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

ABC admits it’s a propaganda arm of the government

What Mark Scott admitted as the managing director of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation was really what everyone knew anyway: the ABC aims to please the gatekeepers of the pay-checks (which is, after all exactly what we’d expect from most organizations in the long run).

What makes it telling is that he could forget that he’s never supposed to admit this. I mean, they promote themselves in ads as “our ABC”. It’s supposed to serve the people, not the government. The key problem is that although the people pay for the ABC, they don’t hold the purse strings. And to some extent, the people, don’t really try to either. We get what we are willing to put up with.

THE ABC managing director, Mark Scott, has told an audience of film and television producers that the way he had been able to secure additional funding was by convincing the government the national broadcaster was working in its interests.

For a long time, Mr Scott said ABC management had simply gone to Canberra crying poor and telling the government what a great job it was doing.

“And I think if you take that approach, well, then you’ve joined the queue of people who feel hardly done by who are in Canberra with their hand out. And I’m not sure that’s a smart way of getting dollars, frankly,” Mr Scott said.

Wait for it:

“I think you’ve got to couch the arguments in terms of what we are in a unique position to deliver that is in the interests of government of the day,” he said, in an address to the Screen Producers Association of Australia conference in Sydney.

Read it all at the SMH

In order to serve the people, the ABC could be putting government policies under the blow-torch. For a moment, just  hypothetically, imagine the government wanted to bring in legislation that would cost billions, be nearly impossible to unwind, would commit the country to pursue inefficient, expensive, underdeveloped technology,  make the country uncompetitive, and it was all based on lost data, inexplicable “adjustments”, pronouncements of foreign agencies, and fallacious reasoning, (not to mention being pushed by big banks).

Would the ABC want to point out those flaws? Or is the path-of-least-resistance for the ABC to point the blow-torch elsewhere, and suggest that “since the issue is settled” it could help communicate the “dire need for that legislation”. You know” “Educate the masses”, “Simplify the complexity”, “expose the (other) vested interests” yada yada yada… and the people at the ABC would feel no conflict. They would reason that they were serving the Australian people’s interests as well as the government. After all (repeat after me) “the evidence is overwhelming” and “97% of (government funded) climate scientists say the same thing (and in a spooky parallel) — 97% of government funded public broadcasters repeat the same message of the government funded scientists.

And thus a quasi type of propaganda machine hobbles along. It’s not-created through conspiracy but through systemic misdirected interests, and so it’s imperfect. Some parts of the ABC do great work even as we despair at the conceited and illogical nature of others. For the record, I’ve had two very good radio interviews with ABC presenters in the last 12 months.

The real problem won’t be solved until the funding issue is.

How could we expect the ABC to do anything other than softly pander to government tastes when the government is the gatekeeper for public money and both institutions live off public largess? If anyone knows of a publicly funded major broadcaster with a different funding model (other than solely through the government) please share that example in the comments.

In the end could anyone imagine a publicly funded broadcaster, which is paid by the government, being biased in favour of a small government?


Note the google metadescription of the ABC news site (written by the ABC):

The ABC is Australia’s most trusted, independent source of news.

Related

Other posts I’ve written about the ABC
See especially:

Marc Hendrickx at ABCnewswatch has much more, see esp ABC Counterpoint the New Science show

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 7.0/10 (3 votes cast)
ABC admits it's a propaganda arm of the government, 7.0 out of 10 based on 3 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/28jx95k

85 comments to ABC admits it’s a propaganda arm of the government

  • #
    Mark D.

    What keeps a nation free and democratic is its press which is an extension of free speech. If the press isn’t willing to do the hard work of exposing untruths, frauds, and all forms of tyranny then they are complicit in all of them.

    How do you fix the problem? Un-fund them.

    00

  • #
    Trajan.

    Auntie Jo,

    We have the same with our dear ‘Auntie’ in Britain, the licence fee – is compulsory in Britain, therefore, we should expect a decent objective narration of the world’s ills..but oh NO!

    The BBC licence fee is a poll tax, the beeb don’t see it that way, if fact everything they see is through a rose (socialist) tinted lens.

    AGW, is a political fiction (the science is fabricated), the grauniadistas and alarmists, eco-loony brigade are wholly supported by the Beeb. We are in the biggest fiscal crisis of the last hundred years and all our pathetic EU shills (British Politicians) can rant about is; building more wind farms for Britain’s future green energy needs………..err what the **** are they on?

    Soon we’ll be upon the UN IPCC fa8tfest of loony politicians and assorted other nutters, in Mexico.

    The Tijuana brass band KanKan, where all the most bent and ridiculous prats in the world get together to chastise the Western world and to tell us taxpayers: to give ‘em more money!

    No doubt the ABC and BBC will send between them hundreds of engineers, cameramen and reporters! All ‘aving a jolly at taxpayers expense, so it’s in their interests to promote AGW – just for the freebies!
    It is time we all stood up and told them (the TV networks, politicians and eco-loonies): the party is well and truly over, the world isn’t about to be fried and that AGW was a political myth! And that: We cannot, as taxpayers afford anymore of this nonsense.

    Trajan, Skeptocats.

    10

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    If anyone knows of a publicly funded major broadcaster with a different funding model (other than solely through the government) please share that example in the comments.

    I seem to remember discussions in Britain about a funding model for the BBC whereby all of the Government support was through an independent trust. The idea was that the Government would pay the trust an amount of money each year, determined by a formula that was linked to inflation, GDP, et cetera.

    I don’t know it ever existed through – it was outside of my area of interest at the time.

    I think what is more important is that Governments throughout the “free world” have always followed the lead of their more totalitarian brothers in seeing the state broadcaster as its publicity arm.

    If you look at Dt Richard North’s excellent reconstruction of the reporting of the “Battle of Britain”, at his Days of Glory blog, there is reference to the “Ministry of Information”:

    The newspapers note on this day that the Ministry of Information has produced a propaganda film on the Blitz, called “London can take it”. Narrated by American journalists Quentin Reynolds, it is intended for a US audience in a country where there is less than a month to go before the presidential election.

    This movie is a propaganda classic on so many levels … but I digress.

    During the war, the BBC was one of the channels used by the Ministry of Information to maintain control over the British population, and to spread misinformation to the Germans listening on the other side of the Channel.

    But that was war time, and such times require the suspension of the rules … ?

    So why does Voice of America, still broadcast world wide? Why does the BBC World Service still broadcast? Why do Australia and New Zealand still make international broadcasts to Asia and the Pacific?

    What is the subject matter and content of those broadcasts, and how are they worded?

    Today, we rarely mention propaganda – it has become a nothing word – truth, frankness, and honesty however, are a cause for surprise and wonder.

    00

  • #
    Binny

    At the end of the day we all work for whoever signs the cheques, and this necessity to toe the politically correct line is an accepted reality for anyone who wants money from the government. Whether it’s funding grants for your local sports club or some sort of environmental grant to undertake on ground work. If you want to be successful you have to use the latest politically correct catchphrases, and of course this creates a self reinforcing feedback loop.

    I’ve been participating in arid zone pasture research project for more than 20 years. This is a win-win situation, the research scientists get access to a large areas of arid zone pasture, and I get early access to the results of their research (it takes 10 to 15 years this research to become public) I also get to nudge the research into areas that are of particular interest to me.
    The older scientists who I’ve known to more than 20 years are openly cynical about what’s necessary to put into funding applications in order to be successful. (Who doesn’t get cynical as they get older?)

    What concerns me is that the younger scientists who should be all bright eyed, bushy tail, and idealistic. Are not cynical about this, they simply accept it as the way things are. They are actually reviewing their raw data; on good news is no news basis. So we have a situation where they are not looking at the big picture and try to understand the situation as a whole but rather specifically looking for a crisis.

    00

  • #
    Lawrie

    So Scott has fessed up to something we have known for ages. The ABC is a child of the left and represents a very small but powerful segment of Australian society. Unfortunately there are many non-urban listeners in more remote parts that do depend on the ABC for their news. To be fair the other MSM by and large are very slack so far as investigative journalism is concerned. Most merely regurgitate press releases.

    A classic example is in the November 11 edition of the Land. Matthew Cawood writes of a model developed by the Antartic Climate and Ecosystems Co-Operative Research Centre. The spokesman and CEO, Dr. Tony Press, tells of his new models which show Tasmania will warm by 2.9 degrees while Australia will warm by 3.4 degrees. “Evaporation will increase by 19% exacerbating projected rainfall declines in the Midlands”. “How valuable is the the new high resolution modelling as a planning tool? Good enough, Dr. Press believes.” He goes on to say that grape growers in the Hunter Valley and the Yarra Valley are finding conditions too warm for some varieties.

    Dr. Press was the head of the Antarctic Division for 10 years. Now it seems he is a warmer of some note. It may be that ACECRC, sitting within the University of Tasmania has just received GOVERNMENT funding for a further five years to study climate change. Judging by some of his earlier comments in the Cawood article ” if emissions continue at their current rate”, he believes in human caused catastrophe as a starting point for his research.

    The model he uses is 90% accurate in temperature output and 65% accurate in rainfall. The rainfall is not much better than flipping a coin and we know that the temperature projections by the IPCC is also 90% accurate and just as wrong judging by real world data.

    He also talks of warming oceans so he must have access to ARGO which apparently we don’t according to complaints here and at WUWT. As pointed out if ARGO was showing oceanic warming on a global scale we would have heard about from your glorious ABC, that paramount source of truth and knowledge.

    Sorry I couldn’t link to the article. I spent hours last night on the Land site but apparently this article appears only in the printed form. I would appreciate some more info on ARGO data if any reader has it.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    Trajan.: #2

    Thank you. You have forcefully described the reasons why I moved about as far as you can get from Europe.

    European politics versus Earthquakes? I will take my chances with the earthquakes every time – at least I get some chance of survival.

    10

  • #
    Amr

    It stopped being MY ABC many yrs ago because of this servile attitude.
    Amr
    Manly Beach.

    00

  • #
    Malcolm Miller

    I won’t be going to the big AGW party at Cantcum, but no doubt the ABC will have somebody there.

    00

  • #
    David Burgess

    After some digging around in the memory (and web searching). I found the name of gynaecologist Dr William McBride.
    In the late 1980s (my memory says), the ABC did assist in exposing some fraudulent medical research.
    Two things come from this piece of history,
    1) the falsifying of data resulted in the disbarring of the offender
    2) We used to have a better ABC.
    Even though I have suggested it myself, selling the ABC is not going to happen.

    May I suggest that,

    1) Scientists who manufacturer data don’t get to work in science (ever again) and are charged with fraud (the precedent exists).
    2) Journalists who knowingly assist them by publishing falsehoods are disbarred and/or publicly ridiculed by their professional association. (Are they accomplices?)

    What most of us on this blog seek is (some) truth in reporting. The falsehoods put forward by the ABC must be addressed by journalists themselves before much will change. When the first high profile climatologist (or Bureau of Met employee) is prosecuted for fraud (knowingly tampering with the data), maybe then things will change.

    00

  • #
    Pointman

    Today’s installment of the Cancun Week special is now available at

    http://ourmaninsichuan.wordpress.com/

    It is the third translation of selected portions of the Chinese book “Low Carbon Plot” and deals with the true national self-interest behind climate politics and finance.

    Pointman

    00

  • #
    PeterD

    We know it, and now we know they know it.

    My concern is that the government is targeting the internet through a gambit to own the hardware (the “National Broadband Network”) and to control the software (all information must pass through a “filter”. To protect our children, of course). The price is irrelevant.

    If the NBN succeeds, the result will be the same, for the same reasons. And we all know it.

    00

  • #
    Ross

    If any of the MPs (or the PM)had any principles they would be alarmed at this guy’ statements and would come out and say so publicly. My bet — nothing will be said by anyone. ( This would probably be the same in any country , unfortunately)

    00

  • #
    Bruce of Newcastle

    So when will the ABC screen the UK Channel 4 doco “What the Greens Got Wrong“?

    I won’t hold my breath.

    00

  • #
    Bob Malloy

    Over at the Drum Unleashed on Graham Readfearn rant, PG posted.

    PG :

    19 Nov 2010 3:10:06pm

    Nice to see some balanced factual reporting on the ABC for a change.

    I posted this simple reply, “You are being sarcastic aren’t you?”

    My reply is yet to see the light of day!

    00

  • #
    katio1505

    The PBS inthe US seem to get most if not all of its funding from donations. Judging from its Newshour, it appears to be apolitical.

    00

  • #
    pat

    auntie was disowned long ago.

    00

  • #
    J.Hansford

    Yep, well said Jo.

    To have a Government funded media Broadcaster in a free democratic society is absurd, and it now sits as an ever present threat to the freedom that has flourished in spite of it…. not because of it.

    As it exists, it forever remains a tool that the politically ruthless can use to muzzle the truth and promote the tyrannical.

    00

  • #
    Joe Lalonde

    Told you guys month’s ago that they don’t bite the hand that feeds them!

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    NPR (National Public Radio) is much the same way here in the U.S. — very left and in the pocket of the worst offenders all the way. But the surprising thing is that major news magazines like Time are also in bed with the left. About a year ago the editor of Time Magazine admitted in an editorial piece that they see their job as one of advocacy.

    When the journalist picks and chooses what’s the truth and what’s not you soon have a dictatorship. At the moment there’s a senator calling for the FCC to close down Fox News and Glen Beck. A bill in the Senate right now would allow the government to shut down any web site.

    Do you like your censorship hot or cold? Those will be the only choices if they get their way.

    The press, broadcast and written, has forgotten what its job is in a free society.

    00

  • #
    smcg

    True, but the ABC has never had a problem “biting the hand” when the Government is even modestly conservative!!

    00

  • #
    Dave N

    I expect by “independent”, they mean independent of other media outlets. Whatever the case we know for sure that independent doesn’t mean unbiased.

    If the ABC news services are there to serve only the government, I suggest that it should be broadcast to politicians only, ie not the general public.

    00

  • #

    I think the ABC is not as much compliant with their paymaster as just simply intellectually inclined towards social service, higher ideals, and thus favouring large government and leftist causes.

    I don’t recall the ABC being particularly favouring their John Howard paymaster.

    Playing with the source of funding is therefore not likely to fix the problem.

    I do believe a noncommercial broadcaster is important for maintaining the standard of public debate in a democracy, as well as a being a break from the relentless ads and consumerism, now apparently present even on pay channels. I note even USA has their CSPAN, which however mainly broadcasts government proceedings and debates without comment.

    Just some suggestions:

    1. ABC publish all complaints and resolutions on their website, as a start – easy and cheap.

    2. An ABC watchdog panel or ombudsman may be money well spent, despite difficultly in defining bias.

    3. An internet website scoring the bias may help, though may be another GroceryWatch.

    4. In house program of compliance training for their staff to their charter of impartiality.

    5. An ABC-Watch segment on the ABC, focusing on their compliance to their charter.

    6. Defined affirmative action at the ABC towards balancing conservative vs leftist reporters.

    Ultimately, we need a public debate on what Conservatism vs Leftism means – too many people mistakenly think them to mean selfishness vs compassion, or perhaps big business, greed and consumerism versus social justice and sustainability. More and more people seem to get stuck on this teenage stereotype.

    00

  • #
    davidc

    I think Counterpoint would be well below 3% of all ABC broadcasts but that probably about the right order of magnitue if you exclude programs that even the ABC can’t use to slip in an AGW plug (as in The Influence of Global Warming on Beethoven’s 5th).

    00

  • #
    spangled drongo

    The ABC’s “Well Earned Breaks” and other ill-making stories courtesy of Hendo:

    http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/media-watch-dog/

    When will Maurice stop waffling and take some affirmative action?

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    I maybe speaking on behalf of the devil but who aired “The great global warming swindle” in Australia Was it 7,9 or 10? Have they kept us informed in any suitable way.
    I see some bias in the stories linked to on this page:
    http://www.australianrain.com.au/
    Hmmm now who is “Matt Handbury”?…
    Murdoch’s nephew

    “Turnbull has refused to answer questions regarding Matt Handbury’s contribution to the Wentworth Forum, the main fund-raising organisation for Turnbull’s 2007 election campaign.[22]”
    (from the wiki page on Malcolm Turnbull).

    One thing this ABC story forgets to tell us is how similar this “mysterious ionisation technology” is to the theories of Henrik Svensmark.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/20/2095678.htm

    Every broadcaster has a bias. To think that any form of unbiased media is possible seems naive. To blame this CO2 hoax on communists/creationists/big buisiness or anyone other than the Eugenics movement and the Gaia religion seems twisted to me. I think the bias from the whistleblowers and skeptics is shining through also( We all have our own bias).
    The ABC represents another voice in Australia and it should not have to cower to Gov’t, religious or corporate pressure but have a certain and stable future with no fear to expose stuff from within or without.
    No doubt within the ABC now would be a great pressure to conform to the warmist climate change fad. This has perhaps happened because those who are most afraid of unemployment hang on during funding cuts and downsizing. To solve this problem I think whistleblower protection in Australia should include the option of a job at the ABC for cases where someone may need to flee another organisation. Can we think of a better place for a whistleblower to be employed?

    00

  • #
    Bruce

    I agree with the comments by Michael Cejnar at post #22. Our ABC seems to be not so much biased towards the current government, but rather favours left wing, alternative types. I recall John Howard refusing to be interviewed by Kerry O’Brien on the 7.30 report for this very reason.

    Not sure how we should try to address this bias – without appearing to be politically incorrect.

    00

  • #
    John Smith

    About time a MSM outlet came out and said “We’re biased and we trick you with propaganda”.
    Or perhaps its too little too late.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    Roy Hogue: #19

    The press, broadcast and written, has forgotten what its job is in a free society.

    “In olden days men had the rack. Now they have the press. That is an improvement certainly. But still it is very bad, and wrong, and demoralizing. Somebody – was it Burke? – called journalism the fourth estate. That was true at the time, no doubt. But at the present moment it really is the only estate. It has eaten up the other three. The Lords Temporal say nothing, the Lords Spiritual have nothing to say, and the House of Commons has nothing to say and says it. We are dominated by Journalism.”
    [Oscar Wilde - The Soul of Man]

    “At the heart of modern journalism, is the rapid repackaging of largely unchecked second-hand material, much of it designed to service the political or commercial interests of those who provide it.”
    [Nick Davis – Flat Earth News]

    “Submit your press release to relevant news media, magazines, TV, radio, online etc. and receive statistical monitoring. Monitoring includes: hit rates, mean hit duration, pages viewed, links followed, and much, much more …”
    [Ads by Google]

    “Who will guard the guards?
    Who can watch the watchmen?”
    [Juvenal, Roman Poet (attrib.)]

    00

  • #

    All public/government enterprise attract a certain type of person. These people tend to shun the hurly burly of private enterprise but excell in the rigid, regulated, initiative smothering atmosphere of the public sector.

    Be it a professor or a journalist or a scientist, they can’t survive the competition inherint in the private sector.

    Would a Phil Jones or a Hansen or a Lewandowski or Glikson or Hugh-Goldberg ever survive in a private corporation? I don’t think so.

    00

  • #
    DougS

    Trajan @ No 2:

    I agree with everything you say, however:

    …It is time we all stood up and told them (the TV networks, politicians and eco-loonies): the party is well and truly over, the world isn’t about to be fried and that AGW was a political myth! And that: We cannot, as taxpayers afford anymore of this nonsense.

    People try but the MSM (and particularly the unspeakable BBC) won’t report it!

    00

  • #
    Siliggy

    Here is a simple short sweet story for the ABC to ignore:
    See charts at http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/
    Global atmospheric temperatures for 18th Nov 2010.
    Sea surface 0.39 deg F cooler than this day last year. Tied for 2nd coldest Nov 18 on the list.
    Near surface layer 0.21 deg F cooler than this day last year and cooler than this day 2006.
    14000 ft 0.20 deg F cooler than this day last year and cooler than this day six other recent years.
    25000 ft 0.76 deg F cooler than this day last year. Coolest Nov 18 on the list.
    36000 ft 0.70 deg F cooler than this day last year. 2nd coldest Nov 18 on list. Coldest was 2008.
    46000 ft 0.49 deg F cooler than this day last year. Tied 3rd coldest on list. Coldest was 2008.
    56000 ft 0.46 deg C cooler than 20 yr average.
    68000 ft cooler than 1999 and 2001.
    102000 ft sixth coldest for this day on the list.
    118000 ft fourth coldest for this day on the list.
    SO WHAT HAPPENED TO GLOBAL WARMING?!?!?

    00

  • #
    Tim

    How is it, that something known for years, takes the highly-remunerated public servant heirarchy this long to state the bleedin’ obvious. My first thought as a response to Mark Scott was:
    “No sh*t Sherlock”.

    Here’s the BBC in lockstep. At least they seem to be attempting to remedy the situation…

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/lachlan-markay/2010/09/02/bbc-chief-admits-massive-left-wing-bias-vows-remedy-imbalance

    [repaired link] ED

    00

  • #
  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Rereke @28,

    There have always been biases and just plain lazy journalists. So no question there. But recently it has been obvious that the late Walter Cronkite was as left as they come — the kind of thinking that would lead you to believe airplanes fly on two left wings. Yet throughout his entire career he presented the news without letting his own personal slant on things color his reporting.

    Something has slipped badly in recent years. It’s no coincidence that Glen Beck and Fox News are targets of the left. They’re exposing the truth about what’s going on. We’re dealing with people who want to win at any cost. Exposure is something they can’t stand. If I tell you that the liberal bias in journalism is something that was carefully created and nurtured you may laugh at me. But as with global warming, I just look where the weight of the evidence points.

    I better stop before I write a book. Just remember all the indoctrination going on in our schools and universities. We’re being had and the masses don’t recognize it.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    Roy Hogue: #34

    Just remember all the indoctrination going on in our schools and universities.

    In one of the comments in reaction to the 10:10 thing, or its parodies, I made the observation that even the original concept for the movie was, “no more than a demonstration in psychological conditioning – brainwashing. And it is being done today, by a teacher, in a classroom near you.”

    I expected to get a lot of flack for that comment. But nothing, nil, zilch, zero. It seems you guys all agreed with me.

    So, in my spare time (/sarc), I have been doing some more research (with a small “R”).

    Most of the AGW stories we see in the press originate as a press-releases produced by a “press officer”. They are then massaged into stories (with a mandated word-count) by a journalist, and finally approved for publication by an Editor.

    Right now, my hypothesis is that the majority of people managing this process are currently between 30 to 50 years old, which would align them nicely in the Generation-X cohort (1961-1980).

    The time of the previous cohort (the Boomers) was a great period of technical innovation following the Great Depression and WWII. A lot of things were invented during the war, and these flowed through into civilian applications – it was the time of the kitchen appliance and the growth of consumerism.

    It was also the height of the cold war, and many Gen-X’ers grew up under that constant threat, especially in the West.

    So what lasting impressions does that leave them with? Well one, is that their parents had embarked on a course of action that was stripping the earth of its natural resources purely in pursuit of “the next big thing” for their own self-gratification and sense of status. Another is that the world was (is) only three minutes away from annihilation, and that the concept of sovereign nations was not only outmoded, but positively dangerous.

    They were also acutely aware of the stark differences between their grandparents generation (who lived through the depression), their parents generation (who they saw as being irresponsible), and their own generation (who had to front-up to reality).

    They then extrapolated this apparent cycle to apply to future generations, and predicted (quite rightly, it would seem) that the following generation (Generation-Y) would not be so concerned about these matters as their parents were.

    So the answer is to use any means possible (including a distinct propaganda bias in both the news media and in the education curriculum) to imbed the need to conserve resources and to regress to a “safer” form of society, either through peer pressure or by global government fiat.

    No conspiracy – just generational peer pressure.

    00

  • #
    davidc

    Siliggy:
    November 20th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
    I maybe speaking on behalf of the devil but who aired “The great global warming swindle” in Australia Was it 7,9 or 10?

    Yes, it was aired by the ABC but was followed by a “discussion” hosted by Tony Jones with the obvious intention of destroying its credibility. This was opposed by Robyn (100m) Williams who presumably could see that this would strike a chord with people with a scientific background. A feature of the sociology of science is that in the absence of a good reason to do otherwise you accept the views of experts in a field that you have only limited expertise in. This is not acceptance of a “consensus” but a practical matter of time management. The thing about Swindle is that it raised the ” good reason to do otherwise” -that this could be fraud and all the usual bets are off. What this means is that you look at and question the data (and it becomes obvious to anyone who does this that there are massive problems)and the models (they claim to have overcome the problems of prediction of the behaviour of nonlinear chaotic systems; such a major achievement should have had been noticed in many fields outside climate science, so why haven’t I heard???). And of course, do the models (however they are constructed) actually agree with the observations (initially leaving aside the problems with the “data”)? Mmmm, not even that?

    So Robyn (100m) Williams was right, it should have been suppressed.

    00

  • #
    davidc

    Rereke Whaakaro:
    November 21st, 2010 at 7:25 am

    It was also the height of the cold war, and many Gen-X’ers grew up under that constant threat, especially in the West.

    I’m not sure if this is your main point but it occurs to me that this prospect of global annihilation by nuclear weapons might be the core reason why so many people are attracted to the idea of global organisations and even the (to me, obviously dangerous)idea of global government. At least a global government wouldn’t drop bombs on itself.

    00

  • #

    Good Lord, what great and unexpected revelation can possibly follow this? Is it true what they say about the Pope being Catholic?
    The important question is, of course, what will be done to change this situation.
    Three words spring to mind. The third being ‘all’.

    00

  • #

    The ABC is one thing but what about The Australian?
    This weekend Mike Steketee has an article attacking Nick Minchin, sceptics, Frederick Seitz, Fred Singer, gets the second hand smoke thing completely wrong, as well as the acid rain scare and ozone hole(claims the replacements for CFCs are more energy efficient and non toxic while everything I’ve read says the opposite)and then goes on to mention climate change. Nice plug for the Oreskes book tour also.
    This article is one of the most dishonest efforts I’ve seen by a journalist for the The Australian.
    I’m going to have to do some research to refute this. I’ll take the CFC replacement/energy efficiency/toxicity issue. Anyone want to do the others?

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    I have been very hesitant to say what I posted earlier. But there’s always a direct correlation between how much the left fears someone and who they go after. Have you ever seen John McCain vilified? I think not. He has no great traction with voters at all. To a conservative like me he’s a RINO, Republican In Name Only. To the left he’s someone they think is relatively harmless so they waste no time on him. I don’t know why Arizona put him back in office for another six years.

    On the other hand, you see Sarah Palin demonized continually. Why? Because she has a large audience and her message resonates with huge numbers of voters. She has a big influence that they fear.

    Glen Beck’s three hour radio broadcast is the third most listened to radio show in the United States. But they don’t fear him for that. They fear him for the detailed research he does and then exposes what he finds to the cold hard light of day.

    Fox News has been growing even while broadcast and other cable networks have been shrinking. Fox News can be relied on for honest reporting and in spite of complaints to the contrary, for well balanced opinion programming. They also keep news and opinion strictly separated. CNN has changed its stripes and begun to present a more balanced view of the world because they were slipping so badly in the ratings.

    The NEA (National Education Association) is one of the most influential teacher’s unions and lobbying groups around. They were formed in the early 20th Century with the express goal of fostering world socialism. They have never repudiated that goal. Not even when asked directly about it.

    All kidding aside: 1 + 1 still = 2 and 2 + 2 = 4. You talk about the Fabians as though they are some still distant threat we can talk our way around. But the truth looks more like they’re close to having their hands around our throats. And if they get that they will squeeze as tight as they can.

    Some of the players may simply be ignorant of the full magnitude of what’s happening and are going along just because it suits their own selfish narrow interest. They are in for a rude surprise! But the rest are not just along for the ride. How much do you trust the UN? IF you do any research at all you’ll notice that they are making plans as though they were the world’s government.

    As I said, I just follow where the evidence seems to lead. I was on a jury once where all the evidence against the defendant was circumstantial. No one thing could possibly convict him of anything. But when all the evidence was taken together it became a crushing weight and we convicted.

    I find mounting coincidences more and more convincing.

    00

  • #
    Joe Veragio

    37davidc:
    November 21st, 2010 at 7:48 am

    ….. At least a global government wouldn’t drop bombs on itself.

    Maybe, but that won’t stop it sanctioning the dropping of bombs on those of it’s ‘constituents’ it doesn’t like. Global government making bullying on a global scale, more possible, more organised
    , more acceptable and more insidious.

    A forumn for Talking and fostering international understanding is one thing – that’s a parliament (in the literal sense), but making the giant leap to giving such a global forumn powers to Govern – that’s something else entirely, though sadly the two are all to readily confused.
    Should anyone who doesn’t appreciate that distinction, even be part of that process. I suppose that’s why many Nations benefit so from having electorates, to remind those that Govern… ‘though elections don’t seem to feature much, if at all, in the proposals for global governance structures typically emaniting from the political classes.

    00

  • #
    Joe Veragio

    Roy Hogue:
    November 20th, 2010 at 12:42 pm

    The press, broadcast and written, has forgotten what its job is in a free society.

    Is Journalism, really the pursuit of truth or are we confusing that with Science ? Oh, that’s been subverted too !.

    With so many hours & channels of media to fill now , hasn’t journalism just become so much about filling the media – with whatever news, pronouncements, advertising or other rubbish can be found.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    davidc: #73

    … global annihilation by nuclear weapons might be the core reason why so many people are attracted to the idea of global organisations and even the (to me, obviously dangerous)idea of global government.

    Yes, you picked up on my point exactly. The UN staffers (not so much the politicians) are also part of the Gen-X cohort.

    Also, one of the original mandates of the UN was to prevent, or lower the possibility of, global warfare between blocks of nation states that are each bound to the others by military treaty, as was the case in both World Wars.

    A single global government would be one way of achieving that.

    Total access to free trade between nation states, with a common currency of exchange (Carbon credits?), would be another.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    With so many hours & channels of media to fill now , hasn’t journalism just become so much about filling the media – with whatever news, pronouncements, advertising or other rubbish can be found.

    Joe @42,

    That certainly happens too. Sadly we make celebrities out of such people when most of them should have been told to go get an honest job instead. But I don’t think that accounts for what’s happening every day on NBC or its cable cousin MSNBC — also the ABC in Australia from what I read here.

    Asking why the journalist goes along with the lie is like asking why Al Gore does what he does. Many people need to prove something, not to the world but to themselves. Or they have a more sinister reason. Why did so many go along with Hitler and Stalin?

    DavidC,

    I notice your comment about nuclear weapons. Up until Iran and the danger of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal falling into the wrong hands I’ve always thought that was just a red herring. Even when John Kennedy stared down Nikita Khrushchev I didn’t think there was any danger of nuclear war. The Soviet Union had too much to lose and Khrushchev knew it. Even North Korea isn’t a real threat. It’s obvious that they’re trying to blackmail the U.S. into sending money. The real problem is the Islamic terrorists who are quite willing to die for their cause. That kind of fanatic just might set off a nuclear bomb and not worry about the consequences.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    Roy Hogue: #44

    Re your comment to DavidC:

    We need to remember that the UN was established in an atmosphere of fear and distrust over the Mexican stand-off, following the collapse of the Third Reich, between the United States and Russia over who would occupy Germany, Poland, Hungary, the Balkans, et cetera. The nuclear arms race, and then the space-race, came later.

    As an off-topic aside:
    The North Korean “nuclear tests” are conducted for domestic purposes – to try and persuade the populace that they are actually living in a first-world country.

    With the current changes within in the Kim dynasty, you can expect another “test” real soon.

    00

  • #
    wendy

    Shocker: Solar panel manufacturing creates potent GHG’s…………..

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/27/shocker-solar-panel-manufacturing-creates-potent-ghgs/

    00

  • #
    wendy

    Some FABIAN information……….

    Gillard is an old guard Fabian socialist on education:-

    http://australianconservative.com/2010/08/gillard-is-an-old-guard-fabian-socialist-on-education/

    AustraliaMatters.com :: Buy gold, you get gold – Vote Labor, you get Fabianism:-

    http://www.australiamatters.com/fabian.html

    Microchips, EDLs, Creeping Incrementalism, Fabian Socialism and Obama:-

    http://sixthcolumn.typepad.com/duckwalls/2009/02/microchips-edls-creeping-incrementalism-fabian-socialism-and-obama.html

    Beware Obama’s Fabian Window:-

    http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13959

    The FABIAN Window:-

    http://www.marxists.org/subject/economy/authors/fabians/images/FabianWindow_Large.jpg

    00

  • #
    wendy

    More FABIAN Links………

    Julia Gillard Tells Fabians of Labor’s Plans:-

    http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2007/11/julia-gillard-tells-fabians-of-labors.html

    THE PRICE OF LIBERTY IS ETERNAL VIGILANCE – List of Fabian Socialists:-

    http://noelozzy.50webs.com/lostlink/austfab.htm

    Fabian Socialist Contribution to the Communist Advance:-

    http://www.alor.org/Library/FabianSocialistContributiontotheCommunistAdvance.htm

    Julia Gillard – New Aussie P.M.’s Red Roots (ADMITS TO BEING A FABIAN!):-

    http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2010/06/red-julia-new-aussie-pms-socialist.html

    This is the link to their home page:-

    http://www.fabian.org.au/1.asp

    00

  • #
    wendy

    THIS GLOBAL WARMING LUNATIC ACTIVIST JAMES HANSEN PREDICTS 2010 TO THE HOTTEST YEAR YET……

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/the-warmest-year-yet-says-nasa-20100603-x7f5.html

    WHAT PLANET DOES THIS MORON LIVE ON!!

    JAMES HANSEN SHOULD BE JAILED FOR FRAUD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    There`s one official thermometer left and James Hansen`s got it stuck the same place as His head .

    I pulled the random collection of headings below off Robert Felix`s site iceagenow.com (links to all the articles are on his site)

    Record snow base at Mt Washington, BC
    3 Apr 10 – So much snow that they’ve extended their ski season.

    Siberia – 2nd harshest winter in 110 years … Perhaps ever – 9 Apr 10 – “The winter of 2009-10 was one of the most severe in the European part of Russia for more than 30 years, and in Siberia it was perhaps the record-breaking coldest ever,” said Alexander Frolov, head of state meteorological service Rosgidromet.

    11 April 2010 in Alberta from Calgary to Fort McMurray, in Central-north Saskatchewan and snow in northwestern Ontario. McMurray Alberta received over 30 centimeters(1 FOOT) in just 24 hours. The roads were so bad that cars had to be left at malls,

    More SNOW for northern England and Scotland – 13 Apr 10 – The coldest winter in 31 years has a final sting in the tail. Positive Weather Solutions senior forecaster Jonathan Powell said: “It will turn decidedly cold for northern England and Scotland from the weekend and into next week with a chilling blast of northerly air.”

    Snow in eastern Japan in Mid April – More like February than April
    8 Apr 10 – Hi, I am living in Japan and we got about 1-2 inches of snow here in the mountains and even on the plains something that is very rare for mid April. Many other parts of Japan have also had snow and temps that are on average 6.oC below normal for this time of year. In fact the last few days have been more like February than April!

    Coldest in Korea in 100 years – 28 Apr 10 – The entire Korean Peninsula is shattering its previous cold-weather records. Seoul reported a midday high high of 7.8 C (46 F) today, while Daejoen, 170 kilometers to the south, recorded a mid-day high of 6.7 C (44 F), the lowest for late April since 1908, according to the Korea Meteorological Administration (KMA).

    Third major snowstorm in Calgary this month – 26 cm by tonight – 28 Apr 10 – Forecasting 26 cm (10.2 inches) of snow by tonight, Environment Canada warned of “dangerous winter weather conditions” for Calgary and surrounding areas, with up to 40 cm of snow expected along the southern Foothills and in the Lethbridge and Cardston areas.

    “Very rare” snow in 18 municipalities in Mexico – 2 May 10 very rare May snowfall in many municipalities of the State of Chihuahua (18 to be exact, in a territory bigger than the U.K.) including the capital city of Chihuahua, where more than 15 centimetres of snow and sleet fell. That is something so rare and has been happening with more frequency. This winter we had the coldest temperature in my city since 1996; the thermometre dropped all the way to -5C. And in the city of Saltillo, Coahuila, just a few hours south it dropped to -7C with snow.

    Snow in the south of France… in May ! ! ! !
    4 May 10 – Toulouse
    Today temps dived to 1°C in Carcassonne, with big flakes à noon ! ! IN MAY ! !

    Snow In Southern France – 5 May 10 – Snow on the city of Carcassone and in South-Western France – “a rare phenomenon this time of year”.
    1ºC was registered at the airport of Tarbes-Lourdes, a record low for a 4th of May since measurements started in 1946.

    Snow in “sunny” Spain – Coldest May since records began – 6 May 10 – After a warm spell at the end of April, old man winter made a comeback in May.

    The State of Catalonia, Spain, experienced the coldest temperatures for the month of May since records exists.

    Provincial capitals registered the following minima: 0ºC in Salamanca, 0.3ºC in Ávila, 0.8ºC in Burgos and Segovia, 1.8ºC in Soria, 2ºC in Guadalajara and Valladolid, 3ºC in Cuenca, 3,3ºC in Teruel, and 3.7ºC in Albacete. This was accompanied by snow in many parts of Northern Spain.

    UK – Coldest winter in a lifetime – Freezing in May- 12 May 10
    Snow and frost bring winter chill to May. Snowflakes fluttered down on Tyneside, with more snow forecast for the Scottish highlands.

    Record Cold in Paris – 11 May 10 – The temperature did not exceed 7.6°C (45.7F) in Paris which is a record cold for a May 11, beating the record cold of May 11, 1984 where the temperature did not exceed 8.4°C (47.1F).

    3 jun 10 – California “Water officials this week are keeping a close eye on Shasta Lake. The surrounding watershed holds a snowpack nearly four times larger than normal.”

    4 Jun 10 – At Storlien-Visjövalen ski resort in central Sweden, the last of the snow finally melted away on Wednesday, making it the longest continuous period of snow cover in the region for at least 60 years, according to the Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI).

    Many parts of Sweden also endured a record number of days with of sub-zero temperatures this past winter. The northern Swedish towns of Sveg and Delsbo had 84 and 71 consecutive days of minus temperatures, while the Härjedalen town of Sveg endured sub-zero temperatures from December 13th to March 6th – the longest consecutive period since records began in 1875.

    Austria’s Sonnblick, more than 3,000 meters above sea level, now has 665 cm of snow depth, a June record.

    Record-breaking June freeze in Korea – 4 Jun 10

    And as the Southern hemisphere has only just started it`s winter I`d like to know how the @%$# Hansen can say warmest year yet and expect anyone to believe Him !

    And they`ve got the cheek to call Us deniers.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    wendy: #49

    I`d like to know how the @%$# Hansen can say warmest year yet and expect anyone to believe Him !

    The word, “delusional” comes to mind

    00

  • #
    davidc

    Roy Hogue:
    November 21st, 2010 at 12:56 pm #44

    Roy, yes, Mutually Assured Destruction becomes a win-win situation for them when one side welcomes martyrdom.

    I think this is not totally OT because it is often said that world government is needed to tackle global warming. The motive for those who see themselves as leading this movement is clearly that they expect to be a member of that government. It is the thinking of the followers that is more interesting. To solve global warming is understandable (but wrong) as is the desire to prevent nuclear war.

    00

  • #

    [...] ABC has come out and said what we already knew; that they are the propaganda arm of our current leftist government. Jo Nova notes that’s also the case when it comes to [...]

    00

  • #

    Wendy@49
    Good one Wendy – looks like Hansen picked the wrong person to cheese off :)

    Roy Hogue@44
    While I agree with your Islamist concern, I beg to differ with your “I didn’t think there was any danger of nuclear war… Soviets had too much to loose”. Really? You forget incompetence, megalomania, stupidity, insanity and sheer dumb bad luck accident. I believe a single accidental launch could have done it. In the Cuban Missile Crisis, the leaders didn’t even have a telephone line to say ‘whoops, sorry’ and ‘starring down’ may always work in Die Hard 4, but not so surely in real life. I believe in the end, Kennedy got lucky by using some bystander spy to send messages. In my view, avoiding a nuclear exchange has been a miracle of biblical proportions. Mankind deserves a kick in the butt for being dumb enough to create the situation and medal for getting throughout it.

    Just imagine, hundreds of centres like the CRU’s but with underpaid Phil Jones’ and HARRY_READ_ME’s bashing Fortran code and making procedures to keep the thousands of nuclear warheads from misfiring or being launched by loonies. No blogosphere to find the errors. Thank God we didn’t have MSWindows and that the military, unlike climate scientists, use strict Quality Software Lifecycle standards that would make Harry’s eyes water. How many thousands of people must have cracked under the pressure of a 24/7 ‘will I or won’t I launch?’, but the systems held.

    I grew up in Europe with nightmares about mushroom clouds, travelled thorough Switzerland, where every public house had a nuclear fallout shelter – the serious kind with 1 foot thick concrete walls, air tight doors with big air filters and food stores. THAT was a real and imminent global risk, not this insane global warming catastrophe from plant food maybe in a hundred years inside my climate models.

    00

  • #
    manalive

    I gave up watching/listening-to/ any ABC product years ago, except for ABC Classic FM and even then only occasionally — too much vapid chatter and music outside strictly ‘classical’.

    Internet streaming via (for instance) iTunes offers much more variety, without the irritating ‘personalities’, my favorite being ‘Radio Swiss Classic’.

    One of Howard’s biggest mistakes was not having the courage to delve into the compost heap, sell-off the network and physical assets and throw the rest onto the streets.

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    Michael Cejnar: #53

    I believe in the end, Kennedy got lucky by using some bystander spy to send messages.

    Weren’t much luck involved.

    Both sides used to quietly meet in neutral territory on a regular basis to exchange messages and get through a bottle of good malt whisky.

    No messages to exchange? No problem, the whisky was still just as good.

    00

  • #
    Mark

    manalive #53

    All too true. Classic FM features far too much avant-garde bubble-and-squeak noise (I hesitate to call it music) for my liking.

    There’s this deification of John Howard amongst many Coalition voters that drives me nuts. Really, they had a Senate majority for three years and what did they do with it? Put some integrity back into the Electoral Act? Nope, they invented and passed Work Choices which got them kicked out. There are no rewards for stupidity, particularly in politics.

    I could never stand Howard, he was never anything other than a pusillanimous little twerp. Always believed it was Janet pulling his strings.

    00

  • #

    manalive @ 53
    One of Howard’s biggest mistakes was not having the courage to delve into the compost heap, sell-off the network and physical assets and throw the rest onto the streets.
    To quote the Beach Boys: Wouldn’t it be nice!

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Wendy @ 48 – Your link to Australian Fabians is interesting – Arvi Parbo, Hugh Morgan, Kerry Packer were/are Fabians? Gerard Henderson and John Howard are Fabians?

    This list needs verification before anyone should take too much notice of it.

    00

  • #
    John Smith

    wendy #49
    I suppose Joolya sorry Juliar Gillard doesn’t want all Australians to recognise who she really is.
    Perhaps it might explain in part their (Fabians) desire to control our internet usage by censorship and tracking our everymove (Ozlog).

    00

  • #
    J.Hansford

    I think the ABC is running a bit scared on this issue though…. They know the day is coming that they will be disbanded. They know that there is no place for a Government run broadcaster in a Modern Democratic, freemarket society….. It’s just that they can’t believe that the day is almost upon them. They are in denial, they will become angry, they will rage… and finally, they will have to accept.

    It will be interesting watching it happen….. The fact that they have been so thoroughly sucked in by the AGW fraud will ultimately be the complete undoing of them…. Their conduct will condemn them. It’s a delicious irony.

    00

  • #
    Mark D.

    Michael Cejnar @ 53

    Just imagine, hundreds of centres like the CRU’s but with underpaid Phil Jones’ and HARRY_READ_ME’s bashing Fortran code and making procedures to keep the thousands of nuclear warheads from misfiring or being launched by loonies. No blogosphere to find the errors. Thank God we didn’t have MSWindows and that the military, unlike climate scientists, use strict Quality Software Lifecycle standards that would make Harry’s eyes water. How many thousands of people must have cracked under the pressure of a 24/7 ‘will I or won’t I launch?’, but the systems held.

    Thanks for that….I WAS in remission for Post-Cold War Stress Disorder.

    00

  • #

    Michael Cejnar @ 53

    You have faith in government software standards. I don’t. I worked as a contractor software engineer for an advanced aircraft test facility for almost four years. I had to develop test software WITHOUT specifications. When I asked for them, I was pointed to the hardware-in-the-loop simulator and told to “copy that”.

    In the process, I discovered that the avionics software for a particular hot fighter aircraft had an approximately 0.7 second time constant filter on and important indicator. This meant that the indicator could not tell the truth in much less than about five seconds – especially during extreme maneuvers.

    Shortly thereafter, I watched a video of a test pilot flying the specific fighter aircraft I was attempting to simulate. He was attempting a barrel roll maneuver. This was especially difficult for this aircraft and had to be done on a rather exact zero g trajectory.

    The pilot did the maneuver carefully the first time and was successful. The second time, being a hot shot test pilot, he moved too quickly and began a 700 fps spin straight down. He pulled out just short of making is memorial crater with 9 g’s lateral. The managerial decision was that it was due to pilot error and added a “don’t do that” to the flight training manual.

    In order to get the third order effects right in my part of the simulator, I asked the agency responsible for the avionics software about the specific equations involved with the indicator mentioned above. I also asked if they had a time lag filter on that indicator. They sent me the particular code fragment I needed and a statement that “no, there is no lag filter”. Yet in that code fragment was a 0.7 second RC lag filter on that exact indicator.

    The bottom line is the the pilot nearly expired BECAUSE of that denied 0.7 second lag. He attempted his barrel roll on what he THOUGHT was a zero g trajectory but the indicator was lying to him because he moved too fast. Every other pilot of that aircraft is subject to the same risk.

    The bottom line is that government software can be trusted as long as everything is quiet, normal, and slowly changing. In an emergency, it is likely all hell will break loose. The reason is that they don’t know what they are doing nor what they have done and don’t give a damn who they kill because if that fact. See the two Space Shuttle catastrophes for more instructive detail.

    Government is hazardous to your health and should be under strict EPA regulation. Your life depends on it.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Michael Cejnar @53

    I understand that fear and why you had it. I saw that same fear growing up and see it right up until now. In the ’60s many companies made a tidy profit building backyard fallout shelters. Even one of my college professors had one. So I hope we can disagree amicably.

    As for Kennedy — yes, there’s an element of luck there. I’m not certain what he would have done if those ships had tried to run his blockade. He would have had to sink at least one of them to prove his resolve and I wonder if he had the nerve. In the end he gave away some missiles pointing at the Soviet Union if those ships would turn around and go home. That’s probably the best possible outcome.

    As for megalomania and so-on — if the safety of the Soviet Union had been threatened then nuclear war might well have been a possibility. But that simply wasn’t the case. I seriously doubt that either Kennedy or Khrushchev would launch missiles over such an incident.

    We now know that in those days the Soviets were parading empty missile canisters around Red Square to keep up the front that they had more missiles than they really had. But that wasn’t known in the west at the time.

    Which of us is right? Fortunately we’ll never know.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Government is hazardous to your health and should be under strict EPA regulation. Your life depends on it.

    Lionell,

    Surly not the EPA. They’re as incompetent as the rest of the government!

    00

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    Roy Hogue: Surly not the EPA. They’re as incompetent as the rest of the government!

    That is the point. The EPA just about binds business so that it can’t get anything done. If that “talent” could be applied to the government, then the government couldn’t get anything done. I don’t want the government doing stuff. It only makes things worse when it does.

    I want to muck up the works of government so that it is unable to fiction – even incompetently. I would rather pay the parasites of government to do nothing than have them make it increasingly difficult for the private economy to create the wealth necessary for the rest of us to live and thrive.

    Eventually, We the People might wake up and discover that we didn’t need 98.5% of the government employees nor 99.9999% of the laws, rules, and regulations. We can get along just fine without them. The self induced poor people dependent upon stolen government handouts will just have to get along without picking our pockets via the gangsters in government.

    00

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    I wrote “fiction” at #65 when I meant “function”. Come to think of it, I don’t want the government to fiction either. Oh well. Sometimes my fingers seem to have a mind of their own.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Lionell,

    The EPA would top my list of government agencies to toss into the Potomac and watch float out to sea. TSA and Homeland Security next. I’ve a really long list.

    00

  • #

    Roy,

    Sometimes you have to set things up so the system feeds on itself. If you can do that, it will self destruct. I have done that many times in other venues though not on a national scale.

    However, I do agree there is a long list of agencies that need to be disbanded. They need to be shut down and their assets sold to the highest bidder. Then take the money to use to eliminate most of the rest.

    As I said, we need a 98.5% (we can quibble a few percentage points here) reduction in government. One way that can be done is to force it to function by the rules it sets for the rest of us to follow. If we can do that, it won’t be able to function. Unfortunately, that is not likely to happen.

    The other approach is for the productive few to go John Galt. Look around you, that is happening and the government is making sure it will happen. If things continue as planned, we soon won’t be able to produce wealth let alone keep it.

    00

  • #
    Bulldust

    David Burchell at The Australian questions the alignment of paycheque sources and research results here (reference to Jones and ClimateGate):

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/radicals-get-rich-while-truth-begs/story-e6frg6zo-1225957983565

    Perhaps this is The Australian’s approach to balanced reportage after the Mike Steketee piece?

    00

  • #
    wendy

    The Cancun shuffle

    Do the Cancun shuffle
    Hear the money rustle
    Watch the greenbacks tumble
    Feel the sterling crumble

    To do the Cancun shuffle
    Let your money hustle
    Bet you’d sell your mother
    You can buy another

    So do the Cancun shuffle
    Don’t move a muscle
    You’d best keep quiet
    Or you’ll start a riot

    Now do the Cancun shuffle
    Best avoid the kerfuffle
    Just hush those voices
    Give us no choices

    Do the Cancun shuffle
    There will be a tussle
    Given time to dance
    We’ll take that chance

    It looks like the dance is on.

    00

  • #
  • #
    wendy

    Cargo cult made compulsory………..

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/cargo_cult_made_compulsory/

    Yet more BRAINWASHING by the green communists on this man made global warming FRAUD!!!

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Lionell,

    I’m hard put to know what assets the EPA has that anyone would buy. A list of what they have would go something like this.

    1. Political correctness
    2. Statistical dishonesty
    3. Scientific laziness
    4. Bad attitude
    5. A bunch of liars for staff and management
    6. Insufficient grip on reality
    7. Tendency to “prove” preconceived results
    8. Failure to stay within their statutory mandate
    9. Bloated budget
    10. Failure to understand what’s a problem and what’s not a problem
    11. Malodorous
    12. Laughable
    13. Bad judgment
    14. Believe out and out lies
    15. Job killers
    16. And just plain pain in the [you know what]

    My apology if I left out a few.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    PS:

    The John Galt thing is very troubling. A lot of people are being hurt badly because businesses are not committing their money.

    00

  • #

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by We Owe The Banks, Jarjarhead and Myles , Robert James. Robert James said: ABC admits it’s a propaganda arm of the government « JoNova http://goo.gl/1YXQy [...]

    00

  • #

    Roy Hogue,

    Perhaps all those “poor” people who are being hurt caused it by voting for benefits from the government. The government has nothing to give. What it gives first had to be produced by someone. That someone has a right, derived from the right to HIS life, to keep what he produces and to dispose of it on HIS terms. A government taking, in ANY form, is theft! The “poor” people receiving handouts from the government are accepting stolen goods.

    Businesses are owned by people. People are doing the producing and not the business. No one has a right to those products simply because they want them or need them no matter how much they want or need.

    A society based upon plunder, as ours is, is doomed. The producers are right to go on strike. The ones who want to live off them will just have to go suck rocks.

    00

  • #
    Paul

    Well it is now official that Climate Change is all about redistribution of wealth

    IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World’s Wealth”
    Thursday, 18 November 2010 13:16 Neue Zürcher Zeitung

    While this has been increasingly obvious, the pretence has been dropped now that they feel confident they can achieve their objective at the coming conference at Cancún

    That does not sound anymore like the climate policy that we know.

    Basically it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet – and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 – there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

    De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

    First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

    No need to prove anything about the science, it is just assumed as a fact commonly recognised. The enormity of the goal of this putsch is breathtaking.

    Paul

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Lionell,

    Did you miss my point? Business would be buying and hiring if not for the ridiculous uncertainty about the future that government has introduced. Of course they have every right to do as they are and keep a tight hand on their money. I would too.

    I thought you knew me a bit better. I’ve little sympathy for those who simply expect a handout. There is strong convincing evidence that continuing unemployment benefits has simply encouraged the unemployed to stay on unemployment benefits instead of taking a job. It makes those who live according to whether they get a nice warm feeling or not very happy to be “helping” everyone they can and then feel real good about themselves. But the truth is that people perform up to the incentive they’re under at any given time. So why in Hell do we give them the wrong incentive?

    Unfortunately, even when things start to improve — honestly, not just in government-speak — not nearly all the jobs that have disappeared will come back.

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Paul @77,

    It seems likely that Cancun will be as big a flop as Copenhagen. But whatever may happen, here in the U.S. the Senate must ratify any treaty the president signs up for with a 2/3 yes vote. The probability of that is now essentially zero.

    They may huff and puff all they want to but by the time Cancun rolls around this little pig will be living in a house of bricks. And the prospect that the U.S. will not go along will be a wet blanket on their cry of, “Fire!”

    Isn’t it interesting that they have chosen Cancun at its hottest time of year?

    00

  • #
    Paul

    Roy Hogue @79

    That’s good news about reality setting in in the US. I have to admit that I am not able to keep up with the ball on this issue, as a political issue, I can’t read fast enough.

    After I posted my previous post I read some other comment where those behind the effort to redistribute the world’s wealth see Cancún as a stepping stone to next year in Africa. There is a very strong belief-system behind this and it seems they no longer feel the need for even the pretence of scientific validity.

    All countries are in this looking, in some way, to gain an advantage for themselves. If the USA will not join in the fun then it will become a bit like the joke about the men at the bar drinking. After the ones who were being punished for their wealth stopped drinking the others were no longer able to pay for their drinks.

    Look for more deceptive ways to gain the same objective being adopted.

    And yes, they learned from the cold weather in Copenhagen that cold has a dampening effect on the Global Warming hysteria. Apparently, the trick was used originally when James Hansen addressed the US Congress in 1988. These people are masters of smoke and mirrors magic.

    Paul

    00

  • #
    SamG

    I agree with Michael Cejnar, No. 22. The ABC isn’t a propaganda arm of the government. It’s mostly at odds with the government.

    00

  • #
    alex

    Here’s yet another example, 3 weeks to remove offensive ad-hom postings because the reporter disagreed with a climate skeptic’s views…

    Bias at the national broadcaster is as easy as ABC :
    Mark Hendrickx, The Australian, February 21, 2011 12:00AM

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bias-at-the-netional-broadcaster-is-as-easy-as-abc/story-fn59niix-1226009060141

    00

  • #
    Dallas Beaufort

    The ABC’s latent loss is reflected in this funding despair, but where is the honest direction from these paragons of virtue who have taken the greens and labor to their bosom for the past 30yrs

    00

  • #

    [...] Mark Scott, director of the ABC himself admitted that the ABC is there to help the government. The fact that he thought it was OK to admit that publicly tells you how far the ABC has come from [...]

    00

  • #

    [...] Mark Scott, director of the ABC himself admitted that the ABC is there to help the government. The fact that he thought it was OK to admit that publicly tells you how far the ABC has come from [...]

    00