text:
Lomborg's Centre cancelled: UWA caves in to bullies who use anger to silence debate »
Maurice Newman triggers the rabid "Conspiracy Theorist" smoke bomb. Is he teasing the hypocrites?
UPDATE: And the namecalling goes on, days later at the ABC. Who knew the words "order", "new" and "world" are triggers for conspiracy-theory-psychoanalysis?
Yesterday Maurice Newman dared suggest that the real climate change agenda was "concentrated political authority". I watched his article on The Australian get quickly repeated through the SMH and many other outlets, which wouldn't always happen. I counted down the hours until Newman was called a "conspiracy theorist" — about 18.
I expect Maurice Newman knew exactly what game he was playing today. Like tapping a knee to trigger a reflex, the words "World Government" always provokes outraged mockery and namecalling as if it were against the laws of physics rather than being the banal, obvious desire of a certain part of the population. There's a reason there's no hit song called "Nobody wants to rule the world".
Was Newman baiting the gullible fans of a man-made catastrophe in order to get his message spread far and wide? If he was, it was successful. Now it's up to us to pick up the ball and point out that hypocrisy of the sacred taboo — only a certain class are allowed to discuss "world-government" (that's the class who like the idea).
If you fantasize of a Global Democracy or an Earth Parliament you are a Saint of the Poor. Let us cheer your insight! But if you aren't sold on the biggest of big-government ambitions, namely a global bureaucracy or A Single World Government, you are a rabid conspiracy theorist – park your brain in the cone of silence, while we laugh at you!
If Maurice Newman had talked of global bureaucracy or an earth democracy his article might have been ignored. His words would probably not have been repeated all over the lamestream media, but left leaning journalists and editors salivate over the chance to mock someone they love to hate. But by using this obvious bait, he reaches more readers and gives rational people the chance to talk about important things like the dangers of big-government, and the lack of polite debate. There is no intelligent discussion of the risks and benefits of One Giant State. There is only inane name-calling "conspiracy theorist". Those who throw it,hope to hide that they have no argument, only abusive weak namecalling.
Is it really the U.N.'s resolve,
To create climate crisis to 'solve',
With their ultimate goal,
Being worldwide control,
Then our rights and our freedoms dissolve?
– Ruairi
"Conspiracy theorist" is the mindless term used to beat down a rational discussion.
It's a kind of hyper-hypocrisy and nobody bothers to hide it. When Christina Figueres, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, says she wants to transform the global economy, or praises Chinese dictators, she's cheered as a visionary. When Bob Brown dreams of a global democracy and parliament, he gets a standing ovation. When Maurice Newman talks about the same thing, people say he should be sacked.
When anyone points out the ambitious, self-serving goals of personal power, it's time to break out the "conspiracy-theorist" smoke machine, lest anyone start to talk about the dark side of the mini "World Government" called the UN, and that turns the public off the idea of a bigger darker version.
We've discussed this issue many times here. David Evans mapped out the theme and made the connections years ago, in Climate Coup — The Politics. The greatest loss of sovereignty in the history of the planet almost occurred in 2009 at Copenhagen, where most of the countries of the world planned to cede control over energy and parts of their economy to a global bureaucracy. In the event the Chinese baulked and others followed. We knew then that anyone who uses the term "world government" would get called a conspiracy theorist:
The Trademark Tactics of the Regulating Class
If you oppose the regulating class, you will get called an "extremist", a "nut", a "conspiracy theorist", "right wing", and every variation of "stupid" and "ignorant", irrespective of the merits of what you say.
There is no secret "conspiracy"
There is just the bleedingly obvious systematic problem that big-government players have an incentive to make government bigger and competition smaller.
As Evans said:
Global Warming: What's At Stake for You
If you are an economic member of the regulating class, a global bureaucracy instigated by the alleged need to regulate CO2 emissions would be terrific: more jobs, power, and money for bureaucrats and their allies. You would be part of what would effectively become a ruling class, free to tax a captive population whatever they could bear and pay yourselves whatever you "know" you're worth.
For everyone else, what's at stake is freedom from the demands of a hostile ruling class, as well as more disposable income, more choice, less red tape, and a better quality of life. The new regulating class—bureaucrats, academics, greenies—look down on others as stupid and morally inferior, they don't like people who make real stuff, and they don't like the private sector or the marketplace. They would be happy for the everyone else to compete in the marketplace to make them stuff, but they themselves won't have to compete. Their regulations would be global so there would be no escape, and competition between nations vying for our services and taxes would shrivel.
Maurice Newman is flying direct into the Flak. Bravo. Let's not shy away, but head straight in to discuss the way they use namecalling, insults and denigration to silence a debate they really don't want to have. (Predictably on the ABC site The Drum free speech is vital but only when the topic is "allowable". Don't hold your breath waiting for the ABC to discuss the dangers of silencing skeptical professors, nobel prize winners, and half the citizens of Australia.)
Maurice Newman triggers the rabid "Conspiracy Theorist" smoke bomb. Is he teasing the hypocrites? , 9.2 out of 10 based on 135 ratings
May 9th, 2015 | Tags: Conspiracy Theorist, Free Speech, Name-calling, Newman (Maurice) | Category: Big-Government, Free Speech, Global Warming, Politics | Print This Post | Email This Post |
135 comments to Maurice Newman triggers the rabid "Conspiracy Theorist" smoke bomb. Is he teasing the hypocrites?
Climate catastrophists are pinning much hope (perhaps even some prayers to Gaia) in an imminent El Nino to save their flagging stocks in man-made global warming.
Without an El Nino, this year's Paris IPPC global talkfest will a damp squib.
Robin Pittwood
And if El Niño should kindly cause a warming for a few months, then obviously that warming wasn't due to CO2.
That's true Robin, ENSO has nothing to do with AGW, but there is a catastrophe looming and its called global cooling. It appears to have already begun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GZnzkxtkMc
Rational people like you and I might think that ENSO is an example of Natural Variability that has nothing to do with CO2 or the Greenihouse Theory.
But a Gaian believes that missing heat due to rising CO2 is being stored in the deep Oceans, a building time bomb, that just needs the right conditions to come bursting forth. if an El Niño should relult in any warming on any temperature measure that will be seem as a canary in a coal.mine type warning. Gaia has spoken. Humans have just a few years to mend their evil ways before the inevitable apocalypse engulfs us all.
In this way the prophesy will be fulfilled. Hence the rising tide of f excitement and fervor leading up to the Paris festival.
'Millenarianism is the belief by a religious, social, or political group or movement in a coming major transformation of society, after which all things will be changed.'
The high priests have warned us of impending global warming, but its not going to happen. Maurice Newman has put himself on the line to receive ridicule and its worked in getting a conversation going on the road to Paris.
Shaking people out of their religious malaise will require more individuals of Newman's heroic proportions, it would be great if Lomborg threw off his lukewarm coat and joined the coolists.
Sorry for the hijack – wanted to link close to original story:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-11/sparrow-maurice-newman-v-the-un/6460160
The ABC trotted out a luvvie to write an opinion piece about Newman to try and paint him as a conspiracy nutter. Been sipping the Lew Koolaid that lad.
So the communist China will save us from this madness again in Paris this year just like they did in Copenhagen in 2009. We will be saved by a totalitarian society that does want to give its power the UN burocrats.. So Mao killings have not been "waisted" after all. In other words reason is out of the door. This is not to say that it was there in the first place. The world is as crazy as in the 20th century and before that. No amount of knowledge that now anyone can easily access has eased the amount of stupidity that rules the world.
cementafriend
Would you like a list of countries that will not be signing over any power to the UN? Here some- China, North Korea, India, Pakistan (because India will not sign), Russia, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Burma, Cambodia, Japan, Canada and likely Brazil & Nigeria. So close to half the world's population and two countries with a UN veto. China and Russia will probably not go to Paris.
There are quite a few articles coming out of China about climate cycles and past warm periods. Xi Jinping (Chinese president pronounced Chi ) studied chemical engineering at University. He will understand when his advisers talk about Thermodynamics and Heat Transfer (engineering subjects). Europe & US do not like Putin while he would welcome to destroy their ambitions. Beside there are Russian scientists and engineers would are predicting a cooling climate.
It was notable that Xi was standing beside Putin at the parade in Moscow to honour the Russian dead in WW2.
Putin knows it is a farce.
Remember his warship doing 'climate research'.
A different Bill
The Russian warships in the arctic were demonstrating the capability of Russia to take over Canada's arctic territories. This is Russia's next move if they are succesful in the Ukraine.
That is why Canada's prime minister Stephen Harper is so adamant about Russia getting out of the Ukraine. Harper even went along with lowering the price of crude oil to make
Russia suffer losses in spite of having the same results for Canada.
Correct except the point about oil prices. Those are the result of the OPEC countries (led by Saudi Arabia) dropping prices to artificial lows to regain control of the markets.
Unfortunately, we are still having to put up with Putin's Puppets, who love to extol vlad's virtues and tell us all how evil the west is. (They are especially active in Canada trying to tell everyone that Harper is responsible for everything bad-we call them Harper Haters.)
The delegation to Copenhagen from China told delegates that there had been three warmer periods during the 3,600 years of civilisation in China than, we now know, ended in 1998. And that each warmer period had brought increased prosperity as plant and crop yields increased markedly.
King Geo
In the early 1500′s Renaissance mathematician & astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus used his scientific research to disprove the populist "Geocentric Theory" (ie that the Sun revolves around the Earth) and promoted the total opposite, his revolutionary "Heliocentric Theory" (ie that planet Earth and the other planets revolve around the Sun) – and didn't that go over well – he was castigated by "mainstream religious groups". Now 500 years on and some deja vu. Maurice Newman states the obvious, ie that the "Theory of AGW" is a myth and that it is promoted by the UN to achieve "World Govt Control", ie essentially a "Communist" doctrine – and sure enough he too, like Copernicus also gets castigated, this time by "mainstream AGW/Climate Change religious groups". History shows that science wins out in the end – so inevitably Maurice Newman, together with millions of other "AGW Skeptics", will be proven right.
