case scenarios actually came about? Some legacy for your kids and their kids, huh?
Every objection you guys bring up here is readily disproved with a little work, like reading reports which, I know, is boring stuff.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Go on then disprove the points in the Article Angus posted at 3:24
November 18th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Luc, the models are always dependent on what goes into them, and that is why I have no faith in them. Garbage in garbage out. The garbage going in has as much credibility as the hockey stick graph until it is released for scrutiny.
What if the sceptics are wrong? Well by reducing our carbon emissions by 50% by 2050 (globally, if India and China come on board) then we could make 6% difference to projected temperature rise (a .94 degree rise instead of a 1 degree rise). And it would only cost NZ $100 billion by 2050 to be a part of it.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
progressive adj. Moving forward; advancing. proceeding in steps; improving steadily by increments: progressive change.
antonym: regressive: adj. atavistic, throwback retrograde, retrogressive, reverting, unmodernised
November 18th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Just got around to seeing what the fuss is with Rudman’s column. I thought I better read it first.
Great column! Well researched, factually correct: maybe just a tad kind on the poor bastards who can’t control their anger, as we witness here with monotonous repetition.
Get over it guys. Let it go. Move on. Its gone for good!
And bloody good job.
November 18th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
The hockey stick graph? That seems to be standing the test of time. Here is the final para of Wikipediaarticle:
“In a paper on 9 September 2008, Mann and colleagues published an updated reconstruction of Earth surface temperature for the past two millennia.[63] This reconstruction used a more diverse dataset that was significantly larger than the original tree-ring study. Similarly to the original study, this work found that recent increases in northern hemisphere surface temperature are anomalous relative to at least the past 1300 years, and that this result is robust to the inclusion or exclusion of the tree-ring dataset. In a PNAS response[64], McIntyre and McKitrick made various claims, including that Mann et al. used some data with the axes upside down. Mann et al. in reply say that McIntyre and McKitrick “raise no valid issues regarding our paper” and the “claim that “upside down” data were used is bizarre” [2].”
Bizarre is the best word to describe much of the noise generated here
I understand the recommendation is to reduce by some 85%. It’s obvious that some pretty extensive sticks and carrots are going to be required. Let’s hope we elect governments who will do what needs to be done.
November 18th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Luc, can’t you do any better than Wikipedia? Mann commenting on his own conclusions (which he already held before he went manufacturing the supporting evidence) is laughable as support for the hockey stick graph. He is a leading IPCC trougher, he depends on AGW alarmism for his sinecure.
Bizarre is the best word to describe your continued masochistic posts showing you’re nothing but a parrot of the IPCC.
November 18th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Ok found his publications. Prolific! I guess each one needs to be read with a wary eye on whether he’s being effective or honest. I hope the scientists who based their analysis on Prof. Schneider’s publications exercised similar scrutiny. But I doubt it.
November 18th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
I hope red uses this blog as an outlet for his frustration, and when he logs off, he actually remembers how great life can be, a cold beer on a warm summers day, sharing a joke with good mates, wrapped up warm with the significant other etc…..I’d hate to think that he spent 24/7 like he does here. That’s no way to spend our limited life span.
November 18th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Ah yes, but everything simply serves to reinforce your predetermined beliefs – and I use the term belief deliberately as in: belief n. esp without proof
Here’s a good explanation of climate modeling
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/01/is-climate-modelling-science/
November 18th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
“So, to be clear on this, are there *any* validated models that show significant deviation of climatic conditions from the consensus predictions regarding the effect of anthropogenic forcings?
[Response: No, there are not. To clairfy though, some deviations are seen in different models, and these may well be 'significant' scientifically, but assuming you are talking about the general sense of the response (at the global scale), all models show very similar behaviour. - gavin]”
So basically all the ‘validated’ models show very similar behaviour. My question is ‘do any of the validated models match empirical evidence’?
November 18th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Yes, about as well as the rest of the climate junk science. Have a read of United Nations Pulls Hockey Stick From Climate Report.
Actually the sloppily published report included a discredited version of the hockey-stick which had been clipped from Wikipedia(!). It was then quickly (and quietly) replaced with another.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
New subject;
Now here is a guy who climbed a tree, as part of his normal days work and proceeded to cut the branch off lower than where he was apparently standing or sitting. Now naturally he fell out of the tree when the branch collapsed.
