Greenpeace hypocrisy

March 6th, 2013 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

is a strident campaigner against big oil, and especially against BP.

bp1

A spy has sent in this photo of the Rainbow Warrior being filled up at the weekend – by BP!

Why isn’t the Rainbow Warrior running on biodiesel?

I guess it is the old maxim of a group saying “Do as we say, not as we do.”

Tags: ,

44 Responses to “Greenpeace hypocrisy”

  1. PaulL (5,983 comments) says:

    Hmm. What would happen if BP said “nope, we don’t fill up Greenpeace boats”?

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Cato (1,095 comments) says:

    Well – for the sake of consistency (and not that I want to get into a protracted discussion about it) but that isn’t actually hypocrisy.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. kowtow (7,925 comments) says:

    Further to PaulL

    BP should tell them to “Foxtrot Oscar.”

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. lazza (369 comments) says:

    Nupp … not biofuel … maybe Whaleoil? (Not).

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. SPC (5,473 comments) says:

    PaulL, what if a government said we will check the applications of interest in Mighty River shares and will not send information to those who opposed assets sales?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. dime (9,662 comments) says:

    BAHAHAHA awesome

    good to see BP looking after the stock holders and taking the CASH

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Cato (1,095 comments) says:

    SPC – spot on.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    Greenpeace fill up with BP for the same reason legions of enviromental troughers fly the globe attending conferences in exoctic locations: We, the hoi polloi, need to be saved from ourselves, and they regard it their duty to tell us how and when.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Longknives (4,678 comments) says:

    Stupid Hippies…
    I saw an old Datsun this morning absolutely belching out black smoke- Greenpeace and Green Party stickers plastered over the back windows..(must have been heading to WINZ at that hour of the morning)

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. nmackay1982 (20 comments) says:

    Niall Mackayposted toGreenpeace New Zealand
    16 February near Wellington
    Dear Greenpeace,

    I have been left with a very bitter taste in my mouth today after having a tour of the $36m(NZD) Rainbow Warrior III in Wellington this afternoon.

    I am a huge supporter of Greenpeace’s past success and many of your current campaigns but I feel your attitude towards the public is very worrying.

    I was looking forward to finding out what the Rainbow Warrior actually did. After an amazing tour of the Bob Barker in December with a crew member taking us through every part of the ship I was excited to see what the state-of-the-art Rainbow Warrior could do.

    How did it help Greenpeace achieve it’s objectives? What campaigns is it involved in? What scientific research do you do and for what purpose?

    Instead we queued for half an hour to go on the most expensive sales pitch set up I have ever been on.

    Instead of actual crew taking us round well-meaning volunteers relayed information to us that they clearly knew little about and when questions were asked by the group were quickly deflected as they didn’t have the answers or were uncomfortable answering them. Like why is meat served in the kitchen on the most environmental ship in the world or why do you use diesel instead of biofuels?

    Then after being sat in front of a very expensive TV screen to watch a very expensively produced promo video telling us everything that was on the posters outside we were taken along to the helipad to be told that helicopters land there.

    Finally what has left me with a very very bitter taste in my mouth was being ushered downstairs to the conference room to be met by Brayden your Outreach Coordinator ie. salesperson/fundraiser.

    Now I am not against fundraising, that is what i do for a living for a not-for-profit and have actually worked for Greenpeace in the past. But your attitude towards the public is clearly as commodities and not as giving, caring donors and should be treated thus.

    After a quick cheesy ‘tour’ of the conference room, we were then told by Brayden pretty much that the only way we can make a difference is to join up as a monthly donor then attacked from all angles by other sales people lurking in the shadows trying to join people up for monthly donations. (Nothing about making personal choices that benefit the environment or taking action ourselves, no give the money to Greenpeace to do what with, and we can sleep easy)

    This was very poor class in my opinion. It was like being offered a free gift at a sleazy motel to go in and get a sales pitch for a time-share. Very poor form.