Copernicus was also fearful and delayed the publication of his work until his death bed when a printed copy was delivered to him. For a clergyman and able administrator to write such monumental work that directly challenged church,s doctrine was remarkable indeed. An Incredible courage that far surpasses today's conditions long after giordano Bruno was burned for suggesting that extraterrestrial worlds may exist. Today there is no such fear and yet the corruption and the lack of courage is pervasive in the academia.
In the nineteen century schools Ptolemy,s system was still taught by the polish teachers unaware that their compatriot "abolished" it 300 years before. It seems that the pervasive stupidity does not have historical and geographical boundaries. Sadly despite unprecedented access to the 21st century oracle called the internet where anything can be found instantly today is no different.
MadJak
Bravo King Geo,
There is a great book on this – it's called the book that was never read" – I think, from memory. The tactics and arguments used against the Heliocentric theory are verbatim transcripts of the arguments used to propagate AGW Similar argument were used against the printing press as well – it always comes down to power politics.
The more time moves on, the more people are shown to be the same.
David-of-Cooyal in Oz
G'day Jo,
And thanks. I hope to be able to read the original Australian article later today or tomorrow.
I would like to say thank you also to Maurice. I suspect such a letter to SMH wouldn't get editorial approval, but I'll try something. Do you have a shareable contact for him?
Yesterday I sent emails of approval (of Maurice) to Greg Hunt and my local member, but no acknowledgement so far.
Dave B
G'day,
I've just sent the following letter to the SMH., under the heading "Maurice Newman".
" The letters you published in your Saturday edition were all in opposition to the views expressed of Maurice Newman as published in Friday's Australian. I fully support what he wrote, and offer two books as supporting evidence.
On the falsity of the IPCC proposition of CAGW: Adelaide Professor Ian Plimer's "Heaven + Earth…", from which I conclude that the long sought "climate sensitivity" factor is zero; and on the reliability of IPCC positions on the science: Canadian investigative journalist Donna Laframboise's "The delinquent teenager…".
(I added my name etc as they require.)
I'm afraid my confidence level on its being published exactly matches my estimate of sensitivity.
Both books are available in hard copy and as ebooks. They have been available for some years now, and have not been challenged to deniability.
Monday morning, and I received this reply:
"Dear Mr B ,
The Herald does not support the views of climate change denialists, because most of the world's scientists support the evidence that shows climate change is real.
Our policy in the letters pages is not to publish the views of people who claim climate change is not occurring. This is a policy we announced last year and published in the Herald with the support of the editor-in-chief.
Marc McEvoy
Letters co-editor, writer
1 Darling Island Road,
T: 02 9282 2792″
I was disappointed, but not surprised. Is this censorship, or merely bias?
Most of what Maurice Newman wrote is incontestable, and the rest of it on fairly safe ground. Newman actually quotes Figueres. How can she argue against what she actually said.
Mark Scott is up for replacement. Maurice, how do you feel about another stint at the ABC. You'd have my vote.
Which of course means he is not a conspiracy theorist. Not only are Left Wing and most journalists incredibly dumb when it comes to having even a very basic layman's understanding of climate science but also, in this case, of simple English.
A conspiracy theory by definition is about covert or secret activities. Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, as you say, has been quite open in her plans to attempt via a manipulation of AGW (there can be no ACC without AGW acting as the agent) to alter national economic paradigms to conform to the UN model.
Safetyguy66
Spot on TedM. There is no dark conspiracy required, many of the proponents of central control are completely open about it.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/brown-advocates-for-one-world-parliament-20110629-1gqz1.html <– Bob Brown opens up about his dictatorial aspirations
http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/05/climate-chief-world-economy/ <—- Christina Figueres tells us what we already knew
And so it was:
Maurice called out Maurice
Strong is an architect of global governance and has been described as "a cross between Rasputin and Machiavelli."
He is quoted as saying:
"Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse."
Strong is also described as
an entrepreneur, environmentalist and one of the world's leading proponents of the United Nations' involvement in world affairs. His cousin was Anna Louise Strong, a known Marxist with strong connections to Communist China.[1] This affords Strong favored status in China and is one explanation why he is so welcome there and why he resides there most of the year.
So, when we think 'conspiracy' of course there's a quasi-overt 'conspiracy' by the few with the tactical 'admissions' of Figueres or Strong, a movement begun with a small snowball and kept rolling, inevitably allowing it to gain critical mass and momentum, vacuuming all before it, from the well-meaning, misdirected 'save the planet' enthusiasts and divesting eco-sycophantic local councils, to the grimly intentioned eco-marxist activists and their friends over in the cafes, the progressive frappe sipping elite at The Conversation for whom damaging a finger nail at a keyboard is a life-changing event.
Newman called out Strong. It's a very big deal. It's not a pussy game of cat and mouse or some frivolous parlour entertainment, or even a snigger over the frappe. The momentous achievement that is Western civilisation and democracy lying in the valley beneath the precipice, a sacred edge that the greatest avalanche of totalitarianism we have ever seen on this Earth is currently thundering toward, is requiring of far more than our concerted effort to arrest.
This was what Newman called out.
For many it is impossible to grasp let alone concede. For some it is a call to research, or even arms if you will. For others, it will elicit the predictable denial, anger, resentment and deflection.
I call it an act of divine intervention. It is no less magnificent than the unpredicted pause, or the silent sun.
They admit themselves.
What was Winston Churchill's quote? Was it "Democracy os the worst form of government, except for all the others"?
Mike Borgelt
The best form of government is one where it doesn't do much besides defend against external threat and impose some reasonable civil order and has little effect on people's lives. That way it doesn't matter whether it is a democracy, monarchy, dictatorship etc.
Isn't the saving grace of Democracy the audience's ability to throw out the cast and start over with a completely new one from time to time ?
That way you're not so reliant on anyone getting it right because you just throw them out when it becomes abundantly obvious they're going wrong.
You couldn't do that with an appointed bureaucracy at the UN, just as you can't do that with the appointed ineptocracy of the European Commission.
These academics are total fantasists living in an imaginary world that is simple enough for their intellectual comfort and contains no "wicked problems". On climate change they have no grasp of the issue or its history.
"for most of its life as a policy issue climate change was perceived as an intangible, hard to define, connect and quantify." The IPCC did this 24 years ago with the FAR. The 4 subsequent Assessment Reports have barely altered the definitions, connections and quantification since. The science was "settled" then and, at Rio 1992, the whole world accepted this so that would not have to concern themselves with "intangibles" an their further deliberations.
And how about this for arse upwards gobbledygook -
"Climate change is the sharpest manifestation of challenges… that include, cybersecurity, corporate profit sharing, deepening inequality, porous borders and the movements of people and money that spill through them".
A "manifestation" is an outcome or indication of another entity the exact opposite of what they are trying to convey.
A large F for comprehension.
They are exactly the targets Maurice Newman is winding up.
" it means coming up with disruptive solutions like coalitions of countries to tackle climate change"
Have they even heard of the UNFCCC? What else is the Conference of Parties?
By the way – a coalition is not any form of unitary government in that its existence is defined by the separation of its parts. "World Government" is also an onanistic fantasy.
Diogenese1 = Diogenes the Cynic?
The Climate Commission pulled out all stops.
It's wonderful. Newman is doing what Tim Blair does – pressing a single button and sitting back with the popcorn. It's the best strategy – let the warmies mock themselves with their idiotic over-reaction to the truth.
We have nothing to worry about in the USA. The Army says it is doing the Jade Helm-15 training to train for fighting foreign terrorists. Maybe, but there are extensive training areas on US military bases which were used for the gulf war in Desert Storm in 1990-1, for the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other foreign conflicts.
Why is it necessary to now train in the Western US and to designate two of the most Republican states as "hostile"? Why is it necessary to infiltrate US troops into Southwest cities in civilian clothes, i.e. undercover troops? Why does the Jade Helm – 15 training have to last for 2 months?
The Army says it will only involve 1200 Special Forces, but what about the airplanes, helicopters, military vehicles, etc. to secretly bring out-of-uniform troops into our cities and towns?
Finally, why can't this training be done on US bases as in all previous wars, or at overseas bases as often used in previous wars? This is unprecedented.
PS: How many people would like Obama to be sending undercover Special Forces into their towns and cities?
I've been mixed up in military training exercises twice, both times with regards to oilfield infrastructure. Being on a production platform and having a fire alarm wake everyone up at some ridiculous hour of the night, only to find the lifeboat area swarming with armed personnel was… interesting. The other occasion was in the desert, and much less nerve-wracking. Regardless of the ultimate purpose, since these events, I no longer underestimate the ability of a well trained military force to 'get the job done', one way or another.
But the real question is what is the "job"?
Oops, forgot the links.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jade_Helm_15
http://american3rdposition.com/wp-content/uploads/Jade-Helm-Martial-Law-WW3-Prep-Document-1.pdf
You may need to copy and paste in your browser if I did not insert the links correctly.
Isn't this ever the way of the world? It waxes and wans throughout history, drawing on the gullible, unknowing and the self-serving. 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely' – Lord Acton . The UN has long been on this road to ultimate power and corruption has been its middle name for decades.
In Newman's article, he uses the term "concentrated political authority" to summarise a number of quotes from Christiana Figueres, including "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years since the Industrial Revolution." and "This is a centralised transformation that is taking place."
AFRWeekend calls Newman's comments a conspiracy theory, but a conspiracy is something done in secret, and it is no theory that she said it, its on video. As some of us know, there is a lot worse Newman could have quoted, but this was a job well done
AFR has a classic quote from Will Steffen: "When you've got people in powerful positions who don't even recognise that [These are bizarre comments], it's time for them [eg Newman]to go,"
Or maybe Steffen was referring to Figueres? Too much to hope he might apply the advice to himself
With Maurice Newman, Graham Lloyd, and Bjorn Lomberg, maybe I'll hang onto my online subscription for a bit longer.
I imagine if there was a 'world government', then it would be far from benevolent towards certain countries, while bending over backwards to appease others, and few would actually be happy about it either way.
