I commented on this issue recently on the DT blog in response to this article by Christopher Booker, but it’s a topic worthy of further attention. I’m sure most of you have heard of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), a tax-and-regulate plan set up as part of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Under it, firms in the developing world who can demonstrate they have reduced emissions are rewarded with carbon credits, which they can on-sell to western polluters, or use themselves to expand their operations.
Provided you buy into the need to limit greenhouse gas emissions in the first place, the CDM appears, prima facie, to be useful and fair. It shares the pain, and encourages industrial development in the poorest parts of the world. Unfortunately, it also assumes that owners of third-world industry are either a) stupid, or b) somehow more altruistic and noble (and less greedy) than their Western counterparts.
The problem centres around the production of certain chloroflurocarbons (CFCs), refrigerant gases widely proclaimed as having created the hole in the ozone layer. I’m not canvassing the science of this today, but the upshot of the Kyoto Protocol is that, while CFCs have been replaced by (more expensive) alternatives in Western industry, manufactures in developing nations can continue to use CFCs until 2030.
Now, a by-product of chlorodifluoromethane, or HFC-22 (one of the most common CFCs) is another gas called trifluoromethane CHF3, also known as HFC-23 and manufactured commercially by DuPont under the brandname Freon 23, a greenhouse gas calculated to be over 11,000 times more effective than CO2. As Booker reports,
By destroying the HCF-23, the firms can claim Certified Emission Reduction credits worth billions of dollars when sold to the West (while much of the useful HCF-22 is sold onto the international black market).
Last year, destruction of CFCs accounted for more than half the CDM credits issued, in a market that will eventually, it is estimated, be worth $17 billion. Of the 1,390 CDM projects so far approved, less than 1 per cent accounts for 36 per cent of the total value.
In other words, business creating its own demand—and it’s us who are paying for it. And while the UN recently announced it has “suspended” payments to five Chinese firms involved, it appears that it will boil down to a question of intent: were these firms creating HFC-23 just to destroy it, or was it a chemically unavoidable by-product of a legitimate business activity? Try proving that.
To me, this story is just one more example of how unworkable any emissions trading scheme will quickly become. To assume businesses will not identify angles of “sharp practice” and rort the system is naïve in the extreme. Again, this can only be policed by an ever-increasing bureaucracy—funded, as always, by the involuntary generosity of the taxpayer.
Be Responsible - Be Free! 
Excellent post Oz.
This morning I’m proud to announce that I did a very protracted and loud ‘fart’.
I wasn’t paid for this, neither has the United Nations come knocking on my door to see if I would like ‘offset’ my emissions by buying ‘credits’ from a lesser polluter…namely Mrs. Scud who simply sat there and scowled.
You’re right…it’s just never going to work.
Good article ozboy and no matter what the intention and how well meaning any system is it is going to be manipulated by crooks.
Oz,
G’day mate,
An excellent post Ozboy (as usual).
CAGW is madness, the elites, politicians have cobbled CAGW as a threat to humanity, there is no sapient being on the planet, who now really believes this crap anymore.
But the politicians still do, it shows they care and how compassionate they are, real life problems always fox politicians because….well they are real aren’t they – huh?
CAGW is a perfect scam, there is no real evidence of it, except in the minds of people who have invested so much in the scam, in money terms, time and the enormous amounts to taxpayer lucre………..to back away now from this scam NOW would be tantamount to political suicide.
So the joke/scam/ is perpetuated.
It gets worse, in order to combat a non existent threat, the loony CAGW advocates have dreamed up loony schemes…….it follows I guess.
So in Europe, we have feed in tariffs, wind farms, houses with wind turbines all about as efficacious as chocolate fireguards, once again total madness.
But again, we ferkin pay for it, you and me and the bloke down the street, we are told the sea will inundate our shores, the land will be parched and all our children are gonna die/starve/blah, blah, blah, ad infinitum…………haven’t we heard and put up with enough of this crap?
But more madder than mad Jock MacMadd is the above scheme, it is something out of a Franz Kafka novel or Red Dwarf/Monty Python etc………….(or am I mad – you betcha!)?
Blame it on Al Gore and more, all politicians who are peddlers of these lies, lies and more lies heaped upon lies.
Underlying it all, is the fact that these hocus pocus merchants of BS (more especially in the EU), think we can’t catch on, that we are basically stupid and have no capacity to reason, we are merely numbers, minions to be taxed and told what to do and when necessary send our lads and lasses to war on a whim (cannon fodder).
This totalitarian nirvana, is quickened and brought on, by an education system which does nothing of the sort, it only produces automatons, which is what is required, beasts of burden – in our brave new world.
The effacement of individualism in the western world, is Marxist in concept and has been tried in a more brutal way in Maoist China and more recently in Kampuchea under the madman Pol Pot.
That was Green pedantry/ecofascism in it’s most basic form; “back to the country you scum, Doctors, office workers all of you and ****ing work the land!”
The ‘elites’ (the rich/corporate bankers/ politicians/ big business/Champagne Socialists) hate us, the working/middle classes who are educated (because we cannot be bullshitted) – we are the enemy and by God shall we know them!
“By believing passionately in something that still does not exist, we create it. The nonexistent is whatever we have not sufficiently desired.”
Franz Kafka
Ed.
The “background noise” of highlighting obscure reports containing the word “climate model” continues at the BBC. Are they desperate?
Animals point to ancient seaway in Antarctica http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11138207
So the BBC’s Antarctic coverage is essentially building on Mercer at al, 1978
Click to access Mercer_Nature_1978.pdf
Are they desperate at the BBC?
Suffolkboy – you surprise me or was it a rhetorical question?
On CAGW, the BBC have always fought a rearguard, bloody and desperate action and now it is a scorched earth policy – scorched……….geddit?
This is not really a time for levity but the whole ‘CAGW thing’ becomes more surreal each day that passes.
Ed.
Not wanting to work our good Captain Sherlock’s side of the blogosphere street or anything, but could it possibly—just possibly, mind you—have something to do with where the BBC have its £8 billion in pension funds allocated?
Naaah… journalists are the good guys: to a man, dedicated to the truth! – Oz
AGW, aka “manmade global warming”, is a scientific, intellectual, political, financial and moral scam. The climate has been changing for millions upon millions of years.
The IPCC is the biggest perpetrator of scientific fraud that the world has ever seen.
Individuals and organizations involved in this fraud should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Civil suits should be filed to recover grant money and subsidies given to individuals and organizations participating in the fraud.
Now is not the time to let up ! ! !
No indeed, mon ami. I don’t care what they do to your posts at the Telegraph, feel free to keep repeating your message down here as long as you like – Oz
Well done Oz this manipulation is clearly a scam on a scam (carbon trading) on a scam (AGW) that is a scam to the power 3, clearly with illegal financial benefits to match.