    Not only that, you could get a free t-shirt if you joined up and if you are already a donor and if you INCREASE your donation by $10 a month you can get a t-shirt too.

    You couldn’t buy a t-shirt, donate cash, sign anything, given any information to take personal action and no information about what this $36m vessel does. We weren’t even allowed to see inside of it but shown pictures as it was a ‘working vessel’. The SS Bob Barker was a working vessel too and they had no qualms showing us every nook and cranny of it. And there was absolutely no pressure to give, people gave gladly, bought t-shirts, brought food and bread for the staff, made cookies and bread, reflecting the passion shown to them.

    As I have said I am a fundraiser, I know the need for monthly donors is crucial, but I am also a member of the public and a massive fan of Greenpeace and write this to help you connect with your donors better. Today your treatment has severely turned me off Greenpeace and I doubt I will renew my monthly giving for a very long time and will divert my funds to other causes that are more transparent, and importantly genuine.

    The fact that you are not in the Southern Ocean right now with your state-of-the-art ship protecting whales on the day that the first whale of the season has been killed and using it as the most expensive PR and sales tool is to me sickening.

    I hope you return to your core values soon, stop wasting time with expensive PR campaigns and treat your public with some care and respect.

    Regards,

    Niall Mackay
    Like · · Promote
    Adrie Lopez, Amie Louise Hayes and Mary Yeung like this.

    Niall Mackay 48 hours and no response by email or on Facebook. Poor.
    19 February at 08:13 via mobile · Like

    Greenpeace New Zealand Niall, Thanks for your email and for your feedback here about the open boat days in Wellington – sorry it took a while to get back to you but we’ve been very buisy and spread across the whole country.

    We’re really sorry that you did not have the experience you were hoping for when you came to see the Rainbow Warrior. We would love to be able to show everyone around every part of the ship but due to capacity and in the interest of letting as many people as possible on board, more lengthy tours were just not possible.

    The Rainbow Warrior is in New Zealand to launch the Clean Energy Report and to raise awareness and public opinion on this country’s ability to become a world leader in sustainable energy, adding to both our economy and our clean, green reputation.

    This was the first time the Warrior has been to New Zealand so of course, it is a good opportunity for us to connect with people who identify with the Greenpeace story as well as those who can remember the original ship. It’s never our intention to alienate or put-off the public but we wanted everyone to have the chance to both get on board and to be able to become a member if they wished to do so.

    As you know, fundraising is our lifeblood. We could not exist without the support of individuals who donate because we do not accept funding from governments or corporations. So it is the last thing that we want for people to feel dis-enfranchised with our values and we not only respect our supporters for their commitment and their generosity but we do welcome their feedback as that is how we will become better at what we do.

    It’s not cost effective for us to sell tee-shirts and the the promo video, whilst it may have looked expensive, was filmed in house, using our staff as friends as actors. We couldn’t really make a less expensive film if we tried.

    With regard to Greenpeace not heading to the Southern ocean to directly confront the whaling ships, we are still working hard on this issue in Japan where the heart of the matter lies. And at the moment with the Rainbow Warrior we’re busy working on stopping deep sea oil drilling in NZ waters and sparking an energy revolution. Deep sea oil drilling, should it go ahead, poses a severe threat to the whole marine environment – including whales.
    19 February at 10:53 · Like

    Niall Mackay Kia Ora Stephanie,

    Thank you for taking the time to reply to my email. I am sorry if it was brutal but I was left with quite an unpleasant feeling after Saturday and felt the need to say something, ultimately for the benefit of Greenpeace.

    I respect and appreciate your work on oil drilling in New Zealand and you are correct in the fact that this has a much wider impact affecting whales and dolphins. I feel the same towards many of your amazing campaigns.

    I appreciate the information you have provided about the RW3 but again I feel that a lot of this is very vague and I just don’t know whether that justifies $32m? Especially when, as you point out, you are a not-for-profit relying on donations. Is this a wise expenditure of donors money? I assume you have done your due diligence but I don’t know how that looks to the general public. Especially when you then use it to make a sales pitch. I understand that if this vessel is in operation for 30 years that might not look like a lot of money. If it is used as a worldwide promotional vehicle and sales strategy whether or not it pays itself off or not, I would say this is unethical and a waste of resources.