I think humans from different countries have much, much more in common than they ever care to admit, so I just don't see how a global democracy could ever really work. The UN (and League of Nations before it) was founded upon some excellent ideals, and (I think) a genuine desire to prevent needless deaths, but it is not what it once was.
Historically, "world governments" collapse under their own weight. They start to collapse at the periphery, which diverts resources from the centre, and then the centre collapses as well. It can take a while, but it always happens. The sad thing is that, "a while", is often measured in generations.
Rick Will
This topic invoked considerable comment at Macrobusiness:
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2015/05/newman-climate-change-world-plot/
It shows how entrenched views are.
This is a little gem that got thrown into the comments:
"Antarctica is melting faster than ever before — and the result will be devastating"
Read more: http://www.popsci.com/gravity-data-confirms-antarctica-melting?con&dom=newscred&src=syndication#ixzz3ZcDPLkJ1
92bn tonne a year is a big and scary number – on the scale of the antarctic is is 0.00035% of the current ice mass. At that rate it will be noticeable in maybe 10,000 years.
The word is out …
Australia Alerted To Real Reasons Behind Climate Scare (investors.com)
Thanks for the link "handjive". A very good read.
I have saved that one, Handjive. Thank you. Just what I need to send to all my non-sceptical, warmest believer, friends who think that I am "whacko" when I mention the M word!
Real denial…. UN attacks Aussie gov't comment that global warming a hoax to bring about a new world order.
UN dismisses climate change remarks by Australia PM aide (turkishweekly.com)
"I think that the point of conspiracy theories has passed.
We are way passed that discussion," UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters Friday.
Many, many thanks to Jonova, Maurice Newman & the Australian newspaper.
This has reverberated around the world.
And, via their ABC, the hypocrites rise to the bait:
RICHARD DI NATALE: What we've got the tin foil hat brigade running the show at the moment within the Coalition.
This is wacko stuff and when you've got people like Joe Hockey saying "wind farms are offensive" you know where this is coming from and for a party that says we're here to protect industry, we're here for business and for jobs, this takes us in the opposite direction.
Melbourne University climate scientist, Professor David Karoly, who is also a member of the Federal Government's Climate Change Authority, says the Prime Minister's chief business adviser must live in an alternative reality.
DAVID KAROLY: There is definitely no agenda by me or any group within the United Nations to govern the world.
There is an agenda to try to communicate the best information available from scientists to the general public to make them aware of the risks due to climate change.
The CEO of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Kate Carnell, says Mr Newman is going too far with his argument that the UN is trying to take political authority over the world.
KATE CARNELL: I think that's, look, from my perspective that's a step too far. I don't see that at all. I think that we have to accept that science that climates are changing, that C02 levels are getting higher and that we need to address that.
the tin foil hat brigade
RICHARD DI NATALE is the new leader of the Australian Greens.
His previous boss, Christine Milne, is "off to save the planet." (theaustralian)
Di Natale and Milne's last boss Bob Brown, pondered why aliens aren't calling.
tom0mason
Cheers handjive,
Another worthy piece PDF'ed and store for future my reference.
World government?
Won't happen. Never will.
"Too big to fail" – Bigger than the British Empire then?
"World government" – British Empire was a trial of about half-world government and how did that end?
That happened many times before, Egypt, Macedonia, Rome, Mongols, nazis, USSR to name a few. You may say but they never lasted particularly in the modern times but they did not have to power of electronics and fast information dissemination. Military can move with ease anywhere in world. The power of killing now is unprecedented. You think that twitter can stop them? Twitter is besieged by the left and they will be cheering and celebrating of crushing of us, the free thinkers.
Now more than ever the thread of lasting dictatorial state is closer to reality that most people dare to think.
1984 will be in 2054 -/+30 years.
What about the Rubik Empire?, I remember the Avant-Guard's blocking the entrances to art galleries in the name of Cubism.
Jokes aside you're correct with modern efficiency of implementation, also what time is "particularly lasted"?, can people imagine even 10 years of their lives under such dystopian rule?
Twitter does appear to be besieged by the left. The British elections is proof of that. The twits on Twitter tried their best to discredit the conservatives and the libs but praise Labor. I think it backfired on them, at least a little. More and more people are waking up to the nonsense spewed on Twitter and other social media outlets.
I actually predicted the violent tantrums of the hard left if Cameron got back in, sadly I'm getting the hang of preempting idiotic behavior.
scaper…'world government won't happen'
you are probably right
and no doubt better informed than me
how do American scientists get into space?
which navy keeps the Arabian sea open for EU commerce?
what is the value of Francs these days?
what is the name of Bill Clinton's foundation (hint: starts with a G… ends with Initiative)
but alas, I suffer from conspiracy ideation
is it too late to sign up for John Cook's class?
That's because they are talking about world governance not world government. People are getting their knickers in a twist because they don't know the difference.
governance noun
late 14c,. 'act or manner of governing,' from old French gouvernance "government, rule, administration; (rule of) conduct," from governer
government noun
1. The form or system of rule by which a state, community, etc, is governed. 2. A system of governance and the means by which it is applied.
It is very important to know the difference … governance is a concept, and as such is benign. Government is the physical means by which that concept is made tangible.
However governance ceases to be a benign concept once the means to make it tangible, in the form of government, is present.
And, the gift that keeps giving, Stephan Lewandowsky, is back, just in time to deal with denial …
Seepage: The effect of climate denial on the scientific community (shapingtomorrowsworld.com)
"We initiate our argument with the known fact that vested interests and political agents have long opposed political or regulatory action in response to climate change by appealing to scientific uncertainty."
> No uncertainty there, Stephan. unless you deny what Christina Figueres, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, said.
Naomi Oreskes, James S. Risbey, Ben R. Newell, Michael Smithson and Lewandowsky, in 'our' article, "illustrate the consequences of seepage from public debate into the scientific process with a case study involving the interpretation of temperature trends from the last 15 years, the so-called 'pause' or 'hiatus'.
But, who would deny we are three & half years past the 15 year mark:
State of the Climate 2008.
C. Peterson and M. O. Baringer, eds.
Associate eds.: H. J. Diamond, R. L. Fogt, J. M. Levy, J. Richter-Menge, P. W. Thorne, L. A. Vincent, and A. B. Watkins
"The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 years or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present day warming rate."
(via stevegoddard)
As a medical professional the term "seepage" has for me associations which are very appropriate to the works of Lewendowsky and Oreskes
U beat Me 2 it & done a much better job of it.
C.J.Richards
From the same sewer that produced the ' 97%' and numerous other wonders of post modern psychology.
Lewandowski was wondering why it hadn't been published yet. Were the Journal having second thoughts ?
They do seem to love wrapping their effluent in the language of scientific discourse. Poseurs that they are.
OT : A New Lew Paper.
In this paper on 'Seepage' Prof. Lewandowski teams up with Madame of Doubt to bemoan the 'misuse' of vernacular terms seeping into 'scientific' discourse. Coming from he who regularly tries to coin expressions to frame the debate that seems pretty rich.
"At a minimum, seepage arises when scientists adapt linguistic frames that were created outside the scientific community for political purposes. We use the case of the so-called "pause" in global warming, which should not be called a pause or hiatus given that global warming continues unabated. Ironically, seepage can arise even when scientists are rebutting a contrarian meme but are nonetheless framing the problem in a way that is inappropriate or misleading."
john robertson
Would that be the ultimate in self condemnation?
Gang Green condemning Gangrene?
Seepage and Odeur indeed.
I forget exactly who but at least one other UN euroweenie has said exactly what Newman warns about.
Yeah well to all the people who hung it on me for so long, for saying this is going on, I am100% vindicated.
The "discussion" section attached to Newmans' article in the SMH was last seen at 715+ comments, I suspect that it has probably been shut down since as its probably melted the smh servers.
I noticed the hard-left luvvies and "we dare not say the name of World Govt" perpetrators were out with bared fangs, right from the off, trying desperately to dilute the lightning rod it had become. The irony is – many people *know* there is something very rotten going on, but couldn't name it. Now Newman has thrown the electric toaster into the bath of the Lefties, and they hate him for it….but nice to see them twist in the wind for a change…
Now lets lever it wide open and point out the significant eugenics component link in it all too. People like the Gates Foundation are in the thick of it…..
At last: someone has come and said it publicly.
Let's watch the damage control.
Random Comment
Jo: A couple of typos. (i) 5th para. replace "has" with "had" in 1st sentence. (ii) 8th para. replace "balked" with "baulked" in 4th sentence.
I can think of a couple of reasons for having a world government, the most pressing would be the threat of an imminent alien invasion. Until Independence Day becomes a reality though I'd rather we stuck with sovereign nations.
The EU is like a more immediately threatening version of the UN and it's on our doorstep. Same stealth loss of sovereignty though.
https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2015/05/08/uk-election-2015-the-car-crash-of-the-chatterati-against-reality/
The irony burns.
"I think it's time for business to come forward and simply say 'We realise this is an important issue, we realise there are a lot of different views on how to deal with the issue, but the common basis has to be a scientific understanding of the seriousness of the problem.'
"When you've got people in powerful positions who don't even recognise that, it's time for them to go," Professor Steffen said.'
Look. Newman walked a thin line with his words. The question is who has crossed it. What I mean is that those that create a phantom menace do so because reality does not match their beliefs. They require more and they make it up. When they can get away with it, they also yell it at passersby.
I think Newman was on point and I think others were the ones who crossed that line. However, some of them are among us, here.
So let us all stop exaggerating and let the warm-mongers have all the delusion.
When saying the simple truth is castigated as exaggeration, the death of reason has arrived.
TdeF
Figueres is brought up on politics and power. Her father was the President of Costa Rica three times. Her brother was also President. Botanist and anthropologist and diplomat, she can see the real power in a climate change scare. This was supposed to be a meteorology group, not world domination!
That is why Bjorn Lomberg has to be silenced. The scare is everything. No one really believes in Global Warming and climate change is a crock. Climates change. CO2 has nothing to do with either. Green political power is everything and the chance for the power hungry UN is in Paris in November. China is the model, communist capitalism the new ideal. Christiana brazenly says this and has her sights set on world power, for herself of course. As Lord Monckton writes, there are two Prime Ministers who can stop the UN communists taking over in Paris, Tony Abbott and the Canadian PM, Stephen Harper.