The EU has its own version based upon a VAT fraud as well I believe.
Slowly however Joe Public is waking up to these facts and as the credibility of Pechauri is challenged then the power of the IPCC and and the EU/UN with regard to AGW is also challenged.
This ongoing visibility will gradually erode the AGW thinking but the vested financial and political interests will prove difficult to dismantle and destroy.
Regardless the AGW thinking continues to lose ground and we are winning.
Slightly off topic the Thorium article in the DT by Ambrose Pritchard is gaining a lot of good posts, and has a positive fell and momentum to it,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/7970619/Obama-could-kill-fossil-fuels-overnight-with-a-nuclear-dash-for-thorium.html
Having worked with CO2e from the years 1996 when Lord Browne of BP conducted the first emissions trade ever up through 2001 when everyone I worked with were uselessly slaughtered by in essence the suppliers of the fuel we use which is of Middle Eastern origin, a harder sell is to convince non-industrial brains that there is such a beast as non-overlapping trading systems such as (at the very least) both Kyoto and the beastie is is based on, the EPA’s Clean Air Act. Whether or not a trading system is non-overlapping–that is, how impactful on public finances in terms of Reaganite trickle down or idiotic direct billing in the form of carbon taxes– is a direct function of how cost effective a proposed emissions reduction solution is. Universally speaking, if the reduction makes proper straightline economic sense–trading 55 buck a tonne coal for half coal, half 15 buck a tonne wood chips or municipal waste–the public doesn’t get it stuffed in their ear.
Again, Canada the brave mounts the barricades, flag in hand….
EDMONTON BIOFUELS PLANT TO USE MUNICIPAL WASTE AS FEEDSTOCK
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Enerkem Inc., a leading waste-to-biofuels company, on Tuesday held a groundbreaking ceremony to signify the start of construction of its municipal waste-to-biofuels facility with its partners.
http://www.DownstreamToday.com/News/article.aspx?a_id=23884
Ozboy, congrats on your first ads. Please go to my site and hammer the periodicals I have listed for clickmonkey revenues at http://www.transactionsmagazine.com/miscellany.htm and on the home page. Also, try on http://www.coalblog.org and ask for Jason Hayes. I think also it might be fun to steal a few Telegraph-grade accounts, like, say, Rolls Royce Power Systems.
My first ads???? – sorry Walt, you’ve totally lost me – Oz
I think if you got CPanel, you would be stunned at the lurkers you have tracking you like a Russian sub. This really is a prime public service ad placement for genuine as opposed to high tech.
Perhaps if you had a pron-based ad sponsor, you would not have to worry about revenues again, they always pay best or there would not be a single “alternative” (leftist) free newspaper in the States, but what to do with all that jiggling giggling wiggling biomass?
The Canadians are also leading the way in not paying out on any plant shutdown type settlements of accounts or awarding of tradeable emissions for simply hitting the off switch or closing a plant. Most US States’ individual trading systems likewise forfend.
It would be fun to see the EPA and Kyoto retroactively disallow these risible grafts. If the folks at DuPont can get money for not producing or selling their wacky juice, I deserve at least a million pounds Sterling for all the times I did not fart in church.
I entirely agree that it is the insurance companies’ packaging of green investment and retirement funds which are the source of both the lefts’ current agitation budgets and the motivation for the perpetuation of this clear fraud. It has reached such a state of obvious South Sea Bubble type fraud that I am surprised that the insurance regulators have not put their feet down and demanded proof according to traceable truth validation criteria based on common law and engineering law-based templates, both of which of course would result in the instant death of the entire green fraud.
Hell is the SFO for anyway besides free coffee and a nice view from the Xth floor over London? Billions down the flusher for naught while quantifiably useful programmes die in committee.
@Worse than Mad men ad-selling bear,
Wotcha Bear!
It would be fun to see the EPA and Kyoto retroactively disallow these risible grafts. If the folks at DuPont can get money for not producing or selling their wacky juice, I deserve at least a million pounds Sterling for all the times I did not fart in church.
Love it Bear – I used to let mine out silently as I could……….. But I knew that I scored minus brownie points (in my overall heaven train tickets allocation) and that the Aaaahmitey would smiteme!
Oz,
“Naaah… journalists are the good guys: to a man, dedicated to the truth! – Oz”
Hmm, well if you say so Oz!
Ed.
manonthemoor says:
September 1, 2010 at 7:39 pm
….’that is a scam to the power 3′
The power of 3 is the power of Myth. Three muses, three fates, three graces….three little piggies
WTF is “reputation analysis software”? A bot that searches wiki for WC edits? Erdos number counting? Citation couting? Something that give you “green points” if you cite the “right” papers in your submission? Oh, come on, the wheels are falling off this scam altogether if we’re dealing with this sort of stuff……
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/01/climate-scientists-software
suffolkboy says:
September 2, 2010 at 12:59 am
Yeah but, wots missin’ here?
Oh yessss err…..it don’t matter how good the model is, the algorithms will always be insufficient to model a chaotic, thermo-dynamic atmospheric system;
1. where not all inputs are even barely understood,
2. and not all inputs/outputs have been measured and quantified(see 1).
Its G.I.G.O.!
Even the greatest ever biggest, bestist, shiniest, super, mega, hyper, computer ain’t big enough or quick enough and we couldna programme it yet anyway, despite what Don the hallowed and almighty says………….Lordy……I do declare!
Ed.
Edward.
September 2, 2010 at 1:48 am
Ed ….. Agreed the whole scam is based on computer models which are defective in all areas, not the least of which a considerable amount of the input data has been corrupted.
As science is allowed to open its eyes now, new parameters are being discovered and quantified, this process may continue for the next 50 years before we can accurately predict weather and climate.
Regardless of this we will NEVER impact or control the climate of mother earth, in any case matters are well in hand in this respect, it is a natural way that has existed way beyond the existence of mere humans
manonthemoor says:
September 2, 2010 at 2:35 am
Hi Motm!
Without a doubt Motm, the real fizz to life is its unpredictability, obviously we like to think that we can control it and to a certain extent we do try (buying gold at the moment is a good idea!) but that is folly of the highest order…obviously only Moanbot can do that;>)
Maybe AI will be the ‘new dimension’, we will never, as a race halt innovation and discovery, my optimism only tempered by mankind’s vast propensity towards gross stupididty and worse his warlike nature, I guess both of these are entwined.
In the final analysis, we are reliant on mother nature to be beneficent and not malignant, because if she turns nasty – there is not much that we can do about it!
Ed.
@ NoIdea says:September 1, 2010 at 1:20 am
“Perhaps I was being a little generous in my estimation that you would know which BF I was referring to when I replied to your post that included the wonderful…
“50,000 feet ….