He was drug tested and then sacked. But!! the ERA has given him his job back DDUUUUrh??????
What fucking idiots.
Worker who fell out of tree gets job back
Wednesday, 18, Nov, 2009 1:27PM
A Christchurch vegetation worker sacked after falling out of a tree, then testing positive for cannabis use, has won a case to get his job back.
The Employment Relations Authority has ordered Transfield Services to reinstate Stuart McLeod.
That is because under the company’s own policies he should have been referred to a substance abuse professional for an assessment, before he could be fired.
The ERA has acknowledged there is nothing wrong with Transfield’s safety policies. It says Mr McLeod’s five metre fall at work was solely because of his own carelessness in cutting the tree . . . below where he was attached to it.
But it says Transfield did not do an assessment to find out if Mr McLeod’s claim of infrequent drug use was true, and in dismissing him presumed unfairly that his dope smoking led directly to the accident.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Lucy Lawless didn’t get to talk with John Boy as he was to busy giving forests away too magpie hand out tribes. Hey bro got a spare pound 4 sale?
November 18th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Luc needs to be a little less trusting of arguments from authority – although that is rather a left-wing characteristic. The following transcript is from an interview with one Dr Atte Korhola in a recent Finnish news program.
Dr. Korhola is professor of environmental change at the University of Helsinki, and an expert in lake sediment studies – which form one of the proxy sources for Mann – and he has this to say:
This would hardly be the first time that Mann and co. have screwed up on statistics. Mann was of course, replaced as the lead author for the IPCC paleoclimate reconstructions after the shit hit the fan in the original hockey stick. After McKitrick and McIntyre pointed out some problems with that anaysis, the US Congress Energy and Commerce Committee called on Dr Edward Wegan to look at it. He also consulted outside statisticians, including the Board of the American Statistical Association. When he was does he had this to say about the analysis in particular:
Data can be fixed up of course and mistakes corrected. But what got my attention were these two statements from Dr Wegman:
and one on Mann making a basic error that:
Perhaps a course in remedial stats would help – I’m sure Dr Wegman would not mind – though I’m not sure if Dr Mann’s ego could take it.
But the problem goes a lot wider than the RealClimate guys. Here’s what Wegman had to say about the broader climate-change and meteorological community, which relies so much on statistical techniques in their studies:
Which is a nice way of saying that although the studies may have been peer reviewed, the reviewers were often unqualified in statistics, which are rather the centrepiece of all this stuff when trying to link cause and effect. Wegman recommended that:
He figured that one place to start would be with the American Meteorological Society, which has a committee on probability and statistics:
He also cited the rather amusing fact that the American Meteorological Association’s 2006 Conference on Probability and Statistics in the Atmospheric Sciences, had only eight presenters out of 62 who were members of the American Statistical Association!!!
Large, complex field this AGW. Best to stick to one’s finely focused specialities – and to seek help in those areas where one is not a specialist.
Sounds like an unqualified denier to me!
Dr. Edward Wegman is a professor at the Center for Computational Statistics at George Mason University, chair of the National Academy of Sciences’ Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics, and board member of the American Statistical Association. He received his Ph.D. degree in mathematical statistics from the University of Iowa. In 1978, he went to the Office of Naval Research, where he headed the Mathematical Sciences Division with responsibility Navy-wide for basic research programs. He coined the phrase computational statistics, and developed a high-profile research area around this concept, which focused on techniques and methodologies that could not be achieved without the capabilities of modern computing resources and led to a revolution in contemporary statistical graphics. Dr. Wegman was the original program director of the basic research program in Ultra High Speed Computing at the Strategic Defense Initiative’s Innovative Science and Technology Office. He has served as editor or associate editor of numerous prestigious journals and has published more than 160 papers and eight books.
What did Pete George/Cerium say the other day? Scientists. Peer reviewed. Supported by observations.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
How do you know they won’t engage?
…..
…..
The Editor
New Zealand Herald
Auckland
Dear Sir,
You’re all lying amoral moronic progressive propagandist scum. Every last one of you. You’re on a vile treacherous mission to impose a totalitarian utopia and crush us under your socialist jackboot. But we’re onto you. You are slime. You will not rest a slimy rest until you’ve completed your evil and vile mission. How can you sleep at night? No doubt in a leftist swamp-bed furnished by your cowardly communist overlords.