    Regarding the sales pitch, it was simply done in poor taste. I understand the passion of your fundraisers, and I admire the job they do, it is not easy. I have done it for many years. But the whole theme of it was to me, very sleazy and very cheesy. When Brayden had us in your conference room he could have told us some stories about, not to labour the point, what Greenpeace do on a day to day basis – bringing people closer to the organisation. I understand time is limited but it was literally, ‘Here’s a bell, here’s a piece of wood, here’s a sign, now we need your money’ then attack of the fundraisers. No matter what your justification the image to me, as a member of the public, was we were being corralled through a process to lead to a sales pitch and only for that purpose, and that is not a nice feeling for people. People are intrinsically passionate for your cause and I felt it was quite patronising. I agree you need a sales element to your tours, wholeheartedly, but there are several other ways it could have been done that would have made the organisation looked better.

    In my opinion sacrificing a couple of monthly donors in the short term to give a better longer term outlook on Greenpeace and therefore more donors in the long run would be a better PR exercise than the experience I and everyone else unlucky enough to waste time on the tour had.

    Ultimately I hope my feedback may help your future campaigns and strategies as despite not wishing to alienate and dis-enfranchise your public, this experience has had exactly that effect on me, and I am very sad about that. I feel it may have done the same to others.

    In closing I hope you find a way to become more human again, if that makes sense, because obviously the double-edged sword of being the size you are is the the danger of coming across as a soulless corporation, and I think that is in fact what you do come across as to the general public these days. Ask them.

    Thank you again for your response and I look forward to seeing how future campaigns are towards the public.

    Regards,

    Niall Mackay
    19 February at 22:27 · Like

    Niall Mackay And as for your Clean Energy Report I refer you to this Blog by David Farrar who is more articulate than me;

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2013/02/the_costs_that_greenpeace_didnt_bother_to_calculate.html

    The costs that Greenpeace didn’t bother to calculate
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz
    I blogged yesterday about the Greenpeace report that claimed all these economic benefits of New Zealand becoming 100% renewable and carbon free energy, and somehow was taken seriously despite not e…
    19 February at 22:30 · Like · Remove Preview

    Greenpeace New Zealand Thank you for your feedback Niall Mackay – it has been heard. We do our best but it’s hard to please everyone all the time. The majority of feedback that we received about the open days on the Rainbow Warrior was very positive but it’s also great to ge…See More
    http://greenpe.ac/Xn0uwg
    http://www.greenpeace.org
    20 February at 07:44 · Unlike · 1

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. nmackay1982 (20 comments) says:

    Sorry, I meant to preface with, this was a recent post to Greenpeace on Facebook. I mentioned your recent Kiwiblog post about their report in the comments. Greenpeace have lost their way, and this is just a massive example of this. Why are they not using biofuel? That would probably come from BP anyway. Caught out Greenpeace.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. lazza (369 comments) says:

    Sure! its hypocrisy … or if not, then try some synonyms … two-facedness, insincerity, non-adherence to principles. Seems like “the cap fits” to me. Disregarding pedantic entomology (splg?) of course, OK?, (Can we please get a comments spell checker David? … splg).

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. RRM (9,638 comments) says:

    I guess the theory is that burning a bit of diesel to get to the site of their next protest does a net good and is therefore worth it? Kinda like bombing cities for peace?

    [Curious, I thought DPF was against blind ideological purity? :-) ]

    She’s a motorsailer so she only runs on the motors part time – unlike every other large ship. Apparently they are pretty flash low-emissions engines also..

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. nmackay1982 (20 comments) says:

    I think calling Greenpeace Hippies is an insult to hippies.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. dime (9,662 comments) says:

    RRM – youre a fan of the terrorists?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. alex Masterley (1,498 comments) says:

    RRM you are right about the vessel.