Or, perhaps you did get the reference and that is why you are ignoring me?”
I don’t know the BF you referring to, so pray do tell why I might be ignoring you if I did ?!
Missed the post, had to go back and find it, I losing the tread… but what can you expect of someone whose –
“thinking ability … is on the level of a 12-year old about to begin “high school”. It’s simply an unpolished, puerile veneer which might impress some people – doting parents, say, or a lonely grandmother out in the countryside, or a maiden aunt – but in the real world it is sadly insufficient.”
Damn, thats good. The addition of the maiden aunt is perhaps a bit much… but!
One to save and use in appropriately distant contexts where the plagerism will go un-noticed.
-grin-
@-suffolkboy says:September 1, 2010 at 2:06 am
“(i) if I suddenly by magic I turned the Sun off NOW (zero radiation incoming to the Earth), what would the temperature difference be between say 40,000 ft altitude and sea level on the Earth a second later? Tomorrow? Next year? (Roughly).”
It ‘roughly’ follows the changes seen each time the sun goes down for 12 hours at lower latitudes, or for 3 months at the poles.
Quote-“(ii) What would you tell Year 7 (11 year-olds) next week if they were to ask you why it is warmer at the Earth’s surface than at 40,000 ft?”
The air is thinner. You will learn more in year 11….
Q-“(iii) As (ii) but Year 11”
God ordained it that way.
(To compensate for the spending cuts the school has gone for academy status and Baptist sponsors….)
Q-“(iv) As (ii) but Year 13 (about to go to university)
If you have a university place you already know how to Google the answer….
Q-“(v) As (ii) but your MP (trying to keep their seat)”
Why the hell are you worried about the lapse rate, if you want to get re-elected get some decent funding for the local school.
(vi) By some means, a planet like the Earth but which has an atmosphere similar to the Earth is floating in space with no nearby star has at some instant a temperature near the surface of 20 deg C. What is its temperature at 40,000 ft? What information would I need to know in order to estimate its rate of thermal radiation to space?
There have been several SF stories based on that premise, I vaguely remember one claimed it took four years for the seas to freeze over… no idea if thats right.
Rate of thermal radiation is going to change over time because the emissivity of the atmosphere will change as the water vapour and then CO2 are frozen out.
Initial rate will depend on the temperature and albedo/emissivity in the relevant spectra and of the planet (and atmosphere)
A counter-question.
Is there a point to these questions beyond keeping me entertained… -grin- ?
Or are you preparing a section of this new academic years lesson plans….
While the questions are in one sense rather peripheral to the issue of AGW, they do relate to the issue that it IS possible to have accurate an reliable answers to questions like these (not guaranteeing I’ve always supplied them). This basic year 11 stuff really doesn’t carry any doubt about its validity – unless you want to import the sort of anti-science nonsense that Creationists and ‘ID’ denialists practice.
I would argue there is a continuum between these basic scientific facts of the material world and the science involved in the AGW theory. There is no convenient demarcation between the data on lapse rates, quantum mechanics of photon absorption and paleo-sediment analysis that allows one to be acceptable science, and the other to be a scientific …. scam.
izen aked on September 2, 2010 at 8:06 am of Suffolkboy
10/10 for effort! Well, it serves lots of purposes. By finding out where your answers differ from mine (when I have worked any out) it helps identify misconceptions. Exactly who has the misconception is for further study. The kiddiz have lots of misconceptions, or simplifications, some harmless, some not, and some as part of development. The really nagging question this year is the syllabus which, AFAIR, continues to read something like “candidates should be able to explain how AGW moved over twenty years from one scientist’s idea to a consensus”. Now, if that comes it in an exam, what is the “correct” answer, what is the “real” answer, and which should the kiddiz put down? Also, how do you answer their questions in class? Be assured, this year THEY WILL BE ASKING DIFFICULT QUESTIONS (at least at Y13). Also, do the answers differ if they came up at a university admissions interview?
Also I think setting and thinking through these examples is fun, with lots of divergent sparks of thought. It’s far more interesting than doing lesson plans again for Year 9.
And I hope it keeps the other drinkers at this bar entertained, though I think we tend to lose half of them as soon as a formula comes up.
So are you saying the temperature at some point 40,000 feet goes up and down according to whether you can see the Sun from that point???
Hello All,
Still catching up with the blogs after a few days away. Ozboy, Ed, Suffolk, Walt et al good posts. Looks like the climate is changing (the political climate).
Pointman
manonthemoor says:
September 2, 2010 at 2:35 am
“… Agreed the whole scam is based on computer models which are defective in all areas, not the least of which a considerable amount of the input data has been corrupted.”
Nope.
There are direct instrumental observations of the energy imbalance and the change in the flow of energy from the surface to space caused by the increase in CO2.
No supa-dooper shiny mega-computers required.
Could provide links … if I don’t its ‘insufficiently documented’, if I do, and quote the relevant sections, I’d just be cut and paste-ing rather than giving reasons of my own…
Actually if you follow the science of AGW at all the key observations on which it is based should be known to you…try giggle or blinging ’empirical evidence for AGW’.
Quote-“As science is allowed to open its eyes now, new parameters are being discovered and quantified, this process may continue for the next 50 years before we can accurately predict weather and climate.”
Weather is inherently unpredictable because it is the short-term variation of a chaotic system.
The chaotic system is driven by constrained thermodynamic balances however so the possible envelope of variation IS predictable (at least inherently)
Q-“Regardless of this we will NEVER impact or control the climate of mother earth, in any case matters are well in hand in this respect, it is a natural way that has existed way beyond the existence of mere humans”
Are you discounting the effects of soot and other particulates and SOx emissions in affecting albedo and cloud formation?
Or do you consider that WHATEVER disturbing factor we introduce to the climate system, even as an intentional piece of geo-engineering, good old ‘mother earth’ will find some way of negating our influence?!
suffolkboy says:
September 2, 2010 at 8:23 am
” The really nagging question this year is the syllabus which, AFAIR, continues to read something like “candidates should be able to explain how AGW moved over twenty years from one scientist’s idea to a consensus”. Now, if that comes it in an exam, what is the “correct” answer, what is the “real” answer, and which should the kiddiz put down?
The correct and real answers are pretty close together. Best summary of both is the Weart site –
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index.htm
Depressing if the syllabus thinks that AGW is only twenty years old, its closer to 120 since it was just one scientist that speculated about the possibility of AGW.
Quote-“And I hope it keeps the other drinkers at this bar entertained, though I think we tend to lose half of them as soon as a formula comes up.”
Optimist.
I would be much more impressed if anyone else came up with the answers before me – at least with the person that did.
Not that my admiration probably counts for much! -grin-
“So are you saying the temperature at some point 40,000 feet goes up and down according to whether you can see the Sun from that point???”