You have not a skerrick of honour and are a disgrace to the fine tradition of traditional tradition media. You’re deceitful dumb elitist cunning mainstream and all wankers. I never buy your filthy paper or read your filthy lies. And if I did I wouldn’t. I wouldn’t even eat fish and chips off your mindless moronic lies and deceit. Your bottomless chasm of socialist totalitarian bile.
Could you please reply and address the points I have made at your earliest convenience? You cowardly craven communist morons.
Yours Sincerely,
Anonymous
1 RedBaiter Lane
RedBaiterville
RedBaiterLand
November 18th, 2009 at 6:30 pm
What a gutless w#nker malc##t.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Brilliant Mal, got him to a T. I think I’ll get Kirsty to write this up tonight and send to the Herald, just for laughs.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
“I’ll get Kirsty”
Police will be interested in that statement fugley.
November 18th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Do you think Red would be too gutless to send them something like that d4j?
November 18th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Hey petey do you know what your mate fugley is referring to when he mentions “Kirsty” ?
November 18th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Lucy Lawless? who? oh that Ryan sheila. Save the World with false swords. LMFAO
November 18th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Hey mal “Kirsty” is a good story for the Herald, just ask fugley! Checkmate lefty sewer scum.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Come on lefty filth answer the question.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
fuck I get sick of reading about climate change / carbon / ETS / melting ice / atmospheric concentrations blah blah blah on this blog…
November 18th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Sorry Dad4justice, I have absolutely no idea what you’re on about. Can you explain your cryptic comment? What was your question?
It’s so partisan around here. I have no association with Billyborker. I didn’t write my last comment for his benefit, although I’m glad it gave him some small joy on this lovely evening. Whoever he is. I suspect he harbours funny economic ideas about wealth sharing and slices-of-fixed-sized-pies etc which would make me laugh.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Sorry starboard but propaganda wars don’t go well when only one side is talking.
Besides, there’s interesting stuff on other threads. Read those.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
I’m starting to agree starboard, it seems a bit pointless, no one seems interested in considering alternate views. Just buy some gumboots and forget it.
So what else is there? Israeli settlements are a snub to the US. But anything on the US is only passing interest, we’ll only be distant observers there.
Why does it have to be “sides” Tom? Dalai Lama, yeah, riveting.
Be daring, look outside your comfort zone.
Why do some of those on the right blame everything on “the left”? Seems a bit stupid to me.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
When it comes to satire, Mal, you should stick to your day job. So infantile and witless.
BTW what is your day job? Giving blow jobs to cretins like Billy?
November 18th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
On cue…
November 18th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
“BTW what is your day job? Giving blow jobs to cretins like Billy?”
Aren’t you just a little bit flattered Red to have malcolm obsessing over you ?!
November 18th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Sorry, hang on RedBaiter, I can only handle one idea at a time. I’m waiting for Dad4justice to get his enigma machine out and decode his last message.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
“I’m waiting for Dad4justice to get his enigma machine out and decode his last message.”
Billy Borker / Fugley / MyNameIsJack likes to imply that D4J is the killer of Ashburton teenager Kirsty Bentley in 1999, as D4J lives south of Christchurch. Billy even assumes the name of D4J’s daughter on occasions too. A real charmer for sure.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Someone has been impersonating Red on the Standard. Or did he come out of his shell?
http://www.thestandard.org.nz/maybe-not-social-but-definitely-networking/
November 18th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Quote of the day
Key on Radio NZ this morning.
Quote:
“Look, who knows what the price of carbon will be tomorrow, next week or in twenty years time. We just don’t know”.
Quote:
“They are wrong. They can’t tell what the deficit will be in December so how do they know what carbon prices will be in 2030 or 2040?”
Inspires confidence in both Treasury and the PM doesn’t it.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
starboard, care to explain why you hold such a low opinion of my idealogy, as evidenced by your response in the previous general debate?
Please point out exactly which you have issue with and why
a) Complete overhaul of the welfare system with proper investigation into corruption/fraud by benefeciries/WINZ
b) Removal of MMP/ETS/WFF/(insert socialist oppression vehicle)
c) Criminal investigation of the past and present political parties, namely Labour and Green, with emphasis on conflicts of interest within the hierarchy
d) Societal condemnation of abusive and negligent parents
e) Death penalty for murder and treason, with a clause that allow for extensive toture of the condemned, at the request of the family of the victim
f) Longer, harsher sentences for crimes with victims, all across the board
g) Proper application of manslaughter
November 18th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
“Aren’t you just a little bit flattered Red to have malcolm obsessing over you ?”
