This is a funny video, although I do tend to believe that the Earth's environmental balance may be more delicate than he makes out.
Here's something interesting I just came across in a British left-of-center site (http://shirazsocialist.wordpress.com/):
"Something just and sensible may or may not come out of the global summit in Copenhagen. But , at least, the anti-science storm-in-a-teacup of the East Anglian emails seems to have made little impact, despite the best efforts of the ultra-reactionary oil lobby eminating from both Texas and Saudi Arabia. The fact remains that climate change “deniers” (when they’re not simply Saudi and Texan oil men) are a bunch of cranks, conspiracy theorists and ultra-right nutters who blithly ignore what 95% of reputable scientists in the world have to say on the subject.
"It’s unfortunate, however, that the bulk of the green movement, in Britain and internationally, is made up of middle class readers of the Guardian and similar publications round the world. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong: just that their failure to address the concerns of working class people plays into the hands of the deniers. Similarly, most of the reformist and revolutionary ”left” (just like most bourgeois politicians) refuse to acknowledge that effective enforcement of emissions requires a global enforcement regime, with the power to override national sovereignty: both US right-wingers and the anti-EU “left” recoil from that.
"But, most important of all, workers in Britain and the “developed” countries must not be driven into the hands of the anti-environmental backlash by middle class Guardian readers and ruling class parasites of the Zac Goldsmith variety. Nick Cohen (back on form) has some good stuff to say about this."
Here are some bits from the piece by British journalist Nick Cohen's that was referred to just above:
"The feeling of suppressed class war is back. Globally, environmentalism is a middle-class cause, and in Britain, disastrously for its supporters, the children of the aristocracy and super-rich dominate the green movement. As before, many onlookers fear that they will pay the price for the soothing of the consciences of the wealthy. The conspiracy theories and the wails from the under-educated at the pretensions of the intellectuals have a tired ring, too. We appear to be on an old battlefield.
"...A right-leaning Australian journalist told me that, for conservatives there, "climate change is now morphing from a science issue into yet another front line in the culture wars, in which any obsession of the inner-city, mung-bean-flavoured-tofu-eating, latte-slurping political/academic/media class is automatically the target of resentment and scorn'...
"Add the disgraceful behaviour of the scientists at East Anglia's climatic research unit, which has given loonies everywhere a new tune, and environmentalists have reason to be worried.
Internal contradictions in the new populism
"Perhaps they should not be too despairing. Internal contradictions run through the new populism as surely as they ran through the old religious right.
"There is a limit to the number of people who can believe that 95% of qualified scientists are engaged in a plot to deceive a gullible public. And even those who buy the conspiratorial narrative are still open to charges of not knowing their real interests. Conservatives boast that unlike latte-slurping liberals they believe in national defence, and are willing to fight for the best values of their country. They seem sublimely unaware that the carbon economy they are so determined to preserve aids and abets the enemies of democracy."
But , at least, the anti-science storm-in-a-teacup of the East Anglian emails seems to have made little impact, despite the efforts of the ultra-reactionary oil lobby .....
This is also the same Corus which, as we reported last week, potentially stands to make £1.2 billion over the next three years by cashing in on now surplus EU carbon credits given to the firm, plus cash paid through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), gained by transferring Redcar's steel production to India.
Tata stands to gain from the CDM from being allocated credits for notional carbon "savings" gained from investing in a new steel plant in the Indian province of Orissa. Coincidentally, this will initially produce 3 million tons of hot rolled steel – exactly the capacity of the mothballed Redcar plant.
In another "strange but true" coincidence, the CDM scheme – which was set up to implement the 1997 Kyoto Protocol - is administered by the UN, of which Pachauri is a senior official. He is also one of the main cheer-leaders for the carbon trading scheme represented by the CDM.
It seems that those with faith are always better than those with facts and now the latest cuss word is "denier".
Analogous to this where faith trumps facts is a video where Lord Monckton interviews a Norwegian follower of Greenpeace Lord Monckton vs. Greenpeace
In your post Rael Jean Isaac, Ruth King: Trapped by the Axis of Anti-Semitism: Left, Right and Islam -
one finds a similar psychology at play where the faith overrides facts, be it climategate or antisemitism
From Michael Neumann, professor of something (hatred of Jews?) at Trent Univ., in Canada: “I am not interested in the truth, or justice, or understanding, or anything else, except so far as it serves that purpose…If an effective strategy means that some truths about the Jews don’t come to light, I don’t care. If an effective strategy means encouraging reasonable anti-Semitism, or reasonable hostility to Jews, I also don’t care. If it means encouraging vicious racist anti-Semitism, or the destruction of the State of Israel, I still don’t care.”
One is not dealing with rational people, but given the power they would be the worst of dictators.
Those who prefer an existence based on rationale and facts had better reevaluate their situation on the playing field.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Good stuff :)
I had to link to it.
This is a funny video, although I do tend to believe that the Earth's environmental balance may be more delicate than he makes out.