Probably more accurately whether you can see the sun from the ground below that point.
(allowing for whatever jet-streams and air-currents are knocking about at the tropopause…)
For God’s sake Izen, can’t you post anything with content? Do you actually believe in all this bollocks or is it just one debating wheeze after another?
Pointman
MM idiot,
Dunno what formula you drink, maybe you should go back to mom’s mammaries (sardonic grin).
Hiya Izen
And there was me thinking that you would be a fan of Bobby Fischer, arguably one of the greatest (Chess) brains ever.
I thought the queen sacrifice reference and board tipping mention would have been a dead give away.
It seems to me, that Bobby Fischer had the thinking ability of a 12 year old, when it came to everything except chess.
Grandmaster of Cerptitude
Master Cerptitudinous
You are so ludicrous
A lexicon superfluous
Verbosity incredulous
Flummoxed and overwhelmed
Tin hat and metal helmed
Pee-wee reviews a deluge now
Noah oh NOAA where for ark thou
Mister flimsy theory
Wonders why we are leery
When he says it’s hot and clearly
Its is not, he is seriously
Deranged and unglued
Mister Cerptitude
Or just plain rude
Whilst playing the prude
Now don’t tip the board
Don’t blame the lord
Tree rings that are bored
Bogus data that is stored
So take the pills for all your ills
Prophecies of doom with all the frills
Carbon tax and bigger bills
Mass debating just for thrills
Like Bobby Fischer full of lies
Global warming theory now it dies
Reality is cold in front of our eyes
Returning ice is no surprise
Missed the post and lost the plot
No room to tread just –grin- a lot
So can you tell us please just what,
It is that makes YOU think it’s hot?
NoIdea
@-Pointman says:-September 2, 2010 at 9:07 am
“… Do you actually believe in all this bollocks or is it just one debating wheeze after another?”
The science stuff doesn’t require belief – it is a matter of empirical evidence.
Political opinion on the other hand usually IS the product of a belief.
Hello Oz !
/// No indeed, mon ami. I don’t care what they do to your posts at the Telegraph, feel free to keep repeating your message down here as long as you like – Oz ///
Many thanks, Oz !
Now is not the time to let up ! (wide grin)
Best,
L’Amerloque 20100902 08h35 Paris time (CET)
Hello All !
Good morning !
In res: cherrypicking, quotes, use of, 12-year olds, trolls
Quoting out of context sometimes leads to misunderstandings. It sometimes attenuates the message(s). Amerloque wouldn’t certainly want that !
From Amerloque’s message at the end of the previous thread:
///
— >> izen says:
On September 1, 2010 at 12:21 am
Sir/Madam:
I have no desire to enter into any correspondence with you. Had you not noticed that I have never posted to you? Do you think it’s by accident ? Are you so self centered ?
This is the one and only time I shall be addressing you directly.
I find your tiresome and repetitive brayings shallowly reasoned and insufficiently documented. You, like so many, prefer to cut and paste rather than reason on your own, preferring to avoid risk rather than moving forward with vigor.
I find that your thinking ability – such that you have demonstrated it here – is on the level of a 12-year old about to begin “high school”. It’s simply an unpolished, puerile veneer which might impress some people – doting parents, say, or a lonely grandmother out in the countryside, or a maiden aunt – but in the real world it is sadly insufficient.
Your writings and “research” are probably enough to convince some people (perhaps those paying for your “education” ?) that you have been trained in “logic” and “science”, but they fall sadly, abysmally, and irrevocably short of such an evaluation on my part.
On the other hand, what can one expect when “good grades” and “degrees” are being handed out like candy to all and sundry while disregarding intelligence, aptitude and skill – not to mention common sense and decency ? ///
The remainder of the message is long and Amerloque shall not abuse readers’ patience by quoting any more here. The whole thing is at the end of the previous thread.
Best,
L’Amerloque 20100902 08h40 Paris time (CET)
Hello Everyone !
The lobomized US press, in this case USA Today, is ramping up for ‘Cancun’. (sigh)
In extenso:
///
Report: Climate change threatens historic Jamestown, Va.
Human-caused climate change threatens to flood Jamestown, the first permanent European settlement in what became the American colonies and the United States, says a report Wednesday by environmental groups.
Jamestown Island, the site of the original 1607 settlement, is low enough to be inundated by rising seas and tidal waters — even if the waters do not rise as much by 2100 as scientists predict, according to the report by Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Climate Organization.
Jamestown, a part of Colonial National Historical Park, is also likely to become intolerably hot for much of the summer, the report says, adding its record-setting heat this summer will become more common. …
///
http://tinyurl.com/2fyq6zz
Best,
L’Amerloque 20100902 09h00 Paris time (CET)
Well! How about THIS apple-cart upsetter – have you come across it yet?
“Rate of Radioactive Decay May Not Be Constant”
“Stanford University News reports that the rate of radioactive decay on Earth may be affected by the sun. This should come as a surprise to you if you’ve taken science class where the rate of decay has been assumed to be constant.” {more at the link below}
http://chemistry.about.com/b/2010/08/24/rate-of-radioactive-decay-may-not-be-constant.htm
{mornin all! a whisker above freezing here last night – hello September!}
“The science stuff doesn’t require belief – it is a matter of empirical evidence.”
And that doesn’t include loading the dice or empirical fantasy, either.
Good morning all and Izen
Front page of the Express this morning
EU to hammer drivers to pay for climate change policies here
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/197041
Plus an article about Pachauri here
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/197040
It seems the Express may be sensing blood on behalf of the MSM at last
Hello Everyone !
Report about a terrorist warmist in the Wall Street Journal this morning:
///
Gunman shot after taking hostages at Discovery Channel headquarters
Police marksmen shot dead a lone gunman carrying a bomb who had taken three employees hostage at the headquarters of the Discovery Channel near Washington DC.
By Alex Spillius, Washington
Published: 7:43AM BST 02 Sep 2010
The suspect, James Lee, 43, had previously served two weeks in jail after staging a protest against the channel’s supposed lack of commitment to protecting the environment.
He entered the building in Silver Spring, Maryland at 1pm, waving a handgun and wearing explosives strapped to his body. Most of the 1,900 people working at the building were able to escape immediately.
Police decided to shoot the suspect after almost four hours when they believed the hostages’ lives were in danger.
Police Capt. Paul Starks said the suspect had fired a gun at least once.
When Lee organised a protest outside the same building in February 2008, he issued a six-page set of demands to Discovery, saying the channel “must broadcast to the world their commitment to save the planet”.
At his trial, he said he became committed to that cause after being laid off from his job in San Diego. He said he had been inspired by “Ishmael,” a novel by environmentalist Daniel Quinn and by former Vice President Al Gore’s documentary “An Inconvenient Truth”. …/…
///
The Wall Street Journal (wsj.com) is accessed by paid subscription … one workaround is to go to the Google “News” page and search for a couple of keywords. The resultant link to the WSJ can be clicked on with no problem – for a while, anyway.)