    I checked the specifications. It is pretty solidly low emission and sails rather than motors most of the time.

    It does not appear to use HFO for propuslsion purposes and anyway that would not be delivered to the vessel by road tanker.

    It is most likey they were topping up on fuel for the RIBs which will be diesel and av gas for the choppers that can fly off it.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Tristan (63 comments) says:

    Thats right DPF…nor should they use any plastic (pollution)… or electricity (hydro damns and gas drilling) or eat anything not grown in the back yard (GE, big farmers) in fact they should just kill themselves to avoid using any resources..maybe an environmentally way like drowning…

    Jesus fucking Christ DPF… this is the some of the worst dog whistle politics..we already have whaleoil for that.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Cato (1,095 comments) says:

    Tristan, well – there’s an argument to be made that they’re acting inconsistently, but I agree that it’s a real stretch to call it hypocrisy.

    For example, I would be comfortable with the abolition (or serious reduction) of Working For Families. However, while they are on offer I will readily avail myself of them because that is prudent under the system we have. I want a different system, of course, but until that happens there’s not much point in donning a hair shirt. I don’t think that makes me a hypocrite.

    I don’t think Greenpeace are hypocrites here either – misanthropes maybe, vadals maybe – but probably not hypocrites.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. RRM (9,638 comments) says:

    RRM – youre a fan of the terrorists?

    No but I don’t think “gotcha” politics or stupid criticisms of trite details help anybody.

    Also I like nuts & bolts and things that make horsepower, ships & the sea are part of that, so I decided to check it out…

    As with the Green Party of NZ, I don’t agree with everything Greenpeace do, but their existence prevents a totally open season, and I think that’s a good state of affairs to have, so I think it’s good they’re around.

    {Not to be confused with NZ RMA which does go far too far.]

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. nmackay1982 (20 comments) says:

    It is good that they are around, but they have to stand by their values and be transparent. Something I don’t think they do anymore. Who know’s what Greenpeace do? Yes they make a little bit of noise here and there and post nice pictures on Facebook and cause a bit of outrage. But what do they actually do?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. scrubone (3,082 comments) says:

    Greenpeace have made a lot of hay attacking BP.

    So the question is, why didn’t they use another provider that they have not labeled as the devil incarnate? There must be one or two, surely.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Griff (6,989 comments) says:

    110.000 liters of diesel is not much to move the accommodation of 30 people plus all the inflatable boats, labs, media etc to effectively protest at a range of up to 9500nm.
    300kw at a service speed of 7 kn is extremely efficient.
    I dont see how this is hypocritical.
    They operate in the real world. Fuel is fuel in particular in nz it all comes from basically the same tanks no matter the brand attached.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. PaulL (5,983 comments) says:

    @SPC: it would be amusing to run a public register of who buys the shares. It really makes no difference who Greenpeace buy oil from, as others have noted it comes out of the same tanks, and if the oil majors refused to sell it to them someone else would, and it would just give them publicity.

    Greenpeace do some moderately useful things, but they’ve mostly lost their way, focusing on causes that really don’t need their attention, and that they focus on mostly for fund raising reasons rather than because what they’re doing is in any way effective.

    I think it’s an interesting point that they burn so much oil in doing something that I consider to be entirely a waste of time. I accept that they think differently, but it also factors into my thinking when they tell me that they think I should use less oil. Them burning oil to “save the whales”, which is basically a hobby, is about as useful as them suggesting I have a slower or crappier car. My car is an equally legitimate hobby.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. jacob (16 comments) says:

    There a good description of the Greenpeace diesel dilemma by Patrick Moore (ex Greenpeace) here:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. nmackay1982 (20 comments) says:

    @PaulL: I agree re Fundraising. That ship is primarily a marketing tool and little else.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. jacob (16 comments) says:

    link’s broken above, Rainbow Warrior 3 bit starts at 11:41

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. dime (9,662 comments) says:

    RRM – gotchya politics? its a blog. its a bit of fun.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. infused (646 comments) says:

    Great video. Really interesting. Watched the entire thing

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. PaulL (5,983 comments) says:

    Those who would buy the shares probably aren’t randians. And I haven’t read Rand, but I believe she asserted that just because you don’t agree with something doesn’t mean you don’t participate. In a kind of “use their weapons against them way”, but also in a “if they confiscated your money in taxation, then you’re justified in maximising the value you get from Govt services, even though your first best option would be no tax and no govt services.”

