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

Long live satire. Amen. Germans mock their green faith.

We’ve reached the end-game. The sensibles have all left the room and there is no point trying to fight a religion with reason.  What utter foolishness to treat their ideas as sensible! The only response to satirical science (thank you Green-ecologicists) is to hold it up for the world to see its true nature.

Green-electricity may not run your heaters well, but it is excellent fuel for the funnies. Enjoy!

These Germans are so good at this, I have to learn to speak German.


H/t to the brilliant James Delingpole

As the video notes, every single German must now pay Euros 240 a year (“a total of 21.8 billion Euros for power which on the market had a value of only 2 billion. That’s sick!”) in order to subidise worthless green energy projects – such as the ugly wind farms for which swathes of forest are being cut down and the ludicrous solar panels now found on every other roof (in a country not exactly known for its sunshine) – which, as even Germany’s former Godfather of Green Professor Fritz Vahrenholt has now conceded, are the wrong solution to the wrong problem.

Germans spend ten times as much as they need too for green electricity and their big green achievement is that the nation has rediscovered lignite!

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (117 votes cast)
Long live satire. Amen. Germans mock their green faith., 9.8 out of 10 based on 117 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/l6jrn2x

138 comments to Long live satire. Amen. Germans mock their green faith.

  • #
    PeterS

    I can’t wait for such satire to appear on our eco-Nazi Greens loving ABC – in my dreams of course.

    222

  • #
    the Griss

    I must say I prefer a drier, more subtle, type of satire. :-)

    31

    • #
      Jon

      We are in mostly catholic Germany and the satire is coined on the public there. I think it will wake many Germans out of zombie mode and become more critical?

      70

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      A sort of Bordeaux Saint Michael satire …

      60

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        But not the Grange! Don’t touch the Grange!

        I guess the ANZAC “spirit” got uncorked today in great quantity.

        40

  • #
    handjive

    Other Than Germany … COAL!

    “Poland is suggesting that coal make a big comeback in the European Union in order to thwart Putin’s use of Natural Gas as a weapon.

    But the sentence that jumped out at me is

    “Poland burns over 50 million tons of coal a year, more than any European nation other than Germany, “

    (via sunshinehours)

    141

  • #
  • #
    Jon

    This is blasphemy worse than “Life of Brian”. Because they are sort of also making fun of IPCC and Al Gore. They base their work on science, almost. Basically it’s policy based science. But to prove it they got a Nobel’s prize, not the science ones that they give out in Sweden, but the only Nobel’s prize that is political and is handed out in Norway, Nobel’s (political)Peace Prize!!!!!!

    How stupid can one be to give a political prize to something and a message pretending it’s scientific based?

    211

  • #
    MadJak

    This one looked to me like another Q and A session from the ABC – just in German.

    Oh, I get it, they were Joking. Very very funny. Sorry, we get exposed to so much catastrafarian preaching downunder by their ABC that I tend to switch off a bit.

    Time to watch it again and enjoy it.

    130

    • #
      Jon

      Probably most enjoyed by those that speak the language?

      50

    • #

      ZDF, for what it’s worth, is a publically-funded TV station; the “second German TV”, following on from the first; the ARD, which is also publically funded. ZDF does air advertising during infrequent but longer breaks. This is somewhat like the relationship SBS has with Australia; except for the content.

      The segment is more fun in German, especially if one also knows of the people being targeted. The “archangel Gabriel” is Sigmar Gabriel, Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy and Vice Chancellor of Germany.

      Perhaps pradoxically, ZDF is headquartered in Mainz; a “green” hotspot in Germany.

      My view is that the left-of-SPD (the SPD is Germany’s version of our ALP) parties have trouble coping with the reality of a Grand Coalition comprised of the “conservative” Christian CDU/CSU and SPD; so they seem to be prepared to sacrifice the (failed) renewable energy policies just to damage the coalition government. A case of sour grapes and whine.