Here's something interesting I just came across in a British left-of-center site (http://shirazsocialist.wordpress.com/):
"Something just and sensible may or may not come out of the global summit in Copenhagen. But , at least, the anti-science storm-in-a-teacup of the East Anglian emails seems to have made little impact, despite the best efforts of the ultra-reactionary oil lobby eminating from both Texas and Saudi Arabia. The fact remains that climate change “deniers” (when they’re not simply Saudi and Texan oil men) are a bunch of cranks, conspiracy theorists and ultra-right nutters who blithly ignore what 95% of reputable scientists in the world have to say on the subject.
"It’s unfortunate, however, that the bulk of the green movement, in Britain and internationally, is made up of middle class readers of the Guardian and similar publications round the world. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong: just that their failure to address the concerns of working class people plays into the hands of the deniers. Similarly, most of the reformist and revolutionary ”left” (just like most bourgeois politicians) refuse to acknowledge that effective enforcement of emissions requires a global enforcement regime, with the power to override national sovereignty: both US right-wingers and the anti-EU “left” recoil from that.
"But, most important of all, workers in Britain and the “developed” countries must not be driven into the hands of the anti-environmental backlash by middle class Guardian readers and ruling class parasites of the Zac Goldsmith variety. Nick Cohen (back on form) has some good stuff to say about this."
Here are some bits from the piece by British journalist Nick Cohen's that was referred to just above:
"The feeling of suppressed class war is back. Globally, environmentalism is a middle-class cause, and in Britain, disastrously for its supporters, the children of the aristocracy and super-rich dominate the green movement. As before, many onlookers fear that they will pay the price for the soothing of the consciences of the wealthy. The conspiracy theories and the wails from the under-educated at the pretensions of the intellectuals have a tired ring, too. We appear to be on an old battlefield.
"...A right-leaning Australian journalist told me that, for conservatives there, "climate change is now morphing from a science issue into yet another front line in the culture wars, in which any obsession of the inner-city, mung-bean-flavoured-tofu-eating, latte-slurping political/academic/media class is automatically the target of resentment and scorn'...
"Add the disgraceful behaviour of the scientists at East Anglia's climatic research unit, which has given loonies everywhere a new tune, and environmentalists have reason to be worried.
Internal contradictions in the new populism
"Perhaps they should not be too despairing. Internal contradictions run through the new populism as surely as they ran through the old religious right.
"There is a limit to the number of people who can believe that 95% of qualified scientists are engaged in a plot to deceive a gullible public. And even those who buy the conspiratorial narrative are still open to charges of not knowing their real interests. Conservatives boast that unlike latte-slurping liberals they believe in national defence, and are willing to fight for the best values of their country. They seem sublimely unaware that the carbon economy they are so determined to preserve aids and abets the enemies of democracy."
Here's all of Nick Cohen's article:
http://tinyurl.com/ydanbk4
Joanne,
But , at least, the anti-science storm-in-a-teacup of the East Anglian emails seems to have made little impact, despite the efforts of the ultra-reactionary oil lobby .....
so here's something to ponder on
Big Carbon
This is also the same Corus which, as we reported last week, potentially stands to make £1.2 billion over the next three years by cashing in on now surplus EU carbon credits given to the firm, plus cash paid through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), gained by transferring Redcar's steel production to India.
Tata stands to gain from the CDM from being allocated credits for notional carbon "savings" gained from investing in a new steel plant in the Indian province of Orissa. Coincidentally, this will initially produce 3 million tons of hot rolled steel – exactly the capacity of the mothballed Redcar plant.
In another "strange but true" coincidence, the CDM scheme – which was set up to implement the 1997 Kyoto Protocol - is administered by the UN, of which Pachauri is a senior official. He is also one of the main cheer-leaders for the carbon trading scheme represented by the CDM.
It seems that those with faith are always better than those with facts and now the latest cuss word is "denier".
Analogous to this where faith trumps facts is a video where Lord Monckton interviews a Norwegian follower of Greenpeace
Lord Monckton vs. Greenpeace
Sol,
In your post Rael Jean Isaac, Ruth King: Trapped by the Axis of Anti-Semitism: Left, Right and Islam -
one finds a similar psychology at play where the faith overrides facts, be it climategate or antisemitism
From Michael Neumann, professor of something (hatred of Jews?) at Trent Univ., in Canada:
“I am not interested in the truth, or justice, or understanding, or anything else, except so far as it serves that purpose…If an effective strategy means that some truths about the Jews don’t come to light, I don’t care. If an effective strategy means encouraging reasonable anti-Semitism, or reasonable hostility to Jews, I also don’t care. If it means encouraging vicious racist anti-Semitism, or the destruction of the State of Israel, I still don’t care.”
One is not dealing with rational people, but given the power they would be the worst of dictators.
Those who prefer an existence based on rationale and facts had better reevaluate their situation on the playing field.