    I’m happy to accept that also applies to Greenpeace and to people buying Mighty River Power shares. Doesn’t stop me finding it to be mildly amusing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Athena (10 comments) says:

    Once Greenpeace’s work is done and the world is powered by clean renewable energy they won’t need to use fossil fuel to campaign around the world. If there had been biodiesel available I expect they would have used it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Reid (16,106 comments) says:

    Once Greenpeace’s work is done and the world is powered by clean renewable energy they won’t need to use fossil fuel to campaign around the world.

    If the world ever is “powered by clean renewable energy” the thing which would have accomplished it is thousands of hated evil commercial operations deciding the cost benefits finally stack up.

    In the real world this is always how it works.

    Why Gweenpeace and in fact any other lefty imagines they actually do make a difference by “raising awareness” is beyond me. I mean, who isn’t already aware of every single thing that Gweenpeace spends millions each and every year pointing out? Not to mention the carbon emissions it takes to do it. I mean you’d have to be a real moron living in a cave if you weren’t already aware and there aren’t too many of them, are there. And if you are a moron living in a cave, whose going to listen to you as you proclaim your new “awareness?” Most people would just tell you to “F-off ya useless loser and get a job.” Wouldn’t they.

    So in the real world, whichever which way you cut it, Gweenpeace and all the other lefty campaigners actually have a net cost, not just in financial terms, to those idiots who give them money, for no return, but also to the precious enviwonment, which they proceed to rape and pillage every single time they put to sea, what with their carbon emissions and their filthy contaminating vessels.

    Not that this reality ever stops either them or the idiots who support said rape and pillage. Which just goes to show how very dangerous it is to conduct one’s life based on the depth of warmth one generates in one’s own tummy, as opposed to using one’s head with real-world data to figure out how to make a real difference, like say setting up a website and using that to raise awareness. Which on any analysis has to be far more enviwonmentally fweindly than pointlessly sailing the ocean in a stinking, dirty diesel-fuelled steel tub which was probably built using steel from a belching Chinese coal-fueled foundry.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. lilman (920 comments) says:

    Green peace can go to hell and if diesel gets them to hell quicker then good on them.
    At a coal mine in the south an application was turned down to open cast mine because of some snails,all at the bequest of Green peace,the rest is History.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    Just letting people know that there are two Tristans here, and I think that the image is excellent and captures the hypocrisy of Greenpeace perfectly.

    Yes, I know they need to power their boat with something, and there is little alternative aside from polluting stinking oil. But that is true for everyone who uses oil. We’re all in the same boat. No-one wants to pollute the environment, but we know it’s a necessary evil – and we don’t condemn others who require oil (the whole world).

    If I ran a boat up and down Waitemata Harbour with advertising banners for businesses (sort of like they do with planes), you can bet I’d be blasted by Greenies for wasting fuel. But this is exactly what Greenpeace are doing!

    I avoid using BP at the pump because of the spill at the Gulf of Mexico. That makes me more environmentally caring than Greenpeace. I doubt they care, they’re just a corporate money making machine. (Urghh, I sound more commie than Greenpeace too!)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Athena (10 comments) says:

    The full costs of fossil fuel use are NOT counted at present. In the real world carbon dioxide emissions are acidifying the oceans and changing the climate. Only a moron living in a cave wouldn’t know that. A cost/benefit analysis that doesn’t count real world costs is rubbish. Fossil fuel companies should be paying for drought relief and flood damage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    Athena, You are peddling the modern-day equivalent of snake oil. The problem, is your suppliers know it’s a fraud, but you appear to believe. Do some of your own research. Subscribe to a bunch of Google new alerts. In short, wake up and start thinking for yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. seanmaitland (472 comments) says:

    Yeah, nah. Sorry, but DPF is 100% correct. There is supreme hypocrisy on display here, despite how many apologists are here rapping on about irrelevant fluff like engine emissions.