The novelty of Progressives obsessing was something I grew tired of some years ago Angus. They’ve always been out there. Mad Mal is just the latest manifestation of RDS (Redbaiter Derangement Syndrome). Just as boring, self obsessed and desperate as all of the others. Yawn…
November 18th, 2009 at 7:45 pm
…and keep it concise starboard. Just one-day-on-climate-on-kiwiblog equivalent for each point.
November 18th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
“..Death penalty for murder and treason, with a clause that allow for extensive toture of the condemned, at the request of the family of the victim..”
you are one sick puppy..aren’t you tan..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
barbaric sadistic murderers deserve no rights or protection whatsoever
November 18th, 2009 at 7:51 pm
I see. Thanks, I didn’t know that. A very low and scummy thing to do. Billyborker / Fugley? / MyNameIsJack, is that true?
November 18th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
He’s actually a character, Swiftman. I like him.
On that basis.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
DPF states his objection to the death penalty is his belief that it is hypocritical of the state to take lives whilst outlawing the very same thing. This is elementary grade thinking, to equate cold blooded murder, with execution as a means of protecting society, deterrence and relief on the tax payer.
In my opinion, the toture clause, would be a perfect means of detterance, out of pure fear, fear is the only thing that scum respond to, they dont care about rule books and comfy prisons, you have to beat them at their own game to prevail.
It would also be greatly satisfying to people who, like myself, would love to personally toture and beat to death anyone found guilty, beyond doubt, of murder of a close loved one.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:01 pm
“A very low and scummy thing to do.”
Well, that you have frequently sought such a lowlife out as a friend just could be validation of the old adage that ‘you can tell a man by the company he keeps’.
Right??
November 18th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
# dad4justice at 6:49 pm
Hey petey do you know what your mate fugley is referring to…
No I didn’t know. If Angus is right, it’s deeply shitty. And it’s also a bit stink trying to associate me with him/it.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
…when the fuck are the nats going to do something about the dpb lifestylers…govt are quick to jump on joe average and tax the shit out of them…..how about focusing on the takers for once…take note whore…Im talkin about you and your filthy ilk…
November 18th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Redbaiter (7848) Vote: at 8:01 pm: A very low and scummy thing to do.
You talk about low morality, about lies and deceit and cowardice. And then you do it all yourself.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
I’ve never conversed or responded to anything Billyborker has written. And I’ve only just realised that apparently he is the same person as Fugley (who I’ve never seen on here) and MyNameIsJack. And I’ve never talked to him either. I wouldn’t know him from a bar of soap.
IIRC most of what Billyborker/MyNameIsJack writes is utter rubbish and I put it into the Philu category (i.e. I mostly skip it). And if what Angus says is true then I think he’s a nasty creep.
I’m sure you’d agree RedBaiter, there’s a difference between a bit of fun and a bit of scum.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
“And it’s also a bit stink trying to associate me with him/it.”
Get off the grass. You commie bastards are all tarred with the exact same brush, There is not a principle or a moral or a standard amongst the lot of you. We on the right know that. We’ve been dealing with you scum for years, and we know exactly what you are capable of, what you will do if you think it is warranted, and what inhuman amoral thugs you always are. Don’t come the raw prawn with me Pete. You’re all cast in the same Progressive mould. There is not a line you will not cross. You have no moral boundaries. None at all.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
starboard, care to explain why you hold such a low opinion of my idealogy, as evidenced by your response in the previous general debate?
…ya get no argument from me on the points raised. Im all for them.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Baiter is a good example of the genuine frustration and lack of trust inherent in our people, the blame obviously lies with the anti-capitalist/freedom movement.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
My previous post should say “anti capitalist / anti freedom movement”
As for starboard, your beliefs are admirable, however you leave me confused as to the intention behind your previous post asserting that im a “tosser”
Regardless, water under the bridge, those who uphold core values like personal responsibility and morality must stick together, anything but is only giving power to the troughers
November 18th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
..hmm , when did I call you a tosser..I call a lot of people tossers…you seem to have slipped my memory.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
In response to my post condemning the woman who so kindly swore at me for suggesting she keep an eye on her near-infant child wandering the street behind her.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
“We on the right ” – so you speak for all of the right? Yeah, wrong.