Shall we rejectionists tarnish all the thermogeddon alarmists wigth the same brush, as they do to “deniers” ? (grin)
Now is not the time to let up !
Best,
L’Amerloque 20100902 10h50 Paris time (CET)
Amerloque says:
September 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm
Bonjour mon amis, Ca va?
I have for many moons been worried about some alarmist person willing to lose his life over the conjecture of CAGW.
What a sad waste, it will turn out that he was challenged in some way, this doesn’t make it any easier to stomach. This brings to mind, something that I have have deep anxiety over, Monckton should watch his back.
Animal rights nutters have long targeted individuals working on animal experimentation – (not something [vivisection] I agree with at all IMHO), how long before eco-nutters/Greenpeace activists start having a go at realists, physically?
The MSM and politicians are guilty of inciting these unhinged people by using emotive rhetoric and by their Armageddon “the end is nigh” scenarios/pictures of drowning souls, burning forests, calving glaciers, polar bears – this is what sends vulnerable minds over the edge…..can people like Gore, Pachauri and our inane governments and especially the Politburo of Brussels see this?……Or is it a deliberate tactic, because if it is (and I would not put it past them) the battle has just gotten serious, very serious thereby using – very, very dirty tactics.
Lots at stake including big, big money and reputations and political power and pension funds too.
Is this where we are?
I sincerely hope not but know, that we are.
Ed.
Hi Everyone !
News from the front, in the Los Angeles Times this morning (Thursday).
///
Environmentalists stunned by failures of key measures in Legislature
Activists expected big gains, but a ban on plastic grocery bags, another on a chemical used in baby bottles and a bid to boost alternative energy fell short in the face of heavy industry opposition.
by Evan Halper, Marc Lifsher and Patrick McGreevy, Los Angeles Times
September 2, 2010
Reporting from Sacramento —
Environmentalists were counting on big gains in Sacramento this summer, with a governor eager to burnish his green credentials in his final months in office. But by the time the legislative session ended at midnight Tuesday, those hopes had fizzled.
Activists had worked for passage of such pioneering measures as a ban on plastic grocery bags and expanded use of the sun, wind and other renewable resources to power California homes and businesses. But the bold proposals they saw as a springboard to nationwide environmental efforts collapsed in the face of aggressive industry opposition that included intensive lobbying, television advertising and even mail to voters.
“We’re in shock,” said Mark Gold, president of the nonprofit Heal the Bay, which had helped lead a large coalition of activists, retailers and unions crusading for the bag ban.
The measure to bar grocery stores from giving away single-use plastic bags appeared headed for the books earlier in the summer, when it was approved by the Assembly and the governor said he would sign it. Backers say the sacks, which can take generations to decompose, have become a scourge on the environment, polluting the urban landscape and oceans alike.
But the American Chemical Council, a trade group, fought hard against the measure.
It spent $242,000 over six months to hire five lobbying firms as it opposed the ban before the battle even reached its peak in July and August, according to the group’s most recent disclosures. The organization also bankrolled a television advertising blitz that exploited the political anxieties of lawmakers already under fire for the state’s financial mess.
“California’s in trouble,” said the narrator in one ad. “2.3 million unemployed. A $19-billion deficit. And what are some Sacramento politicians focused on? Grocery bags.” …/…
///
http://tinyurl.com/24qpgjq
(sarcasm on)
Golly gee gosh, can you imagine that ? The opponents used “lobbying” “television advertising” and even (gasp) “mail to voters” !
(sarcasm off)
It’s about time.
Of course, ecofascist thermogeddonists would never, ever use such tactics … would they ? (grin)
Now is not the time to let up !
Best,
L’Amerloque 20100902 12h50 Paris time (CET)
Hello All !
Mea culpa !
The recent excerpt that Amerloque attributed to the WSJ was in fact quoted from the … Daily Telegraph !
The correct keywords for the WSJ article are:
///
Suspect Killed in Hostage Standoff
By JOSH MITCHELL and DEVLIN BARRETT
SEPTEMBER 1, 2010
SILVER SPRING, Md.—A man obsessed with programs on the Discovery Channel stormed into the company’s headquarters in suburban Washington, D.C., on Wednesday wearing explosive canisters and brandishing a handgun, sparking a four-hour hostage drama that ended when police shot and killed the man and freed three workers he was holding captive. ///
…/…
///
Sincere apologies to all !
Best,
L’Amerloque
Hi, Ozboy. I see you have Google ads on this blogspace. That was the ad I was referring to. You should be getting click-pence for it, kind sir. I had thought you had set up that arrangement to defray blog space costs in terms of your time, etc.
Here is yet more bloggo on non-insane power generation regimes.
http://www.coalblog.org/?p=1505
Edward. says:
September 1, 2010 at 11:01 pm
Erm, actually, as a choirboy, I would save up the methane as best I could for appropriately timed discharge during the sermon or better yet, the responsa LOL
…and with Thy Spirit BLAPPA BLAPPA BLUP BLUP FLUT FLUT BWEEEEEEEEEEP
Walt O’Bruin says:
September 2, 2010 at 10:36 pm
We are both gonna spend a lot of time in the ‘waiting room’, knocking on the gates- Lmao!
Ed.
Delightful Guardian own-goal this evening. Back in April last year Leo Hickman posted a wordy blog about how evil man and ‘climate change’ were wiping out the lovely little PIKA, a rabbit-like animal, and how it should be classified as ‘endangered’.
To-day Jonathan Watts has posted a Grauniad blog about the Tibetan grasslands which are being destroyed by evil man and ‘climate change’, but more directly by ‘a growing population of PIKA’.
The Tibetans have apparently hunted down the Eagles, Hawks and Leopard which used to predate upon the PIKA.
How can these idiots write about ‘saving our planets’ when they haven’t even a basic understanding of how an eco-system works ?
G’day bufo mio. You’re talking empirical science again. Soooooo yesterday. Get with the post-normal wave, baby – Oz
Rastech September 2, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Following a link from your link I came to
http://chemistry.about.com/od/workedchemistryproblems/a/c14dating.htm
I noticed they are also mentioning the Carbon from Nitrogen reaction.
“Carbon-14 is produced in the atmosphere when neutrons from cosmic radiation react with nitrogen atoms:
147N + 10n → 146C + 11H
Free carbon, including the carbon-14 produced in this reaction, can react to form carbon dioxide, a component of air. Atmospheric carbon dioxide, CO2, has a steady-state concentration of about one atom of carbon-14 per every 1012 atoms of carbon-12. Living plants and animals that eat plants (like people) take in carbon dioxide and have the same 14C/12C ratio as the atmosphere”
I am still looking for more information, I had been hoping that Izen would be more forthcoming, seeing as it was him that first raised this point.