      100

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        the left-of-SPD (the SPD is Germany’s version of our ALP) parties have trouble coping with the reality of a Grand Coalition comprised of the “conservative” Christian CDU/CSU and SPD

        The political party landscape reportedly looks like this.
        Compared with Australia, the SPD is much more socialist and less authoritarian than the ALP, and the AFD is in similar area to our Liberal-in-name-only Party.

        20

        • #

          I think the AfD is in the wrong place. It’s a libertarian offshoot of refugees from the CDU seeking smaller, responsible government and an uncoupling from the EU political system as well as a redefinition of the Euro to let countries set their own budgets, etc.

          The Greens’ control freakery is getting up the nose of many Germans (e.g. with policies like “meat free days”). They cannot possibly sit in the Libertarian region.

          Methinks that the “political compass” has become tainted by propaganda.

          70

      • #

        At NoTricksZone:

        Angela Merkel’s Vice Chancellor Stuns, Declares Germany’s ‘Energiewende’ To Be On ‘The Verge Of Failure’!

        In a stunning admission by Germany’s Economics Minister and Vice Chancellor to Angela Merkel, Sigmar Gabriel announced in a recent speech that the country’s once highly ballyhooed transformation to renewable energy, the so called Energiewende, a model that has been adopted by a number of countries worldwide, is “on the verge of failure“.

        Archangel Gabriel has spoken. In the video he concludes his speech:

        Many thanks. It was a bit nasty, I know, but I had to tell the truth.

        20

    • #
      Just Thinkin'

      You need to watch it a few times to go through the sub-titles. But, I tell you what, most of the GREENIES won’t get it!

      40

  • #
    Bulldust

    Germany comedy… OK now I have seen everything.

    134

    • #
      PeterS

      Better than American comedy, which I can’t stand.

      62

      • #
        Bones

        If this type of comedy works to convince people they are being suckered,then its worth the effort.Remember Peter,this type of comedy in America got obuma elected,it probably reaches more people than current affairs programs and most welfare recipients don’t know the difference

        70

      • #
        Just Thinkin'

        come on. I’m sure you can understand The Big Bang Theory.
        The only Yank show I will watch.
        So very subtle.

        22

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          If it’s any consolation to you in Oz, I won’t watch but a very few shows on, as you put it, “yank” TV. We’ve become a nation of intellectual garbage consumers. I don’t bother with a lot of our movies for the same reason. Noah is one of them, in spite of rave reviews.

          61

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    I think it is funny, clever and well done for impact. I’d love to see the look on the face of Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, the master of much of the muck and mystery and the perfector of the supercilious sneer, as he watched this for the first time.

    190

  • #
    Glen Michel

    Not quite the shortest book in the world as German humour is varied.on the other hand the city of Freiburg in the far southwest is noted as The sunniest place in Germany and 70%of its energy comes from solar and wind- but at what a cost !love the beer gardens as well

    40

    • #
      Jon

      They have easy to find excellent white wine. Very good spatburgunder(Pinot. Noir) can also be found if you look for it at weinprobestand’s, Some producers of spatburgunder have started using oak? For me to travel to Germany to drink cheap beer, when they have all this good wine, is heresy?

      30

    • #

      They also have landslides and subsidence in the region from over-exploitation of geothermal energy.

      50

  • #
    Anteros

    You can’t reason people out of alarmism – because they didn’t use reason to get there in the first place.

    200

  • #

    Trust me. I’m not hijacking this Thread.

    This video is as funny as it gets.

    Right at the bottom of the Thread, Joanne links to an article on how Germany has rediscovered Lignite. (brown coal). From that article, and right at the top is this:

    It (Germany) turns to lignite, a cheap, soft, muddy-brown colored form of sedimentary rock that spews more greenhouse gases than any other fossil fuel.

    Ah, well, I shouldn’t really expect journalists to actually go and find out for themselves. They just want the sensationalist $hit to write.

    So, then, let’s have a look at just one of Germany’s new coal fired plants.

    One of them is at Neurath, and that’s a really large plant. The new units there are F and G, so this is a monster plant, if the new units are named F and G.

    There’s just the 2 units, and each of them drives ONE 1,100MW Generator, so that’s 2200MW Nameplate. At the moment, while they are still new, they are running at a Capacity Factor of 92 to 95%, and over the years (50 of them off into the future) that CF will drop to around 80%, but right now at that 92% (the lower figure, they are delivering) 17,750GWH to the German grid.

    Let’s then look at 40 year old Bayswater as a comparison, and hey, you say, that’s not apples with apples, as the German plant is brown coal, and Bayswater is black coal, and Australian black coal from this region is some of the cleanest burning black coal there is, compared to the filthy Lignite being burned here.

    Even so, Bayswater has 4 units, each driving a 660MW generator, so 2640MW, a much larger Nameplate. Bayswater, (now almost 40 years old remember) is delivering 17,000GWH of power to the N.S.W. grid, so this German plant is actually delivering more power from a smaller Nameplate.

    The Neurath plant in Germany is one of the new UltraSuperCritical plants, (USC) and is operating at a 43% efficiency rate, and I know that’s important to the greenies out there, because it’s a (seemingly) low number they can point at, but this is about efficient as it can get for coal fired power plants. This plant cost $3.5 Billion, converted from Euros, a humungous cost that greeenies also like to point at because it is so huge, conveniently forgetting that cost can be recovered over 50 years and not the best case scenario of 25 years for Renewables, wind and all forms of solar power.

    Along with the USC technology, the Germans also installed an added extra for the drying of the coal at the front end, because Lignite does in fact emit more CO2 than black coal. The coal is pulverised to talcum powder consistency, dried by the immense heat of the flue exhaust, and is then injected, thus ensuring a considerable amount less in CO2 emissions, in fact the same CO2 emissions as for an equivalent black coal fired new tech USC plant.

    In fact this plant emits around 15 to 20% less CO2 than Bayswater does.

    So, more power and less CO2 from what the journalist describes as spewing more GHG than any other fossil fuel.

    Amazing how fact is sometimes stranger than fiction.

    Oh, and for an equivalent (Nameplate only) Wind Plant, 2200MW, that’s 733 huge turbines, and with a costing the same as for the proposed plant at King Island, there’s $7.33 Billion, with only a 25 year life span to recover that cost, and only delivering 5800GWH of power to the Grid each year, only 32% of the power delivered by the German coal fired plant. So the equivalent Wind plant would cost twice as much and deliver only one third of the power, and only last half as long. Oh dear! Fail is by far a too polite word which just cannot describe this at all.

    Tony.

    Neurath Plant Information Source. (pdf document) 8 pages, and really interesting with a number of descriptions with really good diagrams, and read how this same Company which ended up installing this plant was working hand in glove with the operators of Hazelwood in Victoria with a view to doing the same thing there, all of this in 2007, and absolutely zero chance now that anything like this will ever be done at Hazelwood.

    691

    • #
      Debbie

      Red thumb? Whomesover you are ? Seriously? Please elucidate on what you don’t like about the numbers provided by Tonyfrom OZ.

      292

      • #
        jon

        It means that it’s not conform to the ideology behind UNFCCC?

        50

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        The red thumbs hide in the darkness and can throw their darts from a position of anonymity, feeling perfectly safe, whereas if they identified themselves by commenting their foolishness might be exposed.

        81

      • #
        Debbie

        Seriously?
        Just another red thumb?
        What’s the problem?

        41

        • #
          Kevin Lohse

          Don’t worry Debbie. A red thumb means you’ve upset the Forces of Darkness. Well Done!

          41

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Debbie,

          I used to comment about red thumbs sometimes. But I finally realized they’re a sort of backhanded compliment that means my comment hit a nerve. Then I started enjoying them.

          But like you, I would rather my detractors say what they don’t like because then I could answer them. But it’s not to be. The red thumb is too tempting.

          I long ago stopped using them myself and seldom give a green thumb except for something outstanding.

          You’re doing fine if you get a red one so don’t worry about it.

          31

          • #
            Jon

            As Margaret thatcher said when they started to attack her on person it usually meant that they where out of arguments and that she had won the debate.

            20

        • #
          PhilJourdan

          Here’s a green one to make up for the red one. ;-)

          11

        • #
          the Griss

          Don’t fret it Debbie..

          it means you have got up the nose of some worthless CAGW green slimo…

          You are on the right track. :-)

          Give me those red thumbs, scumbags, because I RELISH them !!!!!!!!!!!

          12

    • #
      ianl8888


      …Lignite does in fact emit more CO2 than black coal

      Well, the basic chemical equation for lignite and black coal is exactly the same: C + O2 —> CO2 + heat

      but ROM (Run of Mine) lignite contains up to 85% water, so much more is burnt for the same heat output (assuming ash content is about the same for both fuels)

      Drying ROM lignite before burning it in the power plant boiler is an obvious method to improve fuel efficiency, if the ROM ash content is low enough. Most German lignite deposits contain raw fuel suitable for this sequence

      70

    • #
      PhilJourdan

      For Joanne et. al. Notice that the German term for “lignite” is literally “brown coal”??? German is not really hard. Just learn the rules. Many words are close enough that you can understand them if you know English.

      40

    • #
      James Bradley

      Well, when the wind farm fad finally dies we should gather up all our money for the next big, earth-saving project, I know – lets build ourselves a MONORAIL…

      70

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Only if it’s done with someone else’s money. Mine is already working overtime for straight time pay.

        30

  • #
    the Griss

    “So the equivalent Wind plant would cost twice as much and deliver only one third of the power, and only last half as long.”

    Maths.. oh, oh.. let’s see 2 x 3 x 2 = ???????……. 12

    That sound really economical !

    140

    • #
      the Griss

      (obviously meant as a reply to Tony at #10..)

      30

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Particularly when you consider that 25 years life is a very flattering figure for Tony to have chosen, and by assuming constant output over that time (and for solar as well) he is being over the top fair to renewables.

      German emissions are rising, not because of the new coal fired plants but because the old clapped out small inefficient plants aren’t being shut down. They are operated on stand-by emitting CO2 to cover for periods when sun and wind doesn’t cooperate. They HAVE to do, it’s law. WHY?; because the sudden surges of power from the turbines and solar PV shut off gas (and other) stations from a deal of the most profitable times, so they couldn’t make a profit. It’s very hard to sell against a product ‘sold’ at zero (because the subsidy makes it possible), so many of the gas and pumped storage stations have shut down. Coal fired is so cheap that it can just keep going, and has to or Germany shuts down, hence that Law.

      The best part for the wind farmers is when there is too much supply and they get paid, handsomely, to NOT supply.

      And for their $A366 per head the Germans are getting a less stable grid, more emissions and an uncertain economic future. The wonders of “renewable” energy!

      190

    • #
      Just Thinkin'

      You forgot the sarc off!

      20

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        I am not sure that the greenies wouldn’t think that the above result was OK, and just what they want to do. After all more emissions gives them an excuse to keep waffling (euphemism) and disruptions cause germans to use less electricity (involuntary).

        Now they’re trying to bring in a meat-less Friday, restrict the size of coffee machines and vacuum cleaners. I haven’t heard lately about their campaign against tough and hard sex toys; apparently they prefer them small and brittle or just floppy. And if you think that is sarcasm you need to keep a closer eye on their lunacies.

        20

        • #

          I’ll tell you what I have noticed over the years, and these last two years especially.

          All these green agenda supporters only think of electrical power consumption as what they use personally, in other words, in their own homes, the residential sector consumption, and here in Australia, that makes up only 25 to 28% of consumption.

          They want to save (their thinking) what is only tiny amounts of power consumption at an obscurely tiny level.

          Tell them that wind and solar power do nothing with respect to the big picture, and they just cannot (or will not) understand.

          They look (especially) at rooftop solar and swear hand on heart it is having an effect, when it isn’t. Even then, they quote best case Mid Summer day totals, (best guess) and use that figure as their hoped for huge total, and cannot see that spread across the whole year, it amounts to virtually nothing.

          There may be 1.157 Million Installations totalling 3.039GW, but mention that all that is only the year round average daily equivalent of 400MW in total, and there is just outright disbelief.

          That 400MW in total is barely 1%, if that, of total Australian consumption.

          They just cannot think outside their own personal space.

          Tony.

          70

        • #
          Jon

          If the object is to breake down the Western World cultural and kapitalist values, this is going to work fine.
          Why?
          Because the Western World did not have a Marxist revolution like they did in Russia. And they belive the reason was Western cultural values and the kapitalist middle class based societies.
          The basis of it all is cheap energy.
          “Affordable energy in ample quantities is the lifeblood of the industrial societies and a prerequisite for the economic development of the others.” — John P. Holdren, Science Adviser to President Obama. Published in Science 9 February 2001

          ?

          10

  • #
    Charlie Flindt

    The plural or German is Germans.

    10

  • #
    Peter Hume

    (Forgive my pedantry but the heading should read “Germans” not “German’s”.)

    30

  • #
    Txomin

    Meanwhile, “Years of Living Dangerously” has a ranting of 8.4 out of 10 at the imdb…

    10

  • #
    the Griss

    Seems that those you voted for this crap, do not have the ability to write reviews.

    50

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      If you meant “Years of Living Dangerously” then the next challenge is to get all the climate skeptics of the blogosphere to trash-talk the series and upvote the imdb user reviews, which have already taken a highly acerbic tone. It’s delightfully nasty.

      40

    • #
      the Griss

      Yep, I meant to reply to tx at 15.1.1

      I have no intention of ever watching this rampant propaganda.

      40

  • #
    Yonniestone

    I find this video difficult to germasticate to.

    70

  • #
    mmxx

    The Global Warming climate is changing chaotically (dare I say, normally) but in disharmony with the flawed models-based scripture that has been foisted on the public by a self-serving scientific clique aided by a scurrilously non-probing main stream media contingent in Australia.

    More power to your site’s exposure of beliefs posing as scientific realism, Jo!

    110

  • #
    Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia

    Looks like the Germans are coming to their senses.

    Looks like Australia is too. Thank you Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey for stopping the Greek styling of our economy. Someone has to do it.

    120

  • #
    mem

    Talking of satire. Here’s some real life satire. Jon Stewart on CNN says cover Global Warning as over-zealously as you do everything else! Yep that would be right. Exaggerate, lie, hell even tell the punters they’re all going to fry. It’s a low rating night. Push up the decibels guys, lets pull them in. Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! Sorry, got carried away there. Read all about it here

    40

  • #
    PhilJourdan

    Damnit! You should put warning labels on this stuff! I could not help myself and literally laughed out loud. Now everyone thinks I am a weirdo (well I am, but they were not supposed to know).

    It’s a miracle! He can walk!!! (I could always walk. – sit down and shut up). LOL

    80

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      And now you’re causing me to repeat the laughing out loud that you didn’t like.

      Stay cool, Phil, stay cool. We’ll both get through this that way.

      50

  • #
  • #
    pat

    i’d seen the clip on Bolt. if only this were satire!

    23 April: Time: TIME MAGZINE: 100 Pioneers
    Katharine Hayhoe
    By Don Cheadle
    An environmental evangelist
    There’s something fascinating about a smart person who defies stereotype. That’s what makes my friend Katharine Hayhoe — a Texas Tech climatologist and an evangelical Christian — so interesting.
    It’s hard to be a good steward of the planet if you don’t accept the hard science behind what’s harming it, and it can be just as hard to take action to protect our world if you don’t love it as the rare gift it is…
    I got to know Katharine as we worked on Showtime’s climate documentary Years of Living Dangerously.
    (Cheadle is an actor, producer and Academy Award nominee)
    http://time.com/#70881/katharine-hayhoe-2014-time-100/

    Christian News Wire: Evangelical Christian Named to TIME’s 100 Most Influential People for Work on Climate
    FRANKLIN, Ind., April 24, 2014 Statement by the Rev. Mitch Hescox, President & CEO, Evangelical Environmental Network
    We are pleased that Dr. Katharine Hayhoe, scientific advisor to the Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN), has been named TIME’s 100 most influential people in the world (time.com/70881/katharine-hayhoe-2014-time-100/). Dr. Hayhoe demonstrates that a person of strong evangelical faith can also be a world-class scientist. She understands that creation-care is truly a matter of life and speaks to churches and conservative groups across the country to demonstrate the need to take prudent steps to address climate change…
    Dr. Hayhoe’s efforts have led to her being targeted by climate deniers like Rush Limbaugh, resulting in a continual fuselage of opposition — even threats to her family.
    But it is precisely her love for her children and for Jesus Christ that has Dr. Hayhoe refusing to be intimidated from speaking the truth.
    Dr. Hayhoe and her husband Dr. Andrew Farley’s seminal book, A Climate For Change, has been instrumental in educating the evangelical church…
    My support and appreciation for Dr. Hayhoe is summarized in her own words:
    “It’s not about saving the planet: the planet will be fine without us. It’s about helping people, real people who are being affected by climate change today. Higher energy bills for air conditioning, freak rainstorms, and droughts wiping out their food supply -rising sea level threatening their homes and fields. It’s the poor and disadvantaged who are being hardest hit: those very people the Bible tells us to care for.”
    Dr. Hayhoe is a top communicator in the field of climate science and her evangelical prospective informs her views on the need to protect human life…
    http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/5164474039.html

    40

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Christian News Wire: Evangelical Christian Named to TIME’s 100 Most Influential People…

      What warms my heart no end about Time’s list of the most influential people of the year is that Megyn Kelly of Fox News is on it — not only on it but high up on it according to what I’ve seen. After watching her very first broadcast on her own I told my wife she would become the powerhouse at Fox. I was wrong, Kelly has surpassed even that expectation. She will soon eclipse all the other hosts at Fox if she keeps going just the way she is; sense of humor but no nonsense; asks the right questions; never lets a guest take over or dodge the question; picks the right issues and keeps things on topic and on point.

      Move over Bill O’Reilly.

      Color me very happy over her debut on that list. :-)

      50

    • #

      …should be “fusillade”, not “fuselage”. The latter is the hull of an airplane…the former is a hail of bullets.

      30

  • #
    janama

    With regard to “years of living dangerously” How sick have we become that we need to use play actors, our modern day court jesters, to promote our scientific theories.

    Science is science regardless of who promotes it.

    90

    • #
      James Bradley

      Ever sat in a courtroom Jamana? It is theatre in the round. Shakespeare said it best “All the world’s a stage etc etc etc…”

      60

      • #

        A courtroom is concerned with weighted opinion; not fact.

        Which is why dragging a climate debate into courts is counter-productive to the sceptics. After all, sceptics are acquainted with the advantage of uncertainty whereas the courts make decisions on the balance of “facts” as interpreted by court-recognized experts. Courts, like politics, cannot function without “certainty”. There is no room for science in a courtroom.

        Courts, like politics, cannot function without “certainty”.

        10

  • #
    Stuart Elliot

    What is the German word for Schadenfreude? I am feeling a bit of it right now.

    90

    • #
      Mark Hladik

      I think it’s, “Yooo inn deeeep du-du”. I referred to my Casull’s German-English/English-German dictionary.

      30

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Hilarious!

    On the other hand, like all good satire, there’s too much truth in it to let me feel good about laughing at it. But what the heck, Roy? Enjoy it while you can and hope it’s true that the end of the nonsense is near!

    80

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    Took a few minutes out to remember those who fell at Gallipoli. We might have a go at each other, but Brits and Aussies know who their true friends are. Thanks for your help along the way.

    80

    • #

      Australians; please stop sending bars of soap to your British rellies.
      It makes their dogs foam at the mouth.

      :-)

      FWIW: many central/Northern Europeans lack the sense to wash/shower and change clothes (at least) daily when the weather gets warm enough to sweat.

      20

      • #
        Kevin Lohse

        What a foul calumny ! Most central/north Europeans wash every second Saturday whether they need to or not. As for changing clothes, we get to redeem our second set from the pawnbrokers every pay-day.

        50

        • #
          Kevin Lohse

          Good Queen Bess was also a hygiene freak. She scandalised her court by insisting on 2 baths a year.

          30

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            I’m about the same. I’ve kidded my wife for a long time that, “Gee, I took a shower this month and I didn’t even need it.” I wonder if I’m central/north European. Does Scottish ancestry count?

            20

            • #
              PhilJourdan

              You know why the French invented Perfume? They never bathe!

              And unfortunately, I married a woman who, while having no french heritage, decided to make that her own.

              I am atypical as I am a Frenchman and I shower every day. But you are welcome to “take my wife, please”! Ex wife that is.

              10

  • #
    pat

    this is not satire. watch your retirement funds:

    VIDEO 24.35: 25 April: Bill Moyers: Putting the Freeze on Global Warming
    This week, Bill talks with two leaders who helped inspire the new fossil fuel divestment movement that Tutu is encouraging. Ellen Dorsey is executive director of the Wallace Global Fund and a catalyst in the coalition of 17 foundations known as Divest-Invest Philanthropy. Thomas Van Dyck is Senior Vice President – Financial Advisor at RBC Wealth Management, and founder of As You Sow, a shareholder advocacy foundation.
    They are urging foundations, faith groups, pension funds, municipalities and universities to sell their shares in polluting industries and reinvest in companies committed to climate change solutions…
    “The climate crisis is so urgent that if you own fossil fuels, you own climate change,” Dorsey tells Moyers. Van Dyck adds that reinvestment is needed to create “a sustainable economy that’s based on the energy of the future, not on the energy of the past.”
    http://billmoyers.com/episode/putting-the-freeze-on-global-warming/

    THERE IS ONE COMMENT ONLY by Matt Boys:
    Question (and I didn’t have time to view the video so maybe it’s in there, but): I don’t see any mention of Bill McKibben, 350.org, or Fossil Free; am I incorrect that they were the groups that started the divestment movement?
    ***If not, then kudos to these groups, but if 350.org and Bill McKibben spear-headed this movement, all credit should be given to them. Apologies for my skepticism, but social media and the internet has taken it’s toll on proper citation of sources. Simply looking for some clarity.

    ***you have to laugh!

    10

    • #
      Bones

      Pat,this must be the investment industries attempt to get those pension funds and investment money they did’nt scam on renewables.Come on board the gravy train to financial ruin.

      20

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Unfortunately it appears quite serious and has been going on for years already. How likely it is to succeed is another matter. Investors by and large are smarter than to jettison profitable investments. Some will but most won’t. So in this case maybe the power of money works for us instead of against us. We’ll have to wait and see to be sure.

        I hate the waiting for that other shoe to drop though.

        10

  • #
    pat

    what “17 year hiatus”? it’s just a ***few years according to NatGeo:

    registration required at NatGeo; however, “Earth Vision Trust” is visible under this short animated video:

    VIDEO: 25 April: Nat Geo: Brian Clark Howard: Science Behind the “Global Warming Pause”
    The ocean appears to be absorbing excess heat