If Angus is right you’re as bad as fugley. You’ve been a bitter bastard for a long time Russell. Mustn’t be much fun.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:21 pm
So many tossers- so little time.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
Question for philu, Luc etc
Do you believe the world will end in 2012?
You might aswell answer honestly, because your credibility is already non-existant
November 18th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Pete, you’re just a boring fuckwit. Over the ten years I have been writing on the internet, I’ve had the same things you say, exactly the same things, said by legions like you. It cuts no ice. I continue to win. You lose. You have no argument. I see the sand drifting away from under your feet, as every year your ideology grows more and more unpopular, and you become fewer and fewer. The only thing that changes is the degree of desperation you display.
You only have the same old same old. Cliched outrage and attempts at ridicule and personal destruction. You’re so fucken dumb you cannot even see its strategy that’s reached the end of its useful life years ago. Keep it up tho. I enjoy seeing you losers and your fumbling ineptitude when it comes to rationality and poilitcal discourse. It helps signal how right I am. You’re all such predictable stupid one dimensional brain damaged dumbfucks.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
ah yes I remember…well for one..if child gets run over tough titties..the parent should have been watching…its no business of yours and if you yelled and frothed at me I would have told you to get fucked … your view on asians bothered me…I like asians..they are generally good people and your rantings offended me…and your name is Tan !! ??
November 18th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
You’ve achieved what in ten years? Same old same old. Won what? Life isn’t a win or lose game, until we all lose.
I’m not desperate for anything. I don’t desperately hope someone else will do my dirty work and take over the country.
Life’s ok for me. Country’s ok for me. Government’s ok(ish) for me.
What’s stupid about having what you want? Better than wishing for what you can’t have.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
I think you misintepreted my post, and i cannot blame you as i believe it was poorly worded, as i was frustrated at the time
It was not meant to be an attack on all asians, just on asians who are negligent of the safety of their children, and too damned arrogant to accept that they are putting their children in grave danger.
I singled out asians incorrectly, because parents of all ethnicities fall under the umbrella of child neglect.
The fact remains that almost every instance where i have observed a child literally risking his/her life because of the neglect/non attention of their so called parents, that child is of asian decent. I accept that it is possible that this is more to do with the demographic of the area in which i reside.
I disagree with you that it is none of my business, because witnessing a child being gravely neglected is equal or arguably even more serious to witnessing a woman being raped, or a man being beaten to death. In all instances i would get personally involved, whether it be aggresively in the form of direct assistance or passively by notifying police / notifying the irreponsible parent that their behaviour is unacceptable.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
“I’m not desperate for anything.”
How many hundred posts do you make here a week? You’re as desperate as every other scumbag leftist, panicking and prevaricating and lying and obfuscating and ducking and diving as they feel the heat of truth. You’re on your way out you political troglodyte. Get used to it.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
phool? you are very quiet. Must be busy.
New spring heads on the menu, best oil before the main harvest
November 18th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
In what amounts to a victory for Phill Goff & co , our democracy has eroded to the point where i feel uncomfortable voicing my opinion directly and transparently.
November 18th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
I see the thread has deteriorated into its usual noise and filth while I have been out and about. You guys really should grow up. Mike, what sort of credibility do you think you have with gormless questions like that.
@Angus earlier re Lindzen take a look at this article here http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/the_contrarian/
And just to show he is not perfect either here is an extract
“In 2001, Lindzen published a paper speculating that as the Earth warmed, water vapor would decrease in the upper atmosphere, allowing heat to escape back into space more efficiently, and thereby reducing overall temperature.
The paper met with vigorous criticism. Eventually, he disavowed the idea. “That was an old view,” Lindzen said about his five-year-old hypothesis. “I find it insane that I am still forced to explain this.”
and another which shows how that guy is perhaps just an attention seeker
“Despite Lindzen’s acknowledgment that the planet is warming, most of his writing in the media and for various think tanks is spun to imply a far more fundamental disagreement within the scientific community. His most recent Wall Street Journal editorial, for example, includes admissions that the Earth has warmed over the last century, that humans are influencing the climate, that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that its levels continue to rise. The editorial’s title was, “There Is No ‘Consensus’ On Global Warming.”