So watch for the media attack on the Australian budget. Immediately we will read that Joe Hockey has to go and Tony with him. This is because Labor and the Greens will not allow a democratically elected government to even pass their budget through the rubbish Senate and the usual suspects will be howling for an end to Abbott, just in time for Paris and the signing away of our sovereign rights.
The Union Labor Green internet army are out in force trying to hide the Labor Budget financial year 2013/14 rubbery figures, the unfunded commitments like Gonski education grants to the state and territory governments that the Coalition had to borrow money to fund after September 2013 when they took office, the under estimated budget deficit ($18 billion that was after funding commitments over $43 billion), etc. They accuse the Coalition of increasing the budget deficit and debt that Labor is to blame for. They ignore the fact that Labor wasted too much money on economic stimulus they bragged was used to save us from the GFC and continued to borrow and spend after bragging into the 2010 election during 2011. 2012 and 2013.
The first Coalition Budget was for financial year 2014/15 and Labor has blocked or slowed progress of budget items ever since May 2014, including blocking around $30 billion of proposed savings. Labor amended the carbon tax and mining tax repeal bills forcing retention of compensation packages to age pensioners and families leaving the government with no revenue from the repealed taxes but retaining a budget liability to pay for them. In short Labor have used the Senate to further damage our economy and financial position at federal level.
The Climate Council on Newman.
'He's not only out of step with the scientific community and the vast majority of Australians who understand the impacts of climate change but he's also damaging Australia's credibility by getting his information from the tin foil hat brigade rather than the world's most respected scientific institutions.'
Pathetic critique.
"getting his information from the tin foil hat brigade".
I thought we were getting the funding from the rich oil lobby, tobacco companies, Koch bothers, gina Rinehart and the likes. Now we are reduced to a hat begging? Where is this money now? It looks like Jo can be accused of money embezzlement and spending it on trips to Margaret River on red wines and going Shark bay. Sarc.
Once again when it suits them they oscillate between "they are awash with money to begging brigade".
Am I Surprised? No, as they argue that more snow and the lower temperature, increase in Antarctic and Arctic ice cover is a result of global warming crap now.
Betting both ways can,t loose.
oscillate or vacillate…? It's a tough choice.
Late addition of Ruairi's work to the post. I'm going to find a way to make the most of his talent (and other skeptics). Thanks to Ruairi :- )
A book of climate skeptic poetry and missives could be pretty amazing. Winston and Manfred have written some paragraphs worthy of a book.
Today I watched the Russians celebrate 70 years since the end of WW11, They filled Red Square with rows of soldiers who marched in rows 20 wide and 10 deep, followed by the tanks, missile launchers and the latest in Soviet weaponry as the helicopters and Jets flew overhead. It was a big day for the Russians as they lost 22 million in that war and it was in fact the Russians who defeated Hitler and marched into Berlin. A commentator told us if all the Russians who died in the war marched past us as the military did today it was would take 19 days.
There were 20 foreign dignitaries there headed by Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Communist Party of China. The west declined to attend.
There is no way the UN will get world government whilst the world is divided as much as it is now.
Yes janama, hinted the same in my comment at 2.1
Don't admire Putin too much.
The majority of Russians killed in WW2, died as a result of Stalin's policies (see the planned famines) or directly at the hands of the KGB in the purges.
Bill, there's a group of women aviators who meet every year in Moscow as they flew the nightly bombing raids on the Germans in Poland. They flew out every night 7 nights a week for 5 years.
Nachthexen or night witches flew fying sewing machines as the Germans called them.Great nighttime navigation.The young girls lost much.
Bill, your comment is spot on. Many of the former Soviet Union's citizens were "sacrificed" by Stalin. The only reason the Russians were able to do their part in the war was due to the economic and militatary contributions of the west. During the war, my father made the Mumansk run as a merchant marine and he saw many a ship and crew go down to the briny deep as a result of shelling and torpedoes fired from U-boat wolf packs.
In hindsight, General Patton was right. The Russians couldn't be trusted then and they can't be trusted now. Russia has a formidable nuclear arsenal and a former intelligence officer inflicted with Aspergers syndrome and visions of grandeur that suffers from xenophobia with his finger on the button running the country.
As Enrico Fermi once said, "That which is not forbidden is compulsory." The day that Putin can be trusted and the world will be safe from a nuclear holocaust will be the day he understands the meaning expressed by Sam Cooke in his song What a Wonderful World! http://www.songlyrics.com/sam-cooke/don-t-know-much-about-history-lyrics/
On September 1, 2014 the US State Department published a report, in which it was stated that for first time since the collapse of the USSR,
Russia reached parity with the US in the field of strategic nuclear weapons.
Thus, Washington admitted that Moscow regained the status that the Soviet Union had obtained by mid-70′s of the XX century and then lost.
Pravda, 12.11.2014: Russia prepares nuclear surprise for NATO
andersm0
Bill, if you have not already done so, a read of Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin breaks down and attributes the deaths rather convincingly. A significant portion of Russia's losses was a direct result of Stalinist policy, both direct and indirect.
Doubtful there will not be a unified one party rule world government, but there will be strangleholds put on large economic and political regions and a global oligarchy is not out of the question either. I've recently been reading about eugenics and see striking parallels with AGW.
Nazis were replaced by the commies. The polish partisans who did not crack under nazis they were broken and executed by the soviets. The soviets used captured nazis to fabricate documents and incriminate patriots with treason. Nazis would sign documents long after the war using nazi document headers.
Even in nazi Germany you had courts, under the soviets apart from a few show trials you went to gulag to work and die. The soviets were not liberators, believe me as I lived in that liberated paradise.
They were the enslavers of half of Europe. they caused the death of more people than the nazis. The End of the war was not in 1945 but in 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall.
When Western Europe celebrated VE half of Their compatriots were sent into slavery. VE Day is a shameful day and there is nothing to celebrate apart from remembering the death of the innocents.
World government? The UN has been acting exactly like they already think they are the world's government and have been for a long time.
But as if to say that isn't sufficiently scary, I'm hearing that the U.S. Department of Justice has a proposal for taking over all law enforcement in the United States. I haven't been able to verify this and I have to hope it's false because it would turn every state and every city into Detroit, Ferguson or Baltimore within months of it's beginning.
If it should ever happen it would be the final violation of the Constitution; fini, Constitution dead and buried.
The bad guys are slowly ever more speedily winning.
[Saw the double word and fixed it.] AZ
Godgrey
See David More's [snip] response: http://aushealthit.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/madness-is-loose-within-abbot.html
I was once a follower.
Can't even do the duty of spelling the Prime Minister's name correctly.
[Abbott's name is correctly spelled in the linked page. I wouldn't make too much of a misspelling in the URL. It's probably a typo from being in a hurry.] AZ
David More is careful to trail out the line of alphabet soup behind his name just to drive home the point he is a very important man. He closed down the comments, he says, because people were being rude. I note that in two of his comments he eloquently calls his critics ratbags. Did he miss his own ad hominem slurs due to lack of self-awareness or is he really that arrogant that he feels exempted from the behaviour standard he professes?
Maurice Newman is a hero. The best type of hero. A hero who is not scared to call out the elephant in the room even though he knows he is going to be flogged as severely as the likes of Jesus. The fight we face on this planet against group-think, and decades of UNESCO school curricula bias is mammoth … Biblical perhaps, and the speed at which Newman was flogged by the usual suspects just goes to prove how far the cancer has metastasized.
[Please keep replies to this factual and polite. Any other kind of reply will be working for the wrong side of the issue. Thanks.] AZ
ossqss
Conspiracy?
It is a documented fact. Just read Agenda 21, which has become increasingly less visible on the net under that name.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&nr=23&type=400
Thank-you Jo and Maurice Newman, well said…
Don't believe the UN doesn't want to rule the world?
Read carefully the Preamble of the UN document Agenda 21 Then carefully read each section.
At every point ask yourselves questions –
Ask yourselves how and why these actions are deemed necessary — beware of becoming sidelined by their questions and answers. Instead ask yourself if this is right, honest, and correct; is the basis of this document truth and reality, or just another another imaginative theory.
Ask yourselves should this be done, and are there not more than efficient ways to achieve some of these ends?
As outlined, is this just another power-grab, a play for global governance, is that the only real aim of this very sophisticated document?
From the Preamble
Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future. No nation can achieve this on its own; but together we can – in a global partnership for sustainable development.
Is all this true, is it real? Are the disparities widening, how would the actions outlined in this document help or hinder the easing of poverty, want, and disease everywhere.
Is it even sane to believe that anyone understands the world's ecosystems enough to manage them well for the benefit of all — human and nonhuman?
Maybe this document is just one very big lie.
Is not Global Governance the very raison d'être of this document?
And let me remind you of a few quotes from the misanthrope elitists –
"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?" - Maurice Strong, ex UNEP Director
"A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer." -Paul Ehrlich, Stanford
"My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it's full complement of species, returning throughout the world." -David Foreman, Earth First!
Dr. Henry Kissinger, who wrote: "Depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World."
"If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." – Prince Phillip, WWF
"In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day." -Dr. Jacques Cousteau.
"A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States." -John Holdren (1973), Obama's Science Czar
Catastrophic AGW is just an extension of these Agenda 21 ideas. Re-enforcement of the theme that everything is spinning 'out of control'. But be aware the UN wants you to feel that, for then they can offer the fake idea of Global Action as the primary supplier of relief to your worries — unfounded or not.
The UN wishes you to see them as the comforting controlling element, as your helpful savior. All the while the unelected, undemocratic UN will be stealing your freedoms, corralling you into their Utopian vision of their new one-world order.
Thank-you from someone who has been described variously at times as a stupid, ignorant, right-wing extremist, big oil advocate, and conspiracy theorist denier-nut, who must be in the pay of big oil/coal, and obviously trying to destroy the world.
Not bad description of someone that has lived without owning a vehicle or a TV for the majority of my life, and that all the technology I've own is recycled/remade — including this PC and the method of connecting to the interWeb.