I am now hunting for a link that mentioned that carbon dating was ruined from the 1950s after all the Atomic bomb tests.
Or am I getting that confused with the lead isotope dating used by Patterson?
NoIdea
I ask a simple question of Izen that requires a simple yes or no in reply. Instead, he prevaricates when there’s no need. I take that as an indication that he doesn’t have any real belief in the whole AGW delusion. Given that, the interesting question is why he sticks around the Bar & Grill. Ideas anyone?
Pointman
@- Pointman says: September 3, 2010 at 8:36 am
“I ask a simple question of Izen that requires a simple yes or no in reply. Instead, he prevaricates when there’s no need.”
Questions about what we BELIEVE are rarely simple and never answered by a simple yes or no. To think otherwise is… simple.
Quote-“I take that as an indication that he doesn’t have any real belief in the whole AGW delusion.”
‘Real belief’?! – does that mean there is such a thing as UNreal belief… I’ve already pointed out that the science of AGW is not a matter of belief, its a matter of empirical evidence.
“Given that, the interesting question is why he sticks around the Bar & Grill. Ideas anyone?”
I’ve explained this before, its to challenge my own ‘Morton’s demon’ as much as to challenge the beliefs that are contradicted by empirical evidence expressed here.
Oh Izen, dissembling is your little art form. There’s nothing simpler than belief. Still can’t do a simple yes or no reply? Your answer to my follow up question is equally disingenuous. I’m beginning to suspect you’re rather younger than we thought. A lot younger in fact …
Why do you sniff around the fringes here? We don’t love you, never mind respect you.
Pointman
izen said September 2, 2010 at 8:06 am
Practical Homework for Izen
Go to the GISS Land Temperature database [1].
Locate Adelaide Airport.
Examine the “homogenized” annual average temperature record spanning c1881-c2010 [2]
Examine the “raw” annual average temperatures spanning c1881-c1991 [3]
Q1: what was the homogenized average temperature in 1882? (16.20?)
Q2: what was the raw average temperature in 1882? (17.20?)
Q3: what was added to the raw to give the homogenized? (-1?)
)
Examine all the additions for each of years 1882-1991,
Plot the amount of the addition against the year.
Describe your result, possibly using the word “staircase”.
Suggest explanations for your result.
What is the gradient of the best-fit curve for the raw data? (-1 degree per century?)
What is the gradient of the best-fit curve for the homogenized data? (+0.5 degree per century?)
[1] http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/
[2] http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=501946720004&data_set=2&num_neighbors=1
[3]http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/findstation.py?datatype=gistemp&data_set=0&name=Adelaide
G’day Suffolkboy,
I’ve seen these raw vs “adjusted” dataset pairs so often it’s a wonder anyone still takes GISS seriously. Being a little bored today, I took your data dumps into Excel to check the actual differences; they are indeed being fudged (oh, all right: “homogenized”) in a series of steps; 1881-1896 raw temps bumped down by 1°C, 1897-1902 by 0.9°C, and so on… from 1961 onwards the raw data are being progressively raised, up to 1991 (the end of the raw series) when they are being bumped up by 0.4°C.
So: they tell us it was cooler in the past, and warmer in the present. And it’s all because of man.
One man.
Oz
Oz + suffolkboy,
G’day gents,
The both of you should have a look at this post by Steve McIntyre here:
http://climateaudit.org/2010/09/01/icoads-hawaii/
– Interesting is it not?
Ed.
And this post too,
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/in-search-of-cooling-trends/
Ed.
An interesting pair of articles, Ed. I’m going to have to read the McIntyre one again, to get my head around it properly.
In terms of “global trends” (whatever that actually means), the phrase statistically insignificant, while useful, is far less satisfying to me than bugger-all – Oz 😉
And this is worth a read too,
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/09/cracks_in_climate_change_onsla.html
Ed.
Oz,
bugger-all – Oz
A rather colloquial expression but in this particular case – exactly on the nail:>)
Homogenised or whatever you call it, the books have been ‘cooked’ there (to me) is conclusively and absolutely no doubt.
So when the IPCC/Prince Chuck whathisface say “there’s only 10 minutes to save the world!” – pardon me, if I don’t sit down and split/open another cold one.
When you build a house on sand……. .
Ed.
Not all that many branches on Chuck’s family tree – Oz
The older he becomes, the dafter he is, I blame his mum – but really, it is a good job she held onto the job for so long – God Bless her (but not him).
Ed.
If your are really bored, you could start on the rest of the 15,000 records. But presumably others have done that, possibly at wattsup. What, you tell me Lord Oxo of Persil and Lord Ealing of Broadway have done that already, and we’re all wasting our time? Or that Lord May of Bee says that the consensus is so overwhelming that it would a waste of time, as does my MP?
What can we do? Shall we set the investigative incisive reporting team from the BBC on to the job; I’m sure they could afford to wheel out Roger H for a head-and-shoulders video clip of how he faced down Al Gore, and then balance it with a crack team of hundred reporting from Somewhere Very Expensive, Mexico? Or get the BBC to re-hash “Absolutely Fabulous” with Saffy re-badged as a
skepticdenierdenialist arguing with her greenie mum? And get Private Eye to run a WarmingBalls column? To get 1000 US pro bono lawyers are preparing lawsuits totalling $1T against a million companies? To perfect a flying pig launcher?Cynicism aside, at least the kiddiz are wising up (if they weren’t already). A surprisingly large fraction are sceptics, not because of logic but because they are bored with the relentless greenwash, haven’t the slightest interest in working out what the heck carbon future derivative trading means, and, in some cases, despair of their greenie parents’ lifestyle. Perhaps I should prepare them for the future by guiding them into exploring the helpful behaviour of thorium nuclei instead of teaching them how to make lamps which run on sunflower oil or the aerodynamics of windmills. They are also pretty good at subversion, by giving the “right” answers in exam papers as compared with using the “real” answers in life.
Talking of wattsup, who stole Darwin? According to WU[1] Darwin Airport has got steps in it (which is what got me looking at Darwin, Durham, Zurich and Braemar{flat as a pancake} in the first place). But I looked just now (2/Sep) and the homogenized data now covers only 1963-2010 and there are no steps, just some noise of around 0.05 deg and a couple of one-off blips. Also since August 2010 or so the welcome page on the GISS data[2] says “Note to prior users: we no longer include data adjusted by GHCN[…] “. Is somebody removing dead bodies from the crime scene?
And why did you tip izen off about E*cel? I had hoped to tie him up with doing 15 subtractions and computing eight to the power of five over three before break, without using a calculator. Next he’ll find out about computers and do all 150000000 subtractions before break rather than admiring the beauty of Stefan’s Law and Planck’s constant. Now I’ll have to send him out of class to subtract all the wool from all the sheep in Oz.
[1] http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/darwin_zero8.png
[2] http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/
Edward. says:
September 3, 2010 at 5:45 pm and September 3, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Edward. says:
O wow! Great posts Ed! I see Steve is looking at the ocean data (such as it is) which I suspect is far more significant and far less known. (I have been spending far too long in the Ozbar instead of keeping an eye on those heroes toiling with the real issues. ) Steve seems to be on the hunt for pseudo trends, where factors (such as where the sample is taken from) gradually changed over the decades (e.g. buckets to engine intakes). I strongly support this. There are probably more. For example, back on dry land I have been worrying about exactly when each day the weather station readings were made, especially the early ones. My history is a bit wobbly here, but the idea of universal time is a recent concept tied up with trains. So how exactly did Lord Armagh’s manservant know when to read the thermometer each day in 1800? By a clock? Synchronised with the Town Hall? GMT? BBC? Sunrise? If there is “progressive introduction” of “standardised time” across a population of weather-watchers, then there would be a wholly spurious “trend” because, for example, Armagh is going to be getting up in the dark while Fenland is half-way to high-noon, so the concept of “10am each morning, sharp, Jeeves” is something of a variable time. Most of the UK is West of Greenwich. And that’s just a little country!
All right, I jest a bit. But it seems all to easy to assume that a trend is caused by whatever one is funded to find or to travel to find, rather than brainstorming on confounding factors: soil nutrient fluctuations in Siberia, change of working hours on airport staff. UHI effects may be just the start. What about Rural Crop Islands: the switch from barley to maize or oilseed rape as a cash crop wouldn’t alter the climate but might nudge the temperature near rural weather stations (see Dyson Freeman) by a few centikelvins.
http://climateaudit.org/2010/09/01/icoads-hawaii/
http://climateaudit.org/2010/09/01/icoads-hawaii/http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/in-search-of-cooling-trends/
I expect you’ve all seen this, but just in case, here is the current top-recommended comment on the JD blog regarding the James Lee case, and the way that it has suddenly become a “non-story” in the MSM…..
And as the next-highest commenter, following up the “non-story” angle, says:
Edward. says:
September 3, 2010 at 5:40 pm.
Most interesting link Ed, Perhaps Steve McIntyre’s observation “Maybe, like Mann’s birstlecones, Honolulu airport is a “sweet spot” for detecting climate change? should read: “Honolulu airport is a “sweet spot” for fabricating climate change?
I presume Honolulu HI, and Honolulu HNL are the same airport, if so, these previous observations by Anthony Watts may have some relevance.
To give just one example: “When errors in weather data are pointed out and acknowledged by the reporting agency, and NOAA declined to fix the issue in the records,as was demonstrated last year in Honolulu, HI International Airport, when a string of new high temperature records were set by a faulty ASOS reporting station, it calls into question the reliability of the whole system”.
Then there is the question of “Missing Minus Signs” in the temperature raw data:
If “raw” data that should have a below zero (minus) temperature reading has been imported into the system with the minus signs “missing” then surely all data resulting from this error is corrupt, and if the CRU “do not hold the original raw data”, perhaps we have an explanation of why the computers predict warming while REALITY shows no statistically-significant “global warming” whatsoever.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/17/giss-metar-dial-m-for-missing-minus-signs-its-worse-than-we-thought/
They are also pretty good at subversion, by giving the “right” answers in exam papers as compared with using the “real” answers in life.
Sounds like myself a bit, a long time ago admittedly!
Gotta love that;>)
Suffolkboy,
Flat-earther (a moniker accorded by Gordo the ‘gloom’ – and now worn with pride – suits my distaste of all that is ‘AGW’ because of the unintentional irony) to flat-lander, there is no doubt in my mind, that the propagation of different crops cause minor changes in the micro climate in that particular area/region.
Have you seen parts of Kent or Northern Europe under vast acreage/hectares (whatever) of cloched soft fruit and also greenhouses + glass like/plastic protectors?
The different crop types will affect albedo and properties within the soils and evapotranspiration rates. These may be minor, they must however affect the temperature readings.
@Dave,Edinburgh,
Greetings Dave,
“If “raw” data that should have a below zero (minus) temperature reading has been imported into the system with the minus signs “missing” then surely all data resulting from this error is corrupt, and if the CRU “do not hold the original raw data”, perhaps we have an explanation of why the computers predict warming while REALITY shows no statistically-significant “global warming” whatsoever.”
I have long given up with all T data, after reading and digesting Mckitrick’s paper on GHCN ‘tricks’.
Click to access surfacetempreview.v3.pdf
I know or feel that there is, has been no rigour in the recording and reproducing data sets, I agree that some of the figures needed a certain ‘homogenisation’ (a term I associate with milk and one that I loathe), if the homogenised data was available to retest and re-run, I could forgive these nurdlers at CRU et al, I now find that my disgust grows as each IPCC review appears – may as well consult with septic peg/mystic meg at the News of the Screws.
Always good to hear from you both of you!
Ed.
Oz,
I gather that you have already seen this:-
http://notrickszone.com/2010/09/03/greenpeace-violence-is-escalating-the-lines-are-drawn/
A few thoughts of mine.
Where is the line drawn by these ‘people’, where does it stop, till we’re all in caves and living on berries and scavenging?
Because this regression to some sort of rose tinted bespectacled nostalgia for a ‘better way of life’ – seems to be their (Greenpeace?) end game logic. of these completely warped individuals.
What is wrong with these eco-lunatics, this is a step too far – I’ve always regarded them as tofu eating eco-freaks whom with, I had some sympathy a long, long time ago.
They became (in the late seventies) advocates, politicised themselves, lost what little grip on sanity they possessed and shape-shifted into eco-fascists and then morphed into, totalitarian, anti humankind headbangers.
It is only logical now, to class them as outside of the law and hence forward as terrorists.
Perhaps now, the IPCC, the UN, western governments can stop treating them (Greenwarmongers) as some type of crusading do good-er saints who have something to say that we all need to hear.
It is only because western governments ‘perceive’ that these nutters are on their side – incredibly, they are given access to delegates, overt government funding and open doors to the corridors of power – we have to now ask why?
Why on Gods green EARTH! Do governments put up with these screw loose, educated but brainwashed renegades?
Whilst, law abiding, sceptical scientists, along with peaceful dissenters (to AGW) are named Deniers, holocaust deniers and far worse……I am speechless.
They are nothing but unhinged lunatics (ecofascists), who will not reason or act in a rational manner.
I am reminded of a certain sect of a Saudi fundamentalist, who has vowed an end to; western values, civilisation, social mores, religions and way of life – what is the difference between GreenPEACE and fundamentalist terrorists?
Ed.
I’ve seen it. My response at DT:
Neither peaceful nor green.
Those of us who do actual work on the ground to help preserve the natural environment get pretty sickened by this sort of thing.
If the spittle-flecked little brat in the video spent less time pursuing totalitarian activism and participated in the occasional neighbourhood clean-up, I might be tempted to take his petulant rant a bit more seriously. And his own future might be slightly cleaner too.
The future palpably does NOT belong to brainwashed, callow little sprogs like him. It belongs to his contemporaries, who right now are way too busy doing their homework, playing sport and just generally being kids to march to the drumbeat of grim authoritarians who have anything but the natural environment’s best interests at heart.
Come to think of it, the kid’s message about the future is eerily familiar…
Oz
Oz,
You may also have viewed this too, anyway in case you haven’t it is a good read and hits the bullseye in the middle.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/09/02/todays-inconvenient-truth-al-gore-lied-jason-jay-lee-died/
Ed.
I’ve been making the same point publicly for some time: just how many politicians who push a Global Warming agenda own waterfront property? And are they introducing laws which have the effect of lowering the value of waterfront property, then snapping it up themselves at bargain basement prices? In many cases, there appears to be irrefutable evidence that they are.
This tells us a) they don’t believe their own pronouncements about the earth’s climate, and b) they are using their positions as lawmakers to rob the citizenry.
A teensy bit of outrage is called for, wouldn’t you say? – Oz
A teensy bit of outrage is called for, wouldn’t you say? – Oz
I do clearly recall your comments, one of the factors in posting the above link – I think someone cribbed.
A bit of an outrage?
I think that would be, to understate the case Oz.
On vulnerable and immature thinking (on everyones account) and on the inculcation of such minds, a very dangerous path is being trodden by the political elites pushing an agenda, which is not only wrong but anti humanity.
It will reap a bitter harvest – and yes that clip is spine-chilling, I remember reading about Germany in the twenties and early rise of Hitler and how he rose to power and thought at the time – was it that easy?
A bit of mindless thuggery, mindless but endless slew of outrageous (and thoroughly evil) anti Semitic propaganda and a fed-up population, extremely war weary, stitched up awfully by the French at Compiegne and tired of hyper inflation were ready to believe anything, thus, were ripe for exploitation.
A dumbed down populace we now have provides a similar scenario today – have been bombarded with black and doomsday cataclysm worst case depictions, all government instigated.
However, the major difference being – although the public is seemingly indifferent, not all of us are.
And if you require a sardonic laugh after all that, take a look see at this, I had to look twice to see if the sleep was still in my eyes, it made me groan.
The UN and the EU those incorruptible bastions of; seekers of the truth, honesty and integrity are instigating ???(well read on) – you really couldn’t make it up!
http://en.mercopress.com/2010/09/02/anti-corruption-academy-with-un-and-eu-sponsoring-opens-in-austria?utm_source=newsletter&utm_me
Ed.
PS, I can’t recall the Twenties but did read about it.
Al gores, is of course hedging his bets, with his waterside properties. If the sea really does rise (and he obviously does not really think it will) Like Noah, He also has a magnificant house boat. ……
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.lesjones.com/www/images/posts/big.zU7.big.191.BIO.SOLARONE.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.lesjones.com/posts/005513.shtml&usg=__l-navaSCItbOXQdy4ASzKMqToAk=&h=375&w=502&sz=27&hl=en&start=5&zoom=1&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=avRBPsQ7LFrCqM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dal%2Bgore%2527s%2Bhouse%2Bboat%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DX%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1
Hiya Fen
It is not just Gore that is a rank elitist hypocritical lying scum bag.
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/197040/Climate-change-Hypocrisy-of-the-green-bully
“RAJENDRA PACHAURI has a chauffeur, lives in luxury and jets across the world on his quest to ban Sunday roasts and cheap flights.”
Will I ever trust Gore or Pachauri as far as I can throw them?
NoIdea
hi No Idea
Marxist thought for the day….
…..I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.
Groucho Marx
MSM busted for spreading unsubstantiated climate alarmism – again.
“Sherpa mountaineers in Nepal say a rise in the rate of snow and ice melt on Mount Everest has exposed bare rock faces and made it dangerous to climb.”
I’m not a climber, but I imagine it would be much easier to climb on bare rock than on rock covered with ice and snow. Anyway it seems the story is completely unsubstantiated – who would have though? 😉
http://co2insanity.com/2010/09/03/climate-alarmist-abc-busted/
http://abcnewswatch.blogspot.com/2010/09/mt-everest-melting-but-who-says-its-so.html
fenbeagle says:
September 4, 2010 at 10:04 pm
As an evangelical Stooge-ologist, I resemble that, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk. You are now under my power, now you must give me all your artistic skills.
Hmm, didn’t work. Coises, foiled again !
Hope no one here took any hits money or health wise in New Zealand from the quake with our crowd. Glad there were no casualties. I’d been through a quake in Washington State, and it is the emotional aftermath of looking over your shoulder for it to happen again which gets to you. Clinical psych’s call it “trauma priming.”
Anyone know whether or not Svengali was half Swedish, half Indian ?
From Ozboy:
Come to think of it, the kid’s message about the future is eerily familiar…
RedWar are der liddle girliemen compared to their predecessors. As frustrated and annoyed as the masses are with massholes like GreenOoze, how delightful a pastime of granting them their wish for becoming immortal through being at one with nature would be for one and all.
Rather, being put at one with nature, naturlich…..
G’day all,
New post here.
Fenbeagle strikes again!
Came back from taking a rehearsal of “Elijah” by a Mr Mendelssohn, who seems to have set music for the choir to an old story, which starts as follows.
Following a couple of unusually hot dry summers, and with the arrangements for water management and food storage not ideal, the population is suffering from drought, harvest failure and starvation. The opening chorus begins “Help! We need somebody!”. Most of Part I is taken up with the efforts of one of the leaders to blame the problems on population growth and naughty behaviour and suggests that, instead of eating cows, they slaughter them, in the belief that this will change the climate. One leader in particular is very keen on this, and challenges the other one, who believes that in the end it will rain. The first leader gets the population to do increasingly bizarre things, usually involving damaging themselves with knives, to get the climate to be cooler and wetter, or at least rain for a day or two. At each point there is a defining silence from the orchestra at the point where the rains are predicted to come. Eventually the second leader, who was biding his time, gets a go, does nothing hysterical , whereupon it rains.
Next week I shall do Part II, which is full of political retribution, inquiries and recrimination about exactly what happened in Part I. Heads roll when it is found out who had been telling porky pies.
I get the usual complaints at these rehearsals about the audience wanting “something more up-to-date” instead of these obscure irrelevant historical narratives. What should I do?