    Greenpeace are highly critical of BP, yet are happy to use their fuel. The emissions resulting from it are completely irrelevant, it doesn’t change anything about how BP obtained the fuel or their business practices.

    .

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. ephemera (563 comments) says:

    Hey, DPF, next time you use a public road or library, or watch TVNZ, can we accuse you of hypocrisy? I thought you were a strident critic of socialism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Griff (6,989 comments) says:

    KK

    Subscribe to a bunch of Google new alerts

    Yes and apply a little discernment as to the quality, content and source of the information.
    You would be amazed how many story’s are just empty echos with no substance.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. krazykiwi (9,189 comments) says:

    Griff – absolutely. We live in an age where there’s no lack of information, more a lack of the wisdom to critique the vast quantity of the stuff that finds us. I have anywhere between 20 and 50 Google news alerts active at any one time, and most weeks I cull some, and add others. I also have a bunch of [mostly free] newsfeeds which get the same treatment – particularly if Goggle delivers the same link first!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Athena (10 comments) says:

    @ kk. ‘do your own research’ ‘subscribe to google alerts’. If that’s your idea of research, not suprising you don’t understand the real world and stuff like the laws of physics and chemistry. The fossil fuel companies are the snake oil salesmen and they have sucked you in bigtime.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Griff (6,989 comments) says:

    Athena
    KK is one of KBs climate change denial nutjobs
    He links to wuwt, bishop hill and other such anti science websites
    My comment was a dig at his propensity to believe any source so long as it says climate change is not happening no matter if the site is proven to be spreading rubbish.I keep a Google news feed on climate change as it gives me an idea of the next pile of anti science excrement to be posted on here as fact. It is also quite amusing to see these anti science posts get cycled by the rest of the climate denial nutters without a sherd of insight into the emptiness of the content of the usual rubbish.

    Here is the latest rubbish from WUWT for instance watch it go round the echo chamber :lol:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/25/fact-check-for-andrew-glickson-ocean-heat-has-paused-too/

    http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/noaa_upper_ocean_heat_content.png?w=640&h=518
    pity the yellow line is not the actual trend just a made up line to skew the facts
    Here is the actual trend
    http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/ohc2.jpg?w=500&h=322

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. tristanb (1,133 comments) says:

    ephemera:

    Hey, DPF, next time you use a public road or library, or watch TVNZ, can we accuse you of hypocrisy? I thought you were a strident critic of socialism.

    He can speak for himself, but I think DPF supports publicly funded libraries (see the recent blog post).

    You would be free to call him a hypocrite if he complained about public libraries, refused to pay tax, and then still went to a library. You would also be able to call him a hypocrite if he lobbied to get libraries made “user pays” then used one while refusing to pay.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. hippybikerchick (2 comments) says:

    Reply to: Green peace can go to hell and if diesel gets them to hell quicker then good on them.
    At a coal mine in the south an application was turned down to open cast mine because of some snails,all at the bequest of Green peace,the rest is History.

    Um, wrong… this was Forest & Bird??

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. hippybikerchick (2 comments) says:

    Reply to: So in the real world, whichever which way you cut it, Gweenpeace and all the other lefty campaigners actually have a net cost, not just in financial terms, to those idiots who give them money, for no return, but also to the precious enviwonment, which they proceed to rape and pillage every single time they put to sea, what with their carbon emissions and their filthy contaminating vessels.

    Reid, I am not an idiot, I am very well educated, and am allowed to donate my cash to whatever cause I wish.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.