ScotsmaninUtah
@tom0mason
A great post
The UN and "Agenda 21″, well , If I remember correctly , the UN couldn't even agree on "the wording" during the Rwandan crisis, never mind how to deal with it and judging by previous results , the UN is just as likely to set fire to the planet than it is to effect a positive change in the ecosystem.
I did notice the footnote in Agenda 21:-
Throughout Agenda 21 the term "environmentally sound" means "environmentally safe and sound"
However I did not see the term "virtually certain" used, so I was left with some doubt as to the degree of "safe" being implied.
Bruce of Newcastle
This letter in the Weekend Australian yesterday seems relevant:
Maurice Newman is correct; after decades of dud predictions, climate alarmists continue to be proved wrong. Unfortunately, this doesn't stop the climate alarmist juggernaut from damaging economies and communities. We need more people like Newman to stand up for common sense in the climate change debate.
Cory Bernardi, [Liberal] senator for South Australia, Adelaide
Well said that man!
Christiana Figueres, the Weather Lady from the UN. No actual weather expertise but demands to run the world economies and introduce a new world order, with herself at the top.
Conspiracy? The last time the Weathermen threatened this, they were a declared terrorist group.
So why is this seriously considered by any Government? Why are another 30,000 opportunists flying to Paris to discuss the weather and so world domination and not least, more UN taxes on flying?
Susan Fraser
New Zealanders visiting your site might like to accept our Govt's invitation to make a submission "Setting New Zealand's Climate Change Target" to prepare for the Paris meeting in December 2015.
Submissions close 3 June 2015
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/climate/consultation
climate.contribution@mfe.govt.nz
With about a third of Tasmania locked-up as World Heritage under the direction of the Paris based agency UNESCO we are well on the way to United Nations control. Essentially Dr. Brown conducted a very successful political campaign, supported by our inner city cafe latte folk, to stop logging in the Tasmanian forests and cede control to Paris. (He also managed to stop the second stage of the Gordon power scheme with the considerable help of Messers. Hawke and Richardson).
But what are the consequences of this? Apart from the loss of employment in the industry and closing of many sawmills, it poses a considerable threat to both property and people due to the intrinsic nature of the eucalypt forest and people should well remember the bushfires of 1939 in Victoria and more recently in Gippsland in 2009 with 179 deaths, S. Tasmania in 1934, 1938 and 1967. History shows that locking-up these forests is a disaster waiting to happen. Why, simply because the eucalypts shed a lot of woody material, capsules ,branches and leaves continually that accumulates on the forest floor at the rate of up to 5 tonnes per hectare per annum. This material breaks down very slowly and when a fire comes most is burnt, the more there is the greater the fire intensity. Locking-up the forests under the control of some Parisian bureaucrat who probably wouldn't know the difference between chalk and cheese is not the answer. Apart from the Midi, France doesn't have much in the way of catastrophic fire and probably never had fires of the intensity of the recent Gippsland fire.
The commonsense approach to this dilemma is to actively manage the forests and not lock them up and throw away the key to Paris. Viz:
Production forests; an 80-100 year rotation, regenerating after logging, with thinnings and low intensity control burning every 10 years or so to keep fuel levels low.
Protection forests: on a 250+ year rotation with a final logging and regeneration, with the occasional thinning to remove dead trees and again low intensity fires every 10 years or so to keep the fuel levels low.
The longevity of the eucalypts is limited and after they attain about 300 years they have internal rot and their crowns are dying and most have gone by about 500 years if they are not destroyed in the meantime.
There is another reason for managing these forests, due to the encroachment of rainforest species, principally Nothofagus. This species is able to regenerate under the forest canopy and in time forms an understorey. When the rainforest attains 100-120 years of age most the dominant eucalypts are dead and dying which is the fate of the World Heritage old growth forests. Pity somebody didn't tell the politicians, the greens and their supporters.
no mention of Figueres's own statements. "scientists" say.
the rejecting "climate scientists" (plural) is Karoly!
8 May: BBC: Australia PM's adviser says climate change a UN hoax
PHOTO CAPTION: Scientists say the world is experiencing a long-term global warming trend
Mr Newman's comments were rejected by climate scientists, while Environment Minister Greg Hunt said it was "not something I would express".
Asked at a press conference what he thought of Mr Newman's comments, Mr Hunt said individuals were "entitled to their views"…
The UN says there is a strong scientific consensus that the global climate is changing and that human activity contributes significantly to this trend…
Mr Newman, who is also a former chairman of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, said the executive secretary of the UN's Framework on Climate Change, Christiana Figueres, was using climate change to oppose capitalism…
Ms Figueres was in Australia this week and addressed a climate summit in Melbourne on Wednesday.
Climate change expert Professor David Karoly from the University of Melbourne, said Mr Newman's comments did not represent any peer reviewed study or assessment of climate change.
"It is clear he has deliberately tried to mislead the Australian public," said Professor Karoly, who is considering making a complaint to the Australian Press Council about the article.
He said the government's decision to appoint Mr Newman to its business advisory council was akin to Qantas having a chairman that believed the earth was flat.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-32639813
CO2 levels reach monthly record – May 2015
Bushfies in South Australia 'destroy dozens of homes' – Jan 2015
Australia has hottest spring on record as temperatures soar – Dec 2014
The new regulating class—bureaucrats, academics, greenies—look down on others as stupid and morally inferior
You probably know some of these people well. Its revenge for feeling inferior in those classes at school where you learnt how to be useful to the community.
no quoting Figueres, no links to the Indie & DM articles:
8 May: UK Independent: Heather Saul: Tony Abbott's senior adviser accuses UN of creating climate change hoax to impose 'new world order'
Maurice Newman is the Australian Prime Minister's chief business adviser and a well-known climate change sceptic…
He claimed the world had consequently been subjected to "extravagance" from "climate catastrophists" for over five decades, before listing news articles ***apparently undermining claims about global warming in The Independent and the Mail Online…
His comments came after Figueres toured Australia and urged the country to move away from coal production, a major pollutant.
Abbott has in the past described coal as "good for humanity" and the "foundation of prosperity" for the foreseeable future, according to Reuters…
His comments were criticised by climate change expert Professor David Karoly from the University of Melbourne, who told the BBC he was considering complaining to the Australian Press Council about the article…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/tony-abbotts-senior-adviser-accuses-un-of-creating-climate-change-hoax-to-impose-new-world-order-10237059.html
Belfast Tele carry the Indie piece:
8 May: Belfast Telegraph: Heather Saul: Australian government adviser claims climate change is a UN plot to establish a "new world order"
His comments were criticised by climate change expert Professor David Karoly from the University of Melbourne, who told the BBC he was considering complaining to the Australian Press Council about the article.
shilling for "renewables" – no Figueres' quotes:
8 May: Irish Examiner: UN using 'debunked' climate change science
by Jane Wardell, Sydney
Under Abbott's leadership, Australia has been reluctant to engage in global climate change politics, unsuccessfully attempting to keep the issue off the agenda of the Group of 20 Leaders' Summit in Brisbane last year…
Asked on the Canberra leg of her trip if the politics around renewable energy was as toxic elsewhere in the world, Figueres said: "No. At the global level what we see is increased participation of renewables, increased investment in renewables, increased excitement about renewables."
http://www.irishexaminer.com/world/un-using-debunked-climate-change-science-329645.html
Increased excitement about renewables.
Yep! Right up to the point where they get their way, and then watch as all those coal fired power plants get shut down still keep on running, and running, and running, and more and more of them being constructed.
By the way, think about this for a minute.
The source for all that UN money here is that Countries committing to any new UNFCCC agreement is from the setting up of an ETS to impose a cost on CO2 emissions, and the money raised from that is then sent to the UN. That's no figment of my imagination, but the stated and documented fact from their own UNFCCC Protocol.
If the money comes from those CO2 emissions, just how soon do you (ever) expect them to be closing down those coal fired and gas fired power plants, the largest source of emissions cash?
It's only about the money. Always was, always is, always will be.
In other terms , when you look at building materials – old growth forest hardwood versus renewable treated pine – there is no comaprison.
I bring this up because one of the problems with the whole eco nonsense is having to dealt with unplesant stuff foisted upon the punters in the name of oeco lunacy.
One of my pet hates is treated pine – yes its "renewable" but its rubbish. Give me hardwood any day. And with the stuff its treated with….dont get me started on that. Green & toxic, no thanks.
I built a wall in my garden from ironbark timbers – 20 years good for in-ground and naturally termite proof and tough as. I nicknamed it "organic concrete".
One thing I hate about the eco nonsense is ideology replacing common sense – we are forced to use either stuff that is sub-standard, toxic or plain unpleasant and its rammed down our throats. It further reinforces that nagging thought that greenies hate humans.
One should rememeber that the CSIRO was pushing World Government in 2012 presumably with the authority of the Labor Government of the day since they were not questioned or repudiated by the Gov. I imagine it is still CSIRO and Labor defacto policy today.
Here is part of an interview given publically by CSIRO scientist, a "Scientific Director" no less, to AAP at the Planet under Pressure conference in London March 2012:
"Dr Stafford-Smith gave an interview from the conference to AAP on March 29:
'Mark Stafford Smith, scientific director of CSIRO's climate adaption flagship, says it's no longer enough for individual nations to try to be sustainable.
Rather a new "planetary stewardship" is needed, he says. "Something like a sustainable development council … in the UN system which has the same level of authority as the security council and which can drive a much more integrated approach," Dr Stafford Smith told reporters via a phone hook-up from London…"
There was now a need for a "constitutional moment", like that in the 1940s which saw the establishment of the World Bank and other institutions, including the International Monetary Fund, to drive the new UN council, he said.[12]'
"When the conference ended, Dr Stafford-Smith co-drafted with a Dr Lidia Brito the conference's "Declaration". ….. The key tract from the Smith/Brito manifesto is:
"Fundamental reorientation and restructuring of national and international institutions is required to overcome barriers to progress and to move to effective Earth-system governance…Current understanding supports the creation of a Sustainable Development Council within the UN system to integrate social, economic and environmental policy at the global level." [14]
"After the conference, CSIRO's Dr Smith told CSIRO interviewer Glen Paul more about his dreams for a supra-national UN council backed by the authority of the dictatorship-laden UN General Assembly.[20] The council would assemble some sort of "triple helix" as he put it, to combine economic, environmental and social engineering. This would lead to "a suite of universal sustainable development goals", he said. CSIRO interviewer Paul then signed off, remarking that he too had just got a grant for a US study trip."