Now no more on global warming tonight from me. But I will respond tomorrow to whatever follows. I must say GB is turning into a wonderful research tool for the contrary arguments and it may be worthwhile doing a bit of a paper on it and submitting it for publication somewhere. Maybe the Herald, since according to some here it has turned from fundamentalist conservatism into trendy leftie land.
I could title it, lets see, ” The Call of the Wild”?
Or What the mad Bastards are Saying?
November 18th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Luc, you agree the idea of impending doom in 2012 is absurd?
Maybe this can help you understand how we, sane people, believe the idea of impending doom in x year is also absurd
November 18th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Absolutely! That’s the key to being content, and contentment leads to happiness. Yearning after what you don’t have (but apparently need) is the feeling advertising is designed to activate, and this tends to drive happiness away. I’m an economic rightie, but even I can see that rampant consumerism is the source of plenty of misery as the clever convince the gullible to hand their money over.
November 18th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Who is predicting doom in x year Mike??? Ok, excluding when the sun dies.
Do you watch movies?
November 18th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
We, sane people, find the idea of impending doom in the period between x year and x year to be absurd and illogical
Happy now?
November 18th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
I need an antidote to the Fox News noise on here so I’m gonna watch Rachel Maddow. Hot chick!
November 18th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
I just shagged a fat chick today.
Next I’m after a ginga
November 18th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
hot, if you are into masculine faces
hot usually refers to women of similar calibre to nat portman, sophia bush , insert victorias secret model here etc
each to their own i guess..
November 18th, 2009 at 9:23 pm
Funny how not one of you claims to be completely independent of the quotes i posted above, silence is more telling than anything..
November 18th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
tan..you are eye-wateringly boring..not to mention pompous..
and you advocate extreme torture of prisoners..
pick any one of those as reason for the silence..
you will be totally deluded as well.. if you see/read that silence as agreement to the drivel you write..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
November 18th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
Ahh, naturally your smear engine is in overdrive
I do not “advocate” for extreme toture of prisonors, that is a world apart from my suggestion that the option be given exclusively to the family of the innocent victims of henious brutal murderers that you people so passionatley defend and champion
November 18th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
She is cute, isn’t she, Puke? Pity she’s into carpet, though.
It’s funny that Puke is the only one here who watches MSNBC opinion shows.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
Getstaffed, I’ll respond to your 2:26 tomorrow. It’s gone a bit funny on here tonight and I seem to have started it. Cheers.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Pete – re 2012. Check out this – Worldshift 2010, by Dr Ervin Laszlo, Founder and President of The Club of Budapest, Author of WorldShift 2012: Making Green Business, New Politics & Higher Consciousness Work Together.
The Club Of Budapest is an offshoot of the Club of Rome. Dec 21, 2012 is a significant date in the Mayan calendar.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Just to put the record straight.
poor old d4j was once besotted by a young woman by the name of Kirsty, last name I will not reveal, but it wasn’t Bentley. Anyhoo, I can’t blame him for being besotted, she was a charmer, attractive, intelligent, athletic and going places. Sadly for d4j, she chose to go those places with me, and the pooor old sould has never quite gotten over the heartbreak of losing her to me.
November 18th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
Stop your lying you sick fucken up scumbag!
Your internet lies are a credit to the putrid and depraved lefty sewer rats!!
I have NEVER lost anything to such a cowardly creep as you fugley. Police will catch you in time!
November 18th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
“and another which shows how that guy is perhaps just an attention seeker”
Well, disprove the data. Prove the models. Go for it. It is always good to work with actual data as opposed to politically motivated “models”
The link: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monthly_report/sppi_monthly_co2_report_july.html
The IPCC assumes CO2 concentration will reach 836 ppmv by 2100, but, for almost eight years, CO2 concentration has headed straight for only 570 ppmv by 2100. This alone halves all of the IPCC’s temperature projections. Pages 5-6.
Since 1980 temperature has risen at only 2.5 °F (1.5 °C)/century, not the 7 F° (3.9 C°) the IPCC imagines. Pages 7-9.
Sea level rose just 8 inches in the 20th century and has been rising at just 1 ft/century since 1993. Sea level has scarcely risen since 2006. Also, Pacific atolls are not being drowned by the sea, as some have suggested. Pages 10-12.
Arctic sea-ice extent is about the same as it has been at this time of year in the past decade. In the Antarctic, sea ice extent – on a 30-year rising trend – reached a record high in 2007. Global sea ice extent shows little trend for 30 years. Pages 13-15.
Hurricane and tropical-cyclone activity is at its lowest since satellite measurement began. Page 16.
Solar activity has declined again, after a large sunspot earlier in the month. The Sun is still very quiet. Pages 17-18.
Science Focus this month studies the effect of the Sun on the formation of clouds. IT’S THE SUN, STUPID! Pages 22-23.
As always, there’s our “global warming” ready reckoner, and our monthly selection of scientific papers. Pages 24-27.
And finally, a Technical Note explains how we compile our state-of-the-art CO2 and temperature graphs. Page 28.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:49 pm
“I have NEVER lost anything to such a cowardly creep as you fugley. Police will catch you in time!”
Maybe I should give you his name D4J, and the address on Main Street, Oxford, North Canterbury he lives. Then you can go and smash his face in, in person.
November 18th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
SPPI is funded by tobacco and oil interests. It’s junk science.
The US is rated the 19th most corrupt country in the world, according to a new report. That’s just gotta be crap. The place reeks of corruption. and the SPPI is but one example. The US Supreme Court even split down strictly party lines to decide a president!
Look above for my earlier posts on the Arctic and Antartica.
November 19th, 2009 at 12:05 am
“That’s just gotta be crap.”
That peer reviewed scientific data . . .
Yeah.
Ok.
Sure.
*roll eyes*
Whatever.
If you want to garner even some form of credibility on this site, desist with the platitudinous white-liberal-guilt-progressive-minded talking points.
( As if your revisionist take on Islam & the Crusades isn’t a strong enough emetic)
November 19th, 2009 at 12:47 am
19th most reeks of corruption, unlike the other 170+ behind it that are progressive people’s paradises.
November 19th, 2009 at 7:13 am
getstaffed (4191) 10:16 pm
I agree with some of Lazlo’s ideas but not others – especially not ends/starts of ages and cycles and target dates for great or terrible things. Time is an ongoing thing, sure there are cycles but our (or Mayan) calendars are meaningless with nature.
Note in the Mayan link:
To me 2012 is just another spin around the sun, no one can predict what good or bad or ordinary things may happen in that particular year or any other year. Event predictions have been totally unreliable. No one can foretell the future.
No one in mainstream climate science is predicting any year for anything specific for effects of climate change, it’s all just a bunch of possibilities and probabilities. There are certain things, the climate will fluctuate, there will be storms and droughts and floods. If there are significant climate changes for any reason it could be sudden or gradual, sooner or later, no one knows for certain.
November 19th, 2009 at 8:27 am
Angus,
revisionist history has a long and proud history, dating all the back to perhaps 700BC – the time period of the earliest tracts of that wonderful work of historical accuracy, the Bible.
I don’t claim t be the font of all knowledge. I enjoy valid objections and concede when I have clearly mispoke or simply have been proved factually incorrect. Credibility is neither here nor there amongst a bunch of anonymous ranters to cowardly to put their names up for all to see.
And it doesn’t take a lot to find that all the objections raised by the AGW deniers are dealt with in the high profile works like the IPCC reports and those of majr institutions like the NOAA and NASA (and whose works are often distorted and misrepresented).
What puzzles me more is the psychology behind this line of thinking. A seeming willingness to strum a ukulele while the storm clouds gather.
Hurf: And as far as the corruption chart goes, I would say the US is kindly dealt with because the worst corruption there is the legalised corruption by which members of the Houses of Congress raise their funds. But that’s just an opinion.
November 19th, 2009 at 8:52 am
So do you deny that Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC said:
“Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.”
Against that backdrop if you choose to blindly accept anything emanating from the IPCC, despite evidence of data tampering, selective data-set adoption and other junk-science activities then you are a fool.
November 19th, 2009 at 9:07 am
Getstaffed
Given your quote from Schneider above I thought you might enjoy this (hat tip: Not PC). May favourites were all the ones where he goes on about global cooling, back in 1978, before his big career change, he declared
and
Not PC has a hilarious list of “when we were cooling” vs “when we were warming” quotes from him. The common theme is apocalyptic. Of course it’s not surprising when you read this comment from him:
Classic stuff – looks like he needs a remedial stats course from Wegman as well! You’ll note that the question that Julian Simon asked in general is never asked by the warmists: