JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

The parodies of the 10:10 eco-attack-dogs begin

Done over and flicked right back at the eco-terrorists. The Final Solution. No doubt re-edited for an infinitely smaller price and exactly no public expenditure. There’s no holding back the free spirited.
[Warning: Like all the 10:10 derivatives this contain graphic violence. Not for children!]


Or the Jihadi extreme version:


….

And EU Referendum has found a copy of the “Making of Splattergate” which just shows how totally serious and self-absorbed these people are. (Did none of the parents of these kids think this would be a tiny bit unwise as a educational concept?) You can go there and watch good British kids speak like up-and-coming suicide bombers.

My first post on this was Sick green-psycho-stars want to kill your children. Seriously, the original 10:10 master is the kind of vid you can send to people you would not normally send things to, think especially of women or mums. Explain that this shocking movie will give them some idea of why you are motivated to work against the dangerous extreme green meme.

As well as making Green Groups denounce it, we need to help all the 10:10 supporters realize just how much it hurts them to be seen within 500 miles of the 10:10 decimating banner.

Has anyone got time to research and list them with contact details?

Send in those other parodies…


UPDATE #1: Thank you!

This is a gem, darkly. No Pressure: No Choice

h/t exp


My response: Sick green-psycho-stars want to kill your children

H/t first two youtubes, BillieQuiz and Alexander Davidson.

UPDATE #2:  irrelevant little aside here

Ht Mark Gillar: He spotted Gillian Anderson’s success at picking dud scare campaigns and found a cringeworthy moment. Here she is on Letterman in 99 telling us and how devastating Y2K is going to be (and worse, how much research she has done on it). Look out: the audience hears her apocalyptic vision and breaks out into laughs and she’s flummoxed, baffled even, “Why are you guys laughing?”

LETTERMAN: Are you concerned about the end of the Millennium? (laughter)

GILLIAN: Actually, you know what? I actually have been doing a lot of research on Y2K. I have indeed. Did you… Do have a specific question? Am I interrupting?

LETTERMAN: I have many. (laughter) (cheers and applause) Well, it’s my show. I’ve got to talk occasionally.

GILLIAN: Okay.

LETTERMAN: No, this is how dumb I am. I didn’t know anything about the Y2K till a couple of months ago, and I’m thinking, I’m thinking, well, certainly people must have been working on this since like the 1940′s, and it turns out nobody’s been working on it at all.

GILLIAN: Well, no, I think in a way that they have been. But the problem was that they had a specific language for computers way back then, and when that language was invented, they had no idea that the computer was going to take off. And so, every other language that has been built up on top of that and on top of that, and it’s about getting back to that initial language.

LETTERMAN: Now, when you hear people talk about what might go wrong, they can paint a very dire picture.

GILLIAN: Oh, absolutely.

LETTERMAN: Give us an example of how bad things might be. This is a conjecture, it’s conjecture, but it might be.

GILLIAN: Well, you know, there’s a possibility that there could be a huge food shortage in stores, that…

LETTERMAN: Born of what? Why is there… What is the computer thing have to do with food shortage?

GILLIAN: Well, because in terms of, like… In terms of getting the food in the trucks to go to all the different cities around, and if the computers aren’t working to regulate that system, then…

LETTERMAN: Everything breaks down.

GILLIAN: Then everything kind of breaks down.

LETTERMAN: So dependent have we become on the computer.

GILLIAN: Oh, absolutely– which is so ironic, because I think what this is about right now is, this is an opportunity for us to get back to basics in a sense, and for us to unite as communities to help each other, so that eventually, if there is a devastating effect, that at least we can join together with the people around us, instead of, you know, acting out of fear and robbing our neighbors for food, or for money, or whatever, because there’s nothing around. And the ironic thing is that… Why are you guys laughing?

(laughter)

Letterman knows what’s going on… the irony flows:

GILLIAN: Because I’m so serious?

LETTERMAN: You’ve got them… They’re worried.

GILLIAN: Let me finish making my point.

LETTERMAN: People are scared now. You’ve frightened us again.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.5/10 (2 votes cast)
The parodies of the 10:10 eco-attack-dogs begin , 5.5 out of 10 based on 2 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/27dd8so

91 comments to The parodies of the 10:10 eco-attack-dogs begin

  • #
    janama

    It had to happen didn’t it. A gay one will be next no doubt.

    00

  • #

    [...] da Jo Nova qualche informazione in più circa i pazzi furiosi. Sul sito EU Referendum (che ha battezzato [...]

    00

  • #
    John from CA

    “Did none of the parents of these kids think this would be a tiny bit unwise as a educational concept?”

    LOL, a tiny bit unwise?

    10:10s complete disregard for the welfare of children says it all. The other versions are equally offensive.

    00

  • #
    mango

    the sceptics are now shooting themselves in the foot – i think it’s a bad idea to endorse and show these videos – especially you jo, you’re normally quite level headed

    /Mango

    [Mango I reply in #32. You are not the only one who feels this way, but I think, as detestable as the whole theme is, we can't shy away. This is too important to not fight back.-- JN]

    00

  • #
    Olaf Koenders

    Mango, I think it’s a very good idea to show these videos – it proves how radical and idiotic these extreme green groups are. It has to be known. They have obviously shot themselves in the foot.

    00

  • #
    John Lyon

    The parodies are casting a fly to see if that will make the Police bite, if they go for the parodies the question as to why the original was not of interest to them will arise.

    00

  • #
    mango

    Hi Olaf

    I respectfully disagree.

    I am sceptical of the whole CO2 induced global warming thing, but by highlighting these videos it just gives the AGWer’s something to fire back at sceptics. If sceptics had not produced these videos (it was sceptics, wasn’t it), then we would still have the moral high ground. As things stands, we have lost the moral high-ground

    JMHO

    /Mango

    00

  • #

    That’s one heck of a parody. I had to laugh.
    Click! Click! Click! Click! Click! Click!
    Good find JO!

    00

  • #
    mango

    Hi John

    I don’t think it will be seen that way.

    And what if the police do bite and the videos are seen as advocating violence or terrorism against a particular group. Would the likes of Jo be seen as encouraging these acts?

    JMHO

    /Mango

    00

  • #

    The parodies will be very effective in communicating the real message of the movement. As I said, this is the next Nov 17, 2009 for the warministas all over again.

    00

  • #
    pat

    bigpond has not a mention of Crean in this article, despite the headline, but i heard these Emerson quotes on radio or tv yesterday and had to ask what is this man talking about when he says a price on carbon would help our “International relations”, not to mention his attempt to prove Labor isn’t backtracking:

    3 Oct: BigPond: Carbon tax no certainty – Crean
    Labor frontbencher Craig Emerson says the government spoke about a price on carbon well before the election.
    And implementing such a measure could help international relations, the trade minister noted.
    ‘If we are seen to be doing the right thing in terms of putting a price on carbon, that will help,’ he told Sky News…
    http://bigpondnews.com/articles/TopStories/2010/10/03/Carbon_tax_no_certainty_-_Crean_521017.html

    00

  • #

    Forget it mango.
    This cat aint going back in the bag. This field day is just beginning. It’s the warministas that created this video. We are only exposing them for what they are.

    00

  • #
    mango

    I can see it biting us in the bum that’s all

    /Mango

    00

  • #
    Billyquiz

    @Mango

    I don’t think the parody versions have been created by skeptics per se, just people with a sense of humour and the time to put into making them.

    The best one (which IMHO is the one where all the kids are blown up) was created by a graphic designer who’s website is here: http://www.cyriak.co.uk/

    00

  • #
    Adolf Balik

    The parodies are not that good like the original. That is perfect parody of the very itself. The AGW movement is the longer the more parody of itself. Remember e.g. the CRU white clean inquiry or Mann’s inquiry that were also parodies of themselves. The longer the more they look like a travesty of science, of viable politics, or of respectable PR. Well, they real face is gradually appearing:
    http://images2.layoutsparks.com/1/89676/skull-life-green-monster.jpg

    00

  • #
    cw

    This otta sum it up:

    Tracy McVeigh guardian.co.uk, Saturday 2 October 2010 19.38 BST Article hist

    The charities that backed a Richard Curtis film for the 10:10 environmental campaign said today that they were “absolutely appalled” when they saw the director’s four-minute short, which was withdrawn from circulation amid a storm of protest.

    The film, entitled No Pressure, debuted on the 10:10 website on Friday. Featuring a cast including film star Gillian Anderson and England footballer Peter Crouch, with music donated by Radiohead and shot by a 40-strong professional film crew led by director Dougal Wilson, it was intended to galvanise viewers into taking personal action to reduce their own carbon footprint.

    In several graphic scenes, committed environmental campaigners use a detonator to blow up recalcitrant members of the public, including two schoolchildren and the ex-footballer David Ginola. Distribution plans for UK cinemas have now been scrapped.

    The charity ActionAid, which co-ordinates the 10:10 schools programme, today welcomed the move. “Our job is to encourage proactive decisions at class level to reduce carbon emissions. We did it because evidence shows children are deeply concerned about climate change and because we see the impacts of it in the developing world where a lot of our work is. So we think the 10:10 campaign is very important, but the moment this film was seen it was clear it was inappropriate. ”

    While many people said they found the short an amusing way of addressing the issue of apathy towards climate change issues, others found it tasteless and unnecessarily violent.

    Within hours of its release, the 10:10 team changed their minds and pulled the film.

    “With climate change becoming increasingly threatening, and decreasingly talked about in the media, we wanted to find a way to bring this critical issue back into the headlines while making people laugh,” said Lizzie Gillet, 10:10 global campaign director. “We were therefore delighted when Richard Curtis agreed to write a short film for the 10:10 campaign. Many people found the resulting film extremely funny, but unfortunately some didn’t and 10:10 would like to apologise to everybody who was offended by the film.”

    Curtis said last night: “I was worried that the environment is an issue that can seem worthy and we will all just drift into disaster. So I thought it was worth trying to write something unexpected. But when you try to be funny on a serious subject, it’s obviously risky. I hope people who don’t like the little film will still think about the big issue and try to do something about it.”

    10:10 founder and Age of Stupid film-maker Franny Armstrong said tonightCurtis had written what she thought was “a funny and satirical tongue-in-cheek little film in the over-the-top style of Monty Python or South Park”. “When the film was released by 10:10 yesterday, lots of people found it funny, but many others were offended. Out of respect for those we offended, we immediately apologised and withdrew the film.”

    The 10:10 team went on to pay tribute to the crew and cast who donated their time and equipment for free, and concluded: “At 10:10 we’re all about trying new and creative ways of getting people to take action on climate change. Unfortunately in this instance we missed the mark. Oh well, we live and learn.”

    At least three other groups linked to 10:10 confirmed they had privately expressed their concern. One told the Observer: “The great fear was that it would just take the focus off the programme.”

    The 10:10 campaign was launched in September last year, based on the Climate Safety report’s identification that a 10% cut in the developed world’s emissions by the end of 2010 would boost the planet’s chances of avoiding a climate catastrophe. The aim was to sign up individuals, schools, companies and other groups to commit to reducing their carbon use by 10%. More than 96,000 people have signed up.

    A statement from the Guardian, a backer of 10:10, which exclusively showcased No Pressure, said: “The film may have been somewhat tasteless, but it was an imaginative attempt to challenge public apathy over climate change.

    “The Guardian warned users of its site that the film contained footage that could cause offence, and continues to link to another version of the film posted on YouTube.”

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    All of these 10:10 sponsors just made it to my toilet paper list of vendors.

    Yes, Sony, that includes you.

    00

  • #

    At the GWS forum on this thread,
    http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/forums/thread-923.html

    a link has been posted that lists the sponsors of 10/10.
    http://sadhillnews.com/2010/10/01/eco-terrorism-1010global-org-no-pressure-ad-campaign-made-possible-by-sony-and-others

    Some of the sponsors are listed as,
    O2
    SONY
    The Guardian (newspaper)
    Action Aid (education…)
    Carbon Trust – which has an “interesting” list of Board members..
    http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/about-carbon-trust/who-we-are/pages/board.aspx
    “big oil”, “big supermarkets”, “big Government” they are all there..

    Time to “Goose” the sponsors of 10/10 may I suggest.

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    In other words “Big Green” who wish to profit by having government change the rules in their favour – while the little greens continue their abject wailing over the self-inflicted, (in their view) impending global climate catastrophe approaching humanity.

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    And the parodies keep coming in. I think this could parellel the downfall vids…

    The Green Final Solution

    Monty Python Mix

    00

  • #
    Mark

    All this just proves that truth is the first casualty when it comes to their insane “war” against element no. 6.

    00

  • #
    Ross

    One point that has not been highlighted enough on this issue is that the Guardian ( as 10:10′s media partner) had this video well in advance of it’s release and no one at the Guardian seemed to be able to envisage what the public reaction to this would be. To me that is amazing and says alot about the “eco bubble” ( as some others have labelled it ) that the Guardian editors and the Environment section of the paper , live in.

    00

  • #

    When we were still under the regime of Gordon Brown in Britain the free spirited produced a series of movies called Brownfall which were over edits on the Hitler movie Downfall.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_rLWulWVNY

    Most of the vids have stopped now, but this one on the EU elections where Brown and Labour got hammered is priceless, I only I had the time to do a Greenfall video.

    There must be someone out there with the talent and the time…….

    00

  • #
    Stu

    Ross (above)

    Yep, my respect for the Guardian as a news outlet has basically vapourised over this. If they can feel so comfortable in supporting this kind of progaganda (they have said that the 10:10 people are their ‘friends’) then they are obviously not worth listening to or associating with an objective source of information.

    This whole thing has been incredible. It has an unreal feeling about it.

    00

  • #
    lychee

    Hey “mango”, obviously you didn’t use….(The rest was Snipped) CTS

    00

  • #
  • #
    Exp

    Items 3-6 on this playlist are spoofs or whatever. I didn’t see number six, “No Pressure? No Choice!”, above.

    http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=7C79DEF1EE25E880

    00

  • #
    fedup

    At last the green movement can be seen for what it really is: a form of fascism and the fact that they will stop at nothing to achieve their aims.
    The spirit of the video parallels exactly how many distinguished scientists who have spoken out against AGW have been treated.
    Freedom of speech and openness of debate is obvoiusly an inconvenient and outdated concept which they choose not to honour.

    00

  • #
    pat

    at least one of the tottenham hotspurs’ footballers apparently had no clue what the film was about. franny armstrong sent a lengthy piece to 10:10 listees in advance:

    alisonlowndes’s posterous: Blowing up footballers + 3 weeks till 10:10:10
    From: Franny Armstrong
    …Our next innocent lambs are Peter Crouch, Ledley King and two others (sorry, I’m an Arsenal fan). I felt bad for the one who didn’t speak a word of English for whom Director Dougal’s perfectly straightforward instructions – “on action, face the coach and listen to him as though you’re really interested. then when I shout “bang”, jump out of your skins, look towards each other in confusion and then run off in different directions” – went straight over his head.
    http://alisonlowndes.posterous.com/blowing-up-footballers-3-weeks-till-101010

    Spurs’ owners/managers must have organised the players’ participation, yet they have said nothing since the film backfired.

    17 Sept: TottenhamHotspurs: Explosive day at the Lodge!
    Ledley King, Wilson Palacios, Giovani and Peter Crouch joined former favourite David Ginola in supporting 10:10′s forthcoming day of awareness on October 10 – which is being called 10:10:10 – by putting their acting skills to the test.
    Without revealing too much prior to the film being released, the production was an explosive affair with a series of small explosions managed by a expert special effects team…
    http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/explosive-day-at-the-lodge-170910.html

    i love the carbon footprint of Spurs’ owner, british businessman, joe lewis:

    Wikipedia: Joe Lewis (British businessman)
    Lewis currently is the main investor in Tavistock Group, which owns more than 175 companies in 15 countries. Tavistock Group’s portfolio includes life sciences (Kalypsys, Ambrx), sports teams (Tottenham Hotspur) and sporting events (Tavistock Cup, Isleworth Collegiate Invitational), manufacturing and distribution (KangaROOS, Gottex), oil, gas and energy (BayCorp, Pampa Energia), financial services, restaurants (Freeb!rds World Burrito, Mitchells & Butlers plc, Zed451), commercial properties (Tamar Capital, Bulgarian Property Development), private luxury residential properties (Isleworth Golf & Country Club, Lake Nona Golf & Country Club, Old Fort Bay), resort properties (Albany, Harmony Cove) and master-planned real estate developments (Lake Nona, New Providence Development Company).
    Lewis, married with two children, has homes all over the world at which he is able to indulge his passion for golf…
    Lewis’ total wealth is estimated at $3 billion, and he is listed as the 316th richest person of Forbes’ List of billionaires .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Lewis_(British_businessman)

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    The children are the key -

    They seem to think that there is nothing wrong with the movie – they identify with the teacher – they identify with the group think of the majority in the class – they identify with the cause.

    This is no more than a demonstration in psychological conditioning – brainwashing. And it is being done today, by a teacher, in a classroom near you.

    Think about it. We may be winning a short-term battle over the science, but we are in real danger of loosing the war over belief systems.

    Propaganda 101: If you control the belief system, facts become irrelevant.

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    Rereke,

    Case in point is the making of splatter-gate clip above where at 1:05 one of these kids says he thinks “it’s OK to blow up children for a good cause”.

    First they dehumanised people for asking questions by calling them deniers. Parallels can be drawn with forcing people to wear a star. You see it becomes easier to knock someone off if they are singled out as being less than human. This video was the logical next step.

    The step after this I guess is them acting out on their fantasy.

    00

  • #

    Exp: Thank you for No Pressure: No choice.

    Loved it. An expert hand crafted it. They’ve cut out any wasted second and added in a great finale. (Speaking of which, I’d like to thank the original creators of those parodies, so if anyone comes across the original names I will try to add them to the post.)

    Mango – none of these would be funny remotely if the eco-jihadi’s had not done it first. And the point of these parodies is that once the first viral nasty version is out there, as disgusting as it is, no one can call it back. We have to take it and run with it. This is our best response — use what they give us to show the world what they really are.

    If we don’t parody them to highlight the obscene risk and sinister danger then we are allowing the sicko-seed of the idea to spread to all the mentally unstable zealots. If we make the antidote funnier and more cutting than their own, then we create a kind of vaccine.

    I put the word “parody” into the title. There is no mistaking our intentions.

    I hope someone sends the top one to the parents of the kids. Perhaps they’ll wonder whether this was such a great idea.

    PS: Thank you all — the comments are right on the mark and helpful.

    00

  • #
  • #
    Bulldust

    Not sure if it’s been posted yet but the Thompson’s got something up in the media… OK it is Farm Weekly, but it’s a start:

    http://fw.farmonline.com.au/news/state/livestock/cattle/receivers-move-in-to-narrogin-feedlot/1957518.aspx

    00

  • #
    Kaboom

    Dudes and Dudettes! This is hip, edgy, in your face media!!! Get used to it, you Old Farts!!!1!!!

    It is not “real life”, so get over it, already!! It is MAKE-BELIEVE people, an edgy way to get a crucial message across.

    Art promulgates the fore-fronting of fantasies into your face. Always has been, always will be. If you don’t like it, then just crawl away and die stat.

    /s

    00

  • #
    Grant

    One massive own goal I think. The script writer and the producer might have duped the client. If they didn’t then it just shows how warped some people’s thinking is.

    However, it highlights what many have predicted. The inconvenient will be sacrificed, and sacrificed brutally, for the cause. I don’t foresee warmists wandering round with their friendly detonators exploding those who do not fall in line, but they are going to feel very self satisfied as some poor nameless child dies in some far off land, because the policies of those who need to feel guilty for being affluent has caused their starvation.

    00

  • #

    [...] Jo Nova goes climate Jihadist. [...]

    00

  • #
    lychee

    “Kaboom”, read some history of the Nazi Holocaust to see that history is trying to repeat itself, thanks to gullible and ignorant morons like yourself.

    Maybe YOU and your “useful idiots” are the ones that should go KABOOM!

    Hit the history books sonny…..

    00

  • #
    Bob Malloy

    I find this reworking of the bedtime story by M4GW worth a look as well.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BptZ7CXHziA&feature=related

    00

  • #
    mango

    Not making myself popular here! lol

    IMHO, a better parody would have been to show nobody getting blown up, with a catch phrase that showed sceptics to be reasonable people, willing to listen to the other side, respecting other peoples opinions (even if they are wrong) and winning the argument with data not violence

    Remember, guys, the evidence is on our side

    /Mango

    00

  • #
    mango

    actually, the Monty Python mix is funny, perhaps it’s the john Cleese voice over

    /Mango

    00

  • #
    G/Machine

    If they are serious about reducing the evil CO2, why don’t they take
    their ‘message’ to China. They are building power stations at the rate
    of 1 per week. As a protest, they could stand in front of their
    bulldozers. We’re with them all the way. No pressure.

    (What is the Chinese for ‘Ecotard’ and ‘bullsh#t’, anybody ?)

    00

  • #
    Kaboom

    Umm, lychee, the /s is a “sarcasm” tag. Plus, always bear in mind Godwin’s Law (Google it) when commenting.

    Peace, Dude.

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    Kaboom,

    your blog name is fantastic dude. you do take sarcasm to new levels. I thought I was good.

    00

  • #
    Mark

    Lively discussion at The Blackboard.

    To be expected, the odious “Robert” and “bugs” offer mealy-mouthed criticism then still manage to wonder what all the fuss is about by making post after post trying to defend the intent behind the film.

    Beneath contempt they are.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    G/Machine: #42

    They are building power stations at the rate of 1 per week.

    I think you might find that is an understatement.

    I sometimes think that the Chinese response to climate change is to rid the world of combustible carbon :-)

    00

  • #
    Billyquiz

    A nice compilation showing how they are targetting our kids:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McHjZ4tfdLw

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    mango:
    October 4th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
    …Remember, guys, the evidence is on our side…

    What evidence?

    00

  • #
    Barry woods

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McHjZ4tfdLw&feature=player_embedded

    THIS ONE INCLUDES PACHAURI…
    “WE HAVE TO SENSITISE THE YOUNG…….”

    NO PRESSURE, BEDTIME STORIES, COP 15 VIDEO, TIDAL WAVE, CHILD SCREAMING, ETC…

    00

  • #
    Speedy

    Jo

    I get your point – Gillian Anderson seems to be on the search for Armageddon, any Armageddon will do…

    Not much going on underneath the haircut, as they say.

    Cheers,

    Speedy

    00

  • #
    Richard S Courtney

    Rereke Whaakaro:

    At #30 you assert:

    Think about it. We may be winning a short-term battle over the science, but we are in real danger of loosing the war over belief systems.

    Propaganda 101: If you control the belief system, facts become irrelevant.

    It is impossible for me to agree more strongly.

    And I strongly assert that an understanding of ‘belief systems’ is needed if we are to overcome the unfounded AGW scare.

    Unfortunately, when I tried to raise a discussion of ‘belief sytems’ on this blog then anti-religious extremists usurped the discussion as a method to promote their cause. And I infer that any similar attempt to discuss ‘belief systems’ would be destroyed in similar fashion by those and similar anti-religious extremists.

    Sad, very sad.

    Richard

    (If you or anyone else think the topic is hijacked.Then tell us about it) CTS

    00

  • #
    Richard S Courtney

    Sliggy:

    At #48 , concerning the overwhelming evidence that disproves anthropogenic (i.e. man-made) global warming (AGW), you ask:

    What evidence?

    As a start, I suggest that you first read the Handbook by Ms Nova which you can access with a click on the link at the top-left of this page.

    Richard

    00

  • #
    Exp

    “Starting with an amusing cartoon about Polar Bears this sequence of climate alarm shorts becomes progressively more shocking.”

    I had the idea of interlacing the sequence of National Geographic shorts into this, but they include advertising. The finale of that series is titled “Six Degrees Warmer: Mass Extinction?”

    10:10 Global Warming Propaganda Progression:

    http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=0749C9A2DE122590

    00

  • #
    george

    Here`s the 1010 brigade presumably making an environmental statement by showing how to turn an aeroplane into 1010 badges

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Cl70nUK3HQ

    Now where would all the energy to carry out such a task (and to create the tools and equipment used) have come from? And how much of it? An irony which would no doubt be lost on their “flock”, I suspect.

    00

  • #

    Richard S Courtney @ 51,

    There is nothing to understand about “belief systems” except that they are not about understanding anything: no facts, no logic, no rationality – just belief. There is nothing else to discuss about it because there is no there there. It can’t even be argued with because there is no basis for or necessity of proof within it. It is the full flowering of Plato to Kant to Postmodern Philosophy AND every religion that has ever existed. Its final fruit is a return of the agonies of the Dark Ages.

    The ONLY way to counteract such things is to stop believing and use reason to acquire actual knowledge.

    00

  • #
  • #
    Mango

    @Siliggy:

    you said:

    What evidence?

    Glad you asked the question. Could I suggest you start right here on this blog? There is plenty to read and educate yourself. Start with Jo’s guide near the top left hand side, but please don’t take her word – check out the references for yourself.

    /Mango

    00

  • #
    matty

    “No Pressure” is the biggest admission yet that they are losing. The far left have always been twisted because they are stuck with unpopular agendas and end up frustrated with democracy. It is why the Australian greens have used stealth to get this far, but AGW is just not living up to reality, especially the politics. Expect more and more desperate little episodes like this sick video.

    00

  • #
    Richard S Courtney

    Lionell Griffith:

    At #55 you assert:

    There is nothing to understand about “belief systems” except that they are not about understanding anything: no facts, no logic, no rationality – just belief.
    [snip]
    It can’t even be argued with because there is no basis for or necessity of proof within it.
    [snip]
    The ONLY way to counteract such things is to stop believing and use reason to acquire actual knowledge.

    Sorry, but the only content in your message is a demonstration that you know nothing – and understand less than nothing – about ‘belief systems’.

    A belief is much, much more important to every person (including you and me) than any fact or information.

    A person rarely recognises that he/she holds a belief and that is why facts and evidence cannot alter a belief: indeed, facts and evidence are selected or rejected by a believer on the basis of the belief.

    Indeed, the ’10:10′ campaign’s propoganda film was a disaster for that campaign because the campaigners failed to understand that their belief system is not shared by decent people. So, they could not undertand how decent people would be offended by it.

    For example, the Guardian newspaper co-sponsored the ’10:10′ film and had seen the film weeks before it was released, and it cannot reasonably be assumed that a national newspaper had no knowledge of public attitudes. But the Guardian was surprised by the immediate and widespread revulsion of the film. Clearly, their belief in the AGW scare prevented the writers at the Guardian from using their proffesional knowlege to consider the likely response to the ’10:10′ film.

    As Rereke Whaakaro said at #30:

    Propaganda 101: If you control the belief system, facts become irrelevant.

    And denial of that fact is more damaging to any opposition to AGW propoganda than refusal to state the facts that there is no evidence for AGW (n.b. none, zilch, not any) and there is evidence which refutes discernible AGW (e.g. the absence of the hot spot’).

    Richard

    00

  • #
    Mark

    By the way, Siliggy #48, it is incumbent on the proponents of a hypothesis to both prove and falsify it, not the sceptics.

    We don’t mind helping to kick the chair from under it though.

    00

  • #
  • #

    I am not always as quick on the uptake as some of you so bear with me…

    Is this the new meme? If we do not conform, if we do not behave in an “ecologically sensitive manner” if we do not conform to the teachings of the anointed ones than we will be sent to the classroom… ????

    Have I go this right? Is this the new threat from the eco-left?

    Will I soon be hearing “Go along or you’ll be sent to the classroom!?

    00

  • #

    Richard,

    I agree that there is a belief that belief is all powerful and defines what can and will happen. So according to that belief, if you control the belief of others you control others. Also, according to that belief, the more people you can get to believe, the more powerful the belief is in creating its own reality. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Reality is real. Reality is what it is without regard to anyone’s beliefs. If the belief does not match what is, any action based upon it will fail to achieve the desired goal. Man has only one method of knowing what actually is and that method is reason. The entirety of man’s knowledge and experience contains those principles by implication. That you believe otherwise is irrelevant. Belief by itself has nothing to do with what can and will happen.

    I suggest YOUR belief system is part of the problem rather than part of the solution. You are tying to operate on the beliefs of others based upon your own beliefs about their beliefs. Reality is lost in the transaction. Drop your dedication to Kant et.al. and discover that there is a real world out there that can be known and understood. Successful action can result only from that kind knowledge and understanding.

    00

  • #
    Barry Woods

    I think most of the schools signed up are in the UK…

    My childs headteacher, spoke to 10 10 this morning and has stopped all involvement with 10 10
    The head was completely unaware of this video, and the 10 10 mindset..

    May I suggest, anyone with children, sent the link to the guardian article, to thier schools headtecher/governors.
    And ask them, please watch this video, read the co-founders words….
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/se
    Should you ever be involved with this…

    Look up your school.

    http://www.1010global.org/uk/education/schools

    I am personally going to email ALL my local schools with this link, and advice them what my schools headteacher has done..

    I hope that anyone else might do the same..

    in there area..

    your choice, no pressure !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    00

  • #
    co2isnotevil

    When I first saw this clip, I thought it was a spoof.

    00

  • #
    mango

    “it’s worse than we thought”

    hot on the heels of 10:10 comes another propaganda effort, this time supported by the NSF!

    http://www.princeton.edu/arts/arts_at_princeton/princeton_atelier/ateliers/great-immensity/

    /Mango

    00

  • #
    Atomic Hairdryer

    Siliggy:

    What evidence?

    Good question. What evidence is there for 10:10′s claims of-

    300,000 global warming related deaths every year.
    4 years left to ‘stabilise’ the environment.

    No pressure, assuming someone’s finger isn’t on the button..

    00

  • #

    The first “tubic” is a kinda botched one. It should end with something like that:

    - the teacher stops for a second with a thought on her face , says “oh! I forgot that!” and then after pressing the button once more she vanishes in another bum!

    That would be the Final Solution!

    Regards

    00

  • #
    Grant

    Mango @ 40

    My idea of parody of the situation would be all the believers going home, thinking about what they can do to reduce their emissions by 10%, realising how unambitious that is and then thinking that by blowing themselves up they can achieve a 100% reduction. Of course non of them would follow through with it because of the personal inconvenience that would entail.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    Lionell Griffith: #63

    Reality is real. Reality is what it is without regard to anyone’s beliefs.

    Tautology aside, you are correct.

    My original statement was, “If you control the belief system, facts become irrelevant”. I do not assert that the facts no longer exist, nor do I not dispute the existence of reality.

    We have had this conversation before.

    Where we appear to differ, is that I accept that reality exists; but due to the limitations of my organic sensory apparatus, and my chaotic computing ability, I cannot directly experience it, in its pure totality.

    So reality, to me, is no more than a conceptual construct, and one that may actually be different to your own. How would we know?

    The conceptual construct that I have, forms the basis for my belief system – my imperfect interpretation of the way “reality works”. It is the mechanism whereby I interpret reality through my sensory apparatus, and relate my sensory experiences to the personal knowledge that I hold in memory.

    Propaganda, is a fairly crude way of modifying (or in the case of children, moulding) a persons conceptual construct so that they interpret their experience of reality in a slightly different way. (Psychotic drugs are another way of altering a person’s sense of reality, although I do not admit to having personal experience of that, you understand ;-) ).

    So whereas I accept your philosophical approach, and defence, of Reality. What concerns me is the open attack, by those “in power”, on the mechanisms that the population use to interpret, and assign meaning to, their experience of reality.

    It is a long time now, since I did Propaganda 101. But I don’t believe the basic principles have altered. What has changed, it would seem, is the sophistication of the delivery methods – as technology has improved, the level of sophistication seems to have decreased, or perhaps that is just relative.

    00

  • #
    Ross

    A price is being paid at 10:10 ( let’s hope the organisation is consigned to history soon )

    http://icecap.us/index.php/go/political-climate

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    I think the best answer to the question is this effective propoganda, we simply have to think about the following question:

    When, in history have so many people begged and demanded that their governments tax them heavily on the basic necessities of life?

    Just thinking about this question surely is all that is required because the next questions is harder:

    How the hell did we get to this point? Why are people so freaking blind to how they’ve been callously manipulated? And why won’t they do anything about it?

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    MadJac: #72

    If you went through an education system that subjected you to psychological conditioning, at every turn; and if you lived each day, subject to propaganda with no other benchmark of reality to compare it to; how would you know that your head had been messed with? Millions of people live quite happily in the Peoples Democratic Republic of Korea, for the simple reason that they know no different.

    The original Matrix film was very powerful because it presented the concept that you could live entirely in a dream environment, and not know, until you took a pill that awoke you from the dream. Of course, once awakened, you could never really go back. So which was the dream? Before you took the pill, or after?

    00

  • #
    Exp

    Radical Muslim version has been taken down.

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    Richard S Courtney @52
    Mango @57
    Mark @60
    Atomic Hairdryer @67

    Ia m thinking of joining 1010…Not “10:10″ but “1010ppm”.

    Oh dear! Time to clear up some confusion(My fault)!
    Mango’s comment at @#4 “the sceptics are now shooting themselves in the foot”, led me to wonder if Mango was a warmist. Then the comment @#9 “Would the likes of Jo be seen as encouraging these acts?”, seemed to reinforce that. If only I had noticed “I am sceptical of the whole CO2 induced global warming thing” @#7 and “Us” @#13. Sorry Mango for thinking you were one of the propagandised non thinkers.
    So please understand that the challenge “What evidence?” was aimed at the warmist delusion.
    As for the suggestions that I start with Jo’s Book. Hmmmm started many years before that!
    Quiet a few skeptical satellite enthusiasts about now, have a look here (15 pages and many very good links).
    http://www.vetrun.net/forums/showthread.php?t=5919
    Lance Pidgeon

    00

  • #
  • #
    papertiger

    I couldn’t decide which to send sooooo….

    I sent Eric at the Prop 23 camp the whole kit.

    Hope he doesn’t keel over ;)

    Let’s cross our fingers, wait and see what happens.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Rereke @ 70:

    It is a long time now, since I did Propaganda 101. But I don’t believe the basic principles have altered. What has changed, it would seem, is the sophistication of the delivery methods – as technology has improved, the level of sophistication seems to have decreased, or perhaps that is just relative.

    I suggest that the level of sophistication has become much greater. The effect of propaganda is lost if the “receiver” learns what and how the methods are applied. On one hand you have crude obvious propaganda all the while there is subtle and almost imperceptible stuff laying around. It too has to be adapted for the relatively higher educated “receivers” these days.

    00

  • #
    lychee

    The Rise of the Greenshirts

    Green extremists have for years been scaring our kids with stories of doom and despair. Now they are threatening any kids who do not swallow their stories. Have a look at the intolerant and threatening stuff they are spreading. Those of us who remember Mao’s Red Guards imagine where this sort of propaganda leads. See:

    http://greenhellblog.com/2010/10/01/greens-detonate-kids-in-violent-climate-video/

    00

  • #
    lychee

    Global Warming as Religion and not Science

    http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/religion.htm

    00

  • #
    mango

    Siliggy:
    October 5th, 2010 at 10:23 am

    Mango’s comment at @#4 “the sceptics are now shooting themselves in the foot”, led me to wonder if Mango was a warmist. Then the comment @#9 “Would the likes of Jo be seen as encouraging these acts?”, seemed to reinforce that. If only I had noticed “I am sceptical of the whole CO2 induced global warming thing” @#7 and “Us” @#13. Sorry Mango for thinking you were one of the propagandised non thinkers.
    So please understand that the challenge “What evidence?” was aimed at the warmist delusion.

    Me an AGWer? Noooo, although I do take the Pielke view, which i suppose puts me in the luke-warmer category. I think anybody who thinks man isn’t partially to blame for climate change (not necessarily global) is mistaken and there is ample evidence available to show this is happening. The whole CO2 as primary driver of climate though is clearly false.

    My comments are a genuine belief that this type of parody of the “parody”, could do sceptics more harm in the long run than good.

    And, apologies right back at ya for assuming your “What evidence” comment was from the mouth of a true believer.

    /Mango

    00

  • #

    Felt sick all day from that video.

    Two suggestions for this blog:

    1. For Gods sake, take down the parodies and condemn them – they are our own goal – what…. it’s disgusting for Warmists to blow up kids but its OK for skeptics to do it in a parody of a parody? Surely you won’t argue – “but please Sir – they did it first!” These parodies will confuse the public – who made what video – we will both be painted bad as one another and loose a golden PR opportunity.

    2. Perhaps it is the time for us to write a letter to our friendly Headmaster – with this link and polite request that given I am a scientifically well informed Climate Realist opposed to climate alarmism, and consequently so are my children, that their views be respected and that I wish my children to be excluded from any environmenal messages or activities.

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    Michael Cejnar:
    October 5th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
    I asked my kids to tell me what they had learned each day on the subject and went over the facts with them each time. Also prepared them for the known future topics so they could see the crap coming. Took them to see the Monckton and Watts tour speakers also. My daughter got an A in that class and the teacher has no idea she is not fooled.

    00

  • #

    [...] The parodies of the 10:10 eco-attack-dogs begin For my original thoughts on the nasty video see, 10:10 cut carbon emissions viral video nightmare. As before if you agree the video is symptomatic of the problems with the media driven/at all costs climate change movement please link to either this or the original article above. Thanks. Related Tags: 1010, carbon trading, climate change(0.00 out of 5) from 0 ratings. Rate Now! function sub(f) { var v=0; for (i=0;i [...]

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    MarkD: #78

    I suggest that the level of sophistication has become much greater.

    On reflection, you are probably right. It is certainly more pervasive.

    00

  • #
    Barry Woods

    Please take down the parodies…
    THEY weaken the message…
    I have only linked to real ‘warmist videos, angry kid, falling polar bears, etc,etc Bedtime Stories

    Take the parodies down please, the horror of the official originals will get lost amongst them

    00

  • #
    mango

    you’re echoing my thoughts barry

    /Mango

    00

  • #
    Barry Woods

    Laughing at them is best….

    How about 10:10 in their own words.. lots of comedy here. There are some really unintentional funnies here…

    I put it i nmy favourites a few days ago- and it still works!!

    http://www.1010global.org/uk/about/inside/team

    Take a look at their OWN job descriptions in their OWN words post – Splattergate’

    ie… a few examples..10:10 Team

    Jonathan Bown Job title: Press Manager Actual job: Making sure as many people as possible know what a great job 10:10 and its supporters are doing..

    Maddy Carroll Job title: PR Manager Actual job: Make sure we’re seen and heard in all the right places

    Robin Houston Job title: Technical director

    Actual job: Making sure the web site works Laughing too loudly at inopportune momentsThere are some great funnies here, so ‘No Pressure’ was a joke… Well I’m laughing at these job descriptions now….

    Especially this one….

    Check out the 10 10 board member Chris Rose: who runs this:

    http://www.campaignstrategy.org/index.php » HOW TO WIN CAMPAIGNS – UPDATED How to Win Campaigns is a practical guide for creating and running successful campaigns.

    Order the updated 2010 edition and see more details of How To Win Campaigns at: » http://www.earthscan.co.uk/?tabid=102418

    ‘The definitive guide to the campaigner’s arts, a magisterial A to Z of how to win hearts and minds.’ – Alex Kirby, BBC

    » Find out more about How to Win Campaigns…

    or: Franny Armstrong

    Job title: Founder

    Actual job: Asking powerful people for money and/or emissions cuts

    10:10er since: That fateful day back in March 2009 when I was trying to think of something to beat Ed Miliband over the head with, and instead came up with 10:10

    10:10 plan: Not flying to America and Australia to launch my climate movie

    Favourite 10:10er: Arsenal and Spurs, hand in hand

    Guilty pleasure: Blueberries not in season

    Best/worst 10:10 moment: Saying “Labour’s definitely getting kicked out at the next election” to the EDF (big energy company) dude I was discussing 10:10 with, not realising he is Gordon Brown’s brother [Bit well connected socially?! ;) )
    Background: Was a drummer, became a filmmaker, turned into a climate campaigner

    http://www.spannerfilms.net/people/franny_armstrong

    00

  • #
    Barry Woods

    http://www.1010global.org/uk/about/inside/team

    Question in the Guardian:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/oct/04/10-10-campaign-events?showallcomments=true&msg=a#end-of-comments

    7 October 2010 9:18AM

    Is The Guardian still sponsoring 10:10?
    Scary people from what I’ve just seen.

    I guess so……

    The Guardian is an echo chamber….. (from Watts Up)

    Duncan Clark
    Job title: Strategy Director. 10:10 Campaign

    Actual job: Working across all kinds of things, including web development, content and scoping out future projects..
    [...]
    ————
    Duncan Clarke is also “a consultant editor on the Guardian environment desk”.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/duncanclark
    That’ll impress future employers;
    Duncan: “I was Strategy Director for a climate disruption propaganda outfit.”
    Hirer: “Just what we’re looking for! Which pressure group was it?”
    Duncan: “I’ll get my coat.”

    http://www.1010global.org/uk/about/inside/team

    00

  • #

    Rereke Whaakaro:

    ….due to the limitations of my organic sensory apparatus, and my chaotic computing ability, I cannot directly experience it, in its pure totality.

    So reality, to me, is no more than a conceptual construct, and one that may actually be different to your own. How would we know?

    If what you say is correct, how can you know that you have limitations in your organic sensory apparatus? After all, aren’t they parts of the reality you cannot experience in its pure totality? How can you know what you hold as a conceptual construct is in fact a conceptual construct? How can you know that you exist in any concrete form? Perhaps you are nothing but a complicated ET computer program spouting nonsense that others can almost attribute a sensible meaning to.

    I will say your question “How would we know?” is suggestive of the real question: what do we know and how do we know it? You are saying that we can’t really know because we can’t know everything. I say we can know something and by building on that something we can know something else. I know how we can know something even given that our senses are limited. Limited in the sense they have a specific identity and therefor are not infinite (ie they are real).

    So yes we have very different perspectives. I work with conceptually with reality and apply logic to experience and experiment. You work with the buzzing fragments of impressions flitting about your brain that you call conceptual constructs. You can’t even be sure your conceptual constructs have anything at all to do with the reality you say you believe exists. This is because you believe that to know anything you must first know everything.

    This argument knowing reality is not new with us. It surged the first time ca 2400 years ago with Aristotle and Plato. Plato won during the dark ages. Aristotle won during the Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution. Plato is advancing once again in our AGW/Climate-change/Climate-disruption era. If Plato wins, we will be plunged into a truly dark dark ages from which recovery will be very difficult if not impossible.

    00

  • #
    Tim Topler

    Thank goodness for global warming.
    Without it, how would this person (Jo Nova) have a life?
    I hope she’s grateful.

    00