Tony Thomas Quadrant 9/9/2012
As I remember the article the CSIRO had 42 delegates there pushing the idea.
GMac
Whatever happened to the days when CSIRO scientists worked at this?
"Clinically silent hypocuprosis and the effect of molybdenum loading on beef calves in Gippsland, Victoria" – JB Bingley and N Anderson.(1972)
btw Irish Examiner piece is really a Reuters' piece. Wardell has been with AAP, AP and now Reuters for the past 11 years.
9 May: GreenLeft: Viv Miley: When people get together and organise
I've never been much of a morning person but some mornings it can be a struggle to get out of bed. Crippling depression aside, peeking at what passes for news in the mainstream media to find out what is going on in the world can be enough to send me running for the covers…
Then there was an opinion piece in The Australian by Maurice Newman claiming that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the United Nations to take over the world…
Normally such opinions are the reserve of tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists in the most paranoid corners of the internet. But this was written by a man who is the Abbott government's chief business advisor; someone who has the direct ear of the prime minister; and this was published in Australia's biggest selling national newspaper…
One can only laugh in the face of such absurdity, if only as means to keep from crying…
https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/58970
9 May: Australian Health Information Technology Blog
This blog is totally independent and has only three major objectives.
The first is to inform readers of news and happenings in the e-Health domain, both here in Australia and world-wide.
The second is to provide commentary on e-Health in Australia and to foster improvement where I can.
The third is to encourage discussion of the matters raised in the blog so hopefully readers can get a balanced view of what is really happening and what successes are being achieved…
Posted by Dr David More MB PhD FACHI:
Madness Is Loose Within The Abbott Government – Maurice Newman Had Gone Off the Reservation!
(Australian link)
…The man is a raving nutter and needs to be treated as such. The science is settled and he must be suffering from some disease that means he can't think clearly any more!
This sort of rubbish needs to be debunked!
See here for sanity!
https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/
The sooner the Government fires him as an advisor to the PM the better!…
Anonymous says: What a ridiculous thing to say. Maurice Newman is absolutely spot on and extremely well respected.
If the science was settle then Copenhagen would not have been the shambles it was.
Good grief and you are supposed to be an educated man…
Anonymous says: I liked your coverage of those important and expensive issues.
But when you stray outside your stated blog subject, you become yet another Bono, Cate Blanchett or Russell Brand. I don't care what your opinion on anything else is.
Best wishes. I'm unsubscribing…
Good to see we are improving the quality of the readership with the climate ratbags going!…
http://aushealthit.blogspot.com.au/2015/05/madness-is-loose-within-abbot.html
I found these too in my old files
Germany 'Sliding Head Over Heels Into Eco-Dictatorship'
Germany's green government advisors admit frankly that decarbonization can only be achieved by the limitation of democracy – both nationally and internationally.
" When it comes to environmental and climate policy, Germany's Scientific Advisory Council on Global Environmental Change (WBGU) is an influential advisory committee for the German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The chairman of the council is Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
'All nations would have to relinquish their national interests and find a new form of collective responsibility for the sake of the climate: "The world citizenry agree to innovation policy that is tied to the normative postulate of sustainability and in return surrender spontaneous and persistence desires. Guarantor of this virtual agreement is a formative state [...]."
This strong state provides, therefore, for the "social problematization" of unsustainable lifestyles. It overcomes "stakeholders" and "veto players" who "impede the transition to a sustainable society."' "
And France – speaking at the 2000 U.N. Conference on Climate Change in The Hague, former President Jacques Chirac of France explained why the IPCC's climate initiative supported a key Western European Kyoto Protocol objective:
"For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance, one that should find a place within the World Environmental Organization which France and the European Union would like to see established."
In 1996, former Soviet Union President Mikhail Gorbachev emphasized the importance of using climate alarmism to advance the new global World Order:
"The threat of environmental crisis will be the international disaster key to unlock the New World Order."
Maurice Strong, senior advisor to Kofi Annan, U.N. Secretary-General who chaired the gigantic (40,000 participants) "U.N. Conference on Environment and Development" in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, who was responsible for putting together the Kyoto Protocol with thousands of bureaucrats, diplomats, and politicians, stated:
">"We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse…isn't it our job to bring that about?"
And note interestingly, the UN has its own political agenda. This is evident from the minutes of a secret UN meeting chaired by Ban Ki-moon – consider this statement:
' …Among other things, the United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB) heard Ban (Ki-moon)'s top organizer, a U.N. Under Secretary General from China named Sha Zukang, declare that the wish list for the Rio + 20 meeting, already being touted as a landmark environmental conclave on the issue of "global environmental governance", included making it: " the catalyst for solidifying a global economic, social and political agenda, built around "green economy" goals.'
"One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. … One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy." IPCC and UN bureaucrat Otmar Edenhofer.
Very few people would know who Carroll Quigley is nor would they know of his tome "Tragedy and Hope,A History of the World in Our Time".
Then there is Gary Allen and his work "None Dare Call it Conspiracy".
If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program, but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth, then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all. Instead it becomes the logical, even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism, or more accurately, socialism, is not a movement of the downtrodden masses, but of the economic elite. The plan of the conspirator Insiders then is to socialize the United States, not to Communize it. . . .
If you can understand this then it is easy to understand why the Liberal/Nat govt is not bothering with the power and bias of the ABC,their aim is the same as that of the ALP/Greens,a state controlled media.
It was no accident that the ALP under Rudd and Gillard ran up a huge govt debt,they are both avowed socialists.
Tony Abbott is a Liberal and liberals are socialists in sheep's clothing – Big Govt Big Business Big Unions the unholy trinity.
dinn
thanks, Australia, for calling a spade a spade; thanks for Joanne's too, a real pearl in the wild sea. as for sea level rise over various past periods of time, i have wasted my brain looking at umpteen differing graphs on the net of what should be ascertainable objectively. I cannot even tell if all that graph material is sortable at this point. Meanwhile:
Hollande said the Paris session would highlight the importance of the U.N. climate fund, which is struggling to find donors.
"Thanks to this fund, we will be able to find solutions to the problem of global warming," he said.
Officials have said they hope to secure at least 50 percent of the $10 billion that governments have pledged for the fund before the Paris summit begins. http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/french-president-climate-fund-caribbean-30929641
decided that 150,000 years ago to present is most useful period, simplifying the complexities. using sea levels graphed helps one to avoid endless left-brain details/arguments and go toward a reasonable overview; i think that the heat/cold dynamic on the Earth must travel through the quite-unified seas and therefore can be reasonably measured there in a fell swoop for a point of time. how many complications tend to develop because people are already scattered across 50 to 10,000 various angles on things?
therefore here at this link are 3 graphs shown for sea levels across the last 150,000 years: https://balance1010.wordpress.com/2015/05/11/the-last150000-years-of-sea-levels-3-graphs/
the idea overall here is that we need a fundamental in-common reference picture or backdrop to reasonably discuss and investigate the subject of heat flow on the Earth "surface". i do not see why the 150,000 years to present sea level graphics miss at all the fundamental reference picture; but if there be a better one that is extant, what is it?
When I look at the sea level data it causes me to wonder if this is a limit cycle of the earth system oscillating between two extremes or if it is due to changes in solar forcing. If so what limits the cycle?
From a radiation perspective I would expect a snow/ice planet to get colder than present and an all water planet without atmospheric effect to be a little cooler than now.
had to wade thru hundreds of google results to find out Japan, Pakistan and Iran have covered the story, with an AFP piece. those google al-gore-ithms are still at work:
8 May: Japan Times: AFP-JIJI: Australia PM advisor says climate change a U.N.-led ruse to create new world order
Newman, a former chairman of the Australian Broadcasting Corp., is a known climate change skeptic but he went further Friday by accusing the U.N. of being involved in a scam…
Newman said "hopefully, like India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Tony Abbott isn't listening" to the U.N…
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/05/08/asia-pacific/politics-diplomacy-asia-pacific/australia-pm-advisor-says-climate-change-u-n-led-ruse-create-new-world-order/
9 May: The News, Pakistan: AFP: Australian PM's adviser says climate change a UN-led ruse
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-1-317186-Australian-PMs-adviser-says-climate-change-a-UN-led-ruse
very prominent on this pdf image from Tehran Times:
9 May: Tehran Times: AFP: Australia PM advisor says climate change a U.N.-led ruse to create new world order
http://tehrantimes.com/PDF/12264/12264-8.pdf
from different search terms, i got a prominent piece on a Gulf News page:
PressDisplay: 9 May: Gulf News: AFP: Australian PM's adviser says climate change is UN ruse to form authoritarian world order
http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx
from the earlier search:
9 May: Journal of Turkish Weekly: UN dismisses climate change remarks by Australia PM aide
The United Nations has dismissed claims by an Australian government adviser that climate change is a UN-led hoax.
"I think that the point of conspiracy theories has passed. We are way passed that discussion," UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric told reporters Friday…
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/185235/un-dismisses-climate-change-remarks-by-australia-pm-aide.html
Milne predicts global warming catastrophe in five years.
'Christine Milne has shed more light on her resignation as leader of the Greens, revealing she believes there is no chance of immediate Australian action on climate change — her driving ambition — and that she must take the fight elsewhere.
'Senator Milne, who stepped down on Wednesday, told The Weekend Australian that she believed the world had only five years in which to prevent "runaway global warming" yet efforts in Canberra appeared futile.'
Denholm / Oz
What a fruitbat.
Referring to Milne (just for clarity). We have our own local one, Elizabeth May, our (allegedly as there are a lot of questions regarding the temporary residents at the time of the last election)elected Member of Parliament, who doesn't even pretend to represent the wishes of the riding's constiuents instead haring off on her own tangents at every opportunity. Luckily, with a national election coming in October, she will be tossed out on her behind. Legitimate residents will be watching closely to prevent the vote stacking and imports that happened last time around.
RT is sadly CAGW-infested, including Max Keiser who should be on to the scam by now & warning the public their pension money is being targeted, & "carbon" derivatives in the trillions is the prize.
following is interspersed with CAGW tweets such as:
16% of Earth's species at risk of extinction due to climate change – report
UK experts fear climate change could usher in disease-carrying mosquitoes
8 May: Russia Today: Climate change is UN-led hoax to create 'new world order' – Australian PM's adviser
A well-known climate change skeptic, Newman has made similar provocative comments in the past, calling the notion a "myth" and a "delusion."…
***In February, he criticized renewable energy policies. Citing British charity Age UK, he stated that elderly citizens in Britain often die of "winter deaths" because they can't afford power. He blamed renewable energy policies which drive up the price of energy.
However, when asked about his claim by The Guardian, the charity sent back a statement which referenced high energy costs, but failed to mention anything about renewable energy.
Just a few months earlier, in November 2014, Newman cited a Scottish government-commissioned study which allegedly said that for every job in the renewable sector, 3.7 jobs were lost elsewhere. However, the report itself made no mention that it was commissioned by the government. In fact, the government called the study "misleading," adding that the industry would actually have the opposite effect on jobs.
According to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the global mean temperature could rise by up to 4.8° Celsius (40.6° Fahrenheit) this century alone. The prediction is seen as a recipe for droughts, floods and rising seas.
http://rt.com/news/256861-climate-change-un-hoax/
***referenced from a Graham Readfearn Guardian article in February?? say no more. apart from the "renewables" stuff, Readfearn had more of his usual nonsense:
12 Feb: Guardian: Graham Readfearn: Climate science denialists in tailspin over hottest years
Tony Abbott's top business advisor Maurice Newman wrongly claimed a UK charity had blamed the deaths of elderly people on renewable energy policies
The accusation is that climate scientists have been "fiddling" the world's temperature data with the express motivation of showing the world is warmer than it really is…
This was sparked by a blog from a retired accountant and climate sceptic who "discovered" that data from three temperature stations in Paraguay had been altered when NASA compiled its global temperature record.
Fellow Guardian blogger Dana Nuccitelli has a rundown…
In August 2014 we saw this exact same evidence-free conspiracy theory play out after Australia experienced its hottest year in the Bureau of Meteorology's record going back to 1910…
Again, it is not a secret that some temperature readings do undergo changes – and those changes can return higher or lower values…
But why would you selectively change some data collected by thermometers when you analyse it?
When networks of weather stations were set up around the world, they were not designed to be a long-term record of the climate. Rather, they were there to record the weather from one day to the next.
Let's say that you have a record of temperature readings from a weather station at, oh I don't know, Denierville (not an actual place).
In Denierville, temperature readings are written down every day for decades, with only the occasional missing day.
For that temperature to give a true reflection of Denierville's climate over the decades, you need to know a few things…
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2015/feb/12/climate-science-denialists-in-tailspin-over-hottest-years
8 May: Australian Science Media Centre: EXPERT REACTION: Maurice Newman's climate change claims
An article in The Australian this morning, written by Tony Abbott's chief business adviser Maurice Newman, says that climate change is being used as a tool by the United Nations to impose a form a global governance. The article calls into question the data produced to support climate change models and UN spending on climate change policies.
Feel free to use these quotes in your stories. Any additional comments will be uploaded here. If you would like to speak to an expert, please don't hesitate to contact us on (08) 7120 8666 or by email.
Professor Nathan Bindoff is a Research Program Leader in the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at The University of Tasmania
"The science of climate change is unequivocal, warming of the earth is clear. The earth has warmed 0.6 degrees since the 1960 and 0.8 degrees since the middle of the 19th century. The fifth assessment report of the ipcc concluded that all of observed change signal temperature change since the 1950's could be attributed to human influence. That report was based on a peer reviewed literature of 13000 papers and the summary for policy makers was agreed by more 110 nations including Australia. A hoax of this magnitude, across so many scientists, government experts and nations is inconceivable…
Professor Andy Pitman is the Director of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate System Science at the University of New South Wales.
"Mr Newman's latest piece in The Australian so entirely misrepresents the facts that there is no obvious place to start an appropriate critique. However, starting with the factually wrong first sentence, climate models are not the basis of scientific concerns about global warming and human emissions of carbon dioxide.
Independently, basic physics and observations provide this link and if we threw away all models this link would remain. Mr Newman's other statements are either factually incorrect or so taken out of context as to be wilfully misleading…
The notion that as the US, China, Europe etc. do the heavy lifting on cutting emissions that Australia can go on emitting without penalty seems a very optimistic basis upon which to build a 21st century economy."
John Cook is a climate communication research fellow at Global Change Institute, University of Queensland
"Our scientific understanding of human-caused global warming is based on fundamental physics and chemistry known for over 150 years, that have been confirmed by many human fingerprints being observed all over our climate.
The only way to deny this overwhelming body of evidence is to resort to implausible conspiracy theories, such as Maurice Newman's Bond-villainesque "new world order" plot. Newman's views are anecdotal confirmation of a number of scientific studies finding that climate science denial is associated with conspiratorial thinking."
http://www.smc.org.au/expert-reaction-maurice-newmans-climate-change-claims/
the Centre has a whole slew of EXPERT REACTIONS
http://www.smc.org.au/category/expert-reaction/
Sponsors: As a not-for-profit charitable institution, the Australian Science Media Centre relies on the generosity of the Australian community for funding. Media, academic institutions, government and industry all contribute to the funding of the Centre.
Foundation Sponsors:
ABC, Australia Pacific LNG, CSIRO, Fairfax Media, Govt of South Australia, iSentia, NewsCorp, NSW Govt, etc
Board Members include:
The Board is chaired by Peter Yates AM and meets four times a year. Deputy chairs are Robyn Williams from the ABC and Professor Merlin Crossley, Dean of Science at the University of New South Wales (UNSW).
Jim Carroll, Director of News, Current Affairs and Sport, SBS…
Brad Hatch, Director of Communications, Fairfax Media
Melvin Mansell, State Editorial Director, SA, WA & NT, News Corp Australia
Advisory Panel includes:
Professor Snow Barlow
Professor Peter Doherty AC
Professor Tim Flannery
Emeritus Professor Ian Lowe AO
Striking how it is always the same names involved, much like Casablanca's "usual suspects"
an update, including a denial that CAGW was responsible:
9 May: NYT Dot Earth: Andrew C. Revkin: Scientists Praise Contributions of Two Dutch Explorers Who Perished on Arctic Ice
Ten days ago, the grinding slow-motion rivers of floating sea ice flowing around Canada's Arctic archipelago claimed the lives of Marc Cornelissen and Philip de Roo, seasoned Dutch polar trekkers combining an adventurous spirit with environmental activism and citizen science.
After several recovery efforts were aborted due to foul weather and unstable ice, one body (as yet unidentified) was retrieved on Friday, Canadian police said…
Cornelissen's efforts were largely funded by WWF (known as the World Wildlife Fund in the United States) but he had worked over the past decade with scientists from the European Space Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory as well as several universities.
The two-man expedition (with a loaned husky as a polar bear watchdog) was called the "Last Ice Survey" because the maze of passages between that part of Canada and northwest Greenland is projected to remain mostly ice covered even when much of the Arctic Ocean becomes open water in late summer in coming decades. (As I've noted, scientists have wisely been proposing that special conservation plans be developed in that region for polar bears and other wildlife dependent on sea ice.)…
***In contrast to some media reports implying that the conditions creating dangerous ice in the area were related to global warming, Haas (Christian Haas, the Canada Research Chair for Arctic Sea Ice Geophysics at York University) added this:
"The accident has nothing to do with climate warming or the last ice. The ice in this region of approximately 100 kilometers in diameter is always thinner than the surrounding regions, and small areas of open water are common year-round. In fact, our own airborne ice thickness surveys just north of this region have shown that the ice is (still?) very thick, ranging from over two meters for first-year ice to over three meters for multi-year ice. The events have changed nothing to the fact that this region will most likely be the last ice area."
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/09/scientists-praise-contributions-of-two-dutch-explorers-who-perished-on-arctic-ice/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog Main&contentCollection=arctic&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body
My understanding is that a new world order was the agenda of The Fabian Society of socialists and fellow travellers established in England in the late 1800s. These people also had a plan, eugenics, to rid their world of unproductive mouths to feed, the basis of the much later Hitler master race agenda. The Fabian Society continues today including the Australian Fabian Society. Former PM Gillard merged her Socialist Forum, a home for far-left factions that she established with encouragement from her UK based mentor, a communist upper class person.
Former Greens leader Bob Brown made it clear that his dreams included a "world parliament" and no sovereign (nation) borders. Recently the deputy leader of the parliamentary ALP said that she was opposed to sovereign borders. The leader said that the ALP would again welcome illegal immigrants if returned to government.
Can there be any doubt that the one world government agenda is why Union Labor Greens care not about undermining the economy, saddling governments federal and state with debt, admitting immigrants who they know will not assimilate and will mostly becoming a burden on government budgets? Divide and conquer, breakdown society. It is why they also remove symbols of nation including references to our Queen from government buildings. And why historical facts relating to colonisation are hidden. They want us to not have a pride in our nation, for us to blindly accept a world with no borders. That is, I suspect strongly, no borders but permission to travel demanded. Control of the population.
Agenda 21 is another tool to damage the economy, to lock up vast areas from commercial logging and mining activities, to stop dams being constructed. But they claim to saving these National Parks for future generations. But in between time they effectively block economic prosperity which can only hurt the future generations.
Renewable energy, so called, is another tool being used to undermine economic activity. And the capitalist wealth seekers ride on the back of the socialist economic vandals. A wise elderly man from South Australia once replied to a blog question about why the left side of politics foster relationships with Islam. His reply was that the reason is that both have a common enemy, capitalists. For me the interesting part of this relationship is that many or most socialists are also Infidels, and they appear not to understand their place in the Islamic world.
I first learnt about the new world order agenda from an ABC radio series during the 1970s. I still have a transcript of the series I purchased from the ABC at that time. In those days ABC leftists must have thought that publicity for NWO and OWG was a good thing but now it seems that the left want to proceed by stealth.
The most serious problem as I see it is the naive and not well educated in politics and other general knowledge matters of the young people since the Whitlam Labor years. And the infiltration of government departments, schools and universities by leftists.
I recall that one of The Fabian Society mottos is The Inevitability Of Gradualness.
Me thinks the late 2009 failed control is now buried through very tricky legal jargon in the text of the 28 chapters (25+3) of the TTIP, TPP, but all are to foolish to hear due to the chatter. Any ink to page will seal the unbreakable International legally binding UN/WTO agreement that will be rock solid with Paris just another more open public one that may set a few target levels.
If that abortion comes to pass, then Canada will stand alone against it.
"The UN is not an Institution to be trusted"
"When Christina Figueres, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, says she wants to transform the global economy"
In my opinion the UN is the last institution which we should trust with our economic health. Their history of dealing with even matters of regional importance is littered with one disaster after another.
I have to say the evolution of the UN is our fault. In Europe and to a lesser extent in Australia (I have to admit ignorance here) we all have "given up" and ceded our responsibility of living to government. when I look at the UK with its 23% of the workforce engaged in government work, in France where the President states that he hates rich people, and in Germany where they build thousands of Wind farms that do not work, it shocks me.
Here in America is the only place left on the planet where we have the means to roll back government. But it is becoming more difficult because the rest of the world is happy to be taxed and let the government decide on things.
we need to defund the IPCC and the UN dramatically, but more importantly we need to defund our governments. Stop letting them tax us.
Jo is doing a fantastic job with her blog, but people like her and others engaged in this game of awareness and common sense, are not being heard in the halls of power, and that is where it counts.
Wow I cant believe everyone on this entire website who is adding their comments agrees with everyone else…its like a…ummm…cult…or ummm….bye!……………….
(Does this mean you have nothing useful for the rest of us to think about?) CTS
wmmbb
What are the conditions for a conspiracy theory? What are the conditions for a scientific theory?
One of the conditions for a conspiracy theory is motivated thinking ie political ideology. Why do people believe what they do? There is a hypothesis, if not a theory, that political ideology, or worldview, is more important in shaping beliefs than scientific understanding. One reason that might be proposed to explain why we defend our views so strongly, in some cases violently, is that we invest so much emotion in them. Empathy is an important mediator that can be forgotten. People claim that evidence dictates their beliefs, but is that true? This post and related comments look very much like a political argument, in which agreement is more important than evidence. At what point do these discussions become a cult, as was suggested?
Is world government a conspiracy? Similarly, is the TPP a conspiracy? The later case is suggested by objective criteria eg the lack of transparent process. Are the fossil fuel multi-national corporations engaging in a conspiracy, or it there behavior normal business practice,including the planned propaganda?
This comment is not meant as a criticism of any person, but as a general reflection. I am fascinated by the prospect that conspiracy theories can sometimes turn out to correct eg the JFK assassination? I was not going to comment since the emotional and political climate here is plain enough.
[It is agreed that there are sometimes conspiracy theories which are proven, but I am curious as t which JFK assassination conspiracy theory has turned out to be correct? Was it the CIA, the Mafia, Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, Cuban President Fidel Castro, the KGB or another of the estimated 42 groups, 82 assassins, and 214 people which have been accused in various Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theories - Mod]
What to believe is always the issue. Insurance companies have reason to be less sceptical and conspiratorial than Maurice Newman. Perhaps they have a more acute appreciation of risk?
I think this blog is more about people agreeing on the degree of governmental interference and overstepping their bounds of authority and why after decades of failing to protect whole groups of people, the U.N. is now suddenly interested in everyone's welfare.
Graham Richards
I have posted this before but I don't think too many of you have bothered to read it!!
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021015-738779-climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism.htm#ixzz3RnAsCrzq
Not only did I read it, I saved it. Thank you. Just what I need to send to all my non-sceptical, warmest believer, friends who think that I am "whacko" when I mention the M word!
You're actually going to believe an Editorial which has no author associated with it and which implies Figueres said things she never said? Seems you did not notice that the suggestion of destroying capitalism was not in quotation marks and was added by the anonymous author to try to twist the meaning of what Figueres meant by "the economic development model".
Figueres has spoken of several side-effects of the prevailing development model, in which only one of the side-effects (she believes) is global warming and she highlights that as the single greatest motivator for all of the economic changes her office advocates.
The only mild threat to capitalism I have ever heard pass the lips of Christina Figueres is at timecode 31:40 in this WAC presentation in April 2013, in which she says that governments have to provide incentives for private sector investments in economic transformation and governments have to "buy down the risk" of such investments. She says (yes a genuine quote this time):
I don't know one private sector company that makes an investment without making profit. That is their terms of reference. And that is actually a very powerful motivation. So instead of condemning them, let us put in the kinds of frameworks and the kinds of structures that are necessary to attract the power of private sector investment. Because we want them to develop the buildings that produce energy. We want them to develop the buildings that produce food. We want them to develop the kinds of roads that going to recharge cars. That's the private sector that is going to do it. But they need to have a certain predictability and a certain rate of return.
- Christiana Figueres, April 18, 2013.
This is a distortion of value propositions and undermines the Austrian economic concept in free markets that all value is subjective and only those party to the transaction have a relevant valuation of the deal. It's a core fallacy of central planning. However this is no more of a threat to capitalism than the subsidies we currently have on numerous goods and services, such as medicine, childcare, tertiary education, or indeed wind power. The transformations she has in mind are undoubtedly wastes of taxpayer money, and it's contrary to free market philosophy, but it's not going to "destroy capitalism".
What she meant by "economic development model" is fossil fuel extraction and pollution being accepted as part of raising living standards and creating a sophisticated economy. She is claiming the developing countries, and sub-Saharan Africa in particular, can develop their economies while skipping the fossil fuel phase that Western economies went through, which is therefore a change to the economic development model. That's what she meant, you can hear her speak of these ideas between 8:38 and 19:20 in that video.
I would think it would help the "skeptics" case if they didn't just make things up – because that's showing a total lack of skepticism. There are older documents available which can be used to make the case that economic transformations for sustainable development were motivated more by communist ideologies of an equitable redistribution of wealth amongst nations than by any kind of environmental calamity, but you'll have to look up the writing of Maurice Strong for that kind of evidence. It's particularly noticeable where he mentions the "The wasteful and destructive lifestyles of the rich" and "move towards a more objective and consistent system of effecting resource transfers similar to that used to redress imbalances and ensure equity within national societies."
Don't use dud arguments when there are half-decent arguments that reach the same conclusion.
The article you refer to is based on the UN press release. The most outrageous Figueres quote in that press release is probably this statement:
what we are going to have to do all of the time is to close the gap between what science tells us where we have to be and where we actually are.
Science is the study of nature, it obtains knowledge of how processes operate, how things are today, how they were different in the past, and what the likely result of an action will be. There is nothing in reality that tells us "where we have to be", as only beliefs and desires tell us how things "should" be. Figueres misuses the name of Science to bestow her vision with an air of inevitability that it simply does not have.
["This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history", Ms Figueres stated at a press conference in Brussels.
"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 - you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation." http://www.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-figueres-first-time-the-world-economy-is-transformed-intentionally
The reigning economic model since industrialisation is capitalism. - Mod]
Drapetomania
Re Robert Q claims..bizarre segue to Tasmanian forests….
"There is another reason for managing these forests.."
Managing..??? LOL
Tasmanian forest "industries" has relied on socialist like providing of oodles of $ from the federal govt from day one..
No capitalist on earth would "invest" in it otherwise.
Look at the latest scam where they thought they were buying out loggers..when all that happened was..the loggers took the money..and kept on logging under other peoples licensing..and tell em again how dropping really expensive hardwoods..and wood chipping them..is brilliant "management"..?????
High value..reduced to..no value..yup..we need more Tasmanian style forest management..and that old chesnut of "what about the bushfires..the state is a tinder box.."..yup..log everything if thats the case..
Tasmania is an economic basket case whose only viable industries..are tourism and food produce..the wood chipping of native timber..is an economic disgrace..
Rob H
This whole issue goes back a long time.
In 1988, former Canadian Minister of the Environment Christine Stewart told editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald: "No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world." – See more at: http://www.cfact.org/2013/02/06/global-warming-was-never-about-climate-change/#sthash.4lYtUavp.dpuf
One of Chretien's (the cretin as we all knew him) liberals. What did you expect?
Karim Ghantous
"The IPCC – Proof isn't required when you have faith"
In response to higher taxes this year and a poor performance in revenues resulting in a decline in stock prices, a fortune 500 company has recruited the IPCC to help in doing its accounts.
A spokesman for the company said , the IPCC's reputation of turning lows into highs and highs into lows has earned them a reputation worldwide.
Laboratory rats have been replaced with IPCC scientists to perform an experiment involving how animals behave when given incentives.
asked why the they are replacing the rats , the institute for bio research declared that the rats were unsatisfactory , because in this situation the experiment required the IPCC scientists to do something the rats just wont do.
The FDA has given the IPCC future contracts in the testing of new drugs.
when asked why was the IPCC chosen , the spokesman for the FDA responded that the IPCC has shown a remarkable ability to analyze data whilst avoiding the costs of actually doing the science.
Evangelists around the world are smarting at the success of the IPCC and every year Evangelists conduct telethons asking the public to donate money for good causes.
But the evangelists have been outdone again as the IPCC has conducted their campaign every 6 years and managed to coerce governments into getting the public to donate money under just one cause and that is in "saving the planet".
Some have reported the success as a true miracle and called it the new religion as apparently
there is no scientific evidence that the world is coming to an end.
Thanks, Scotty! Made my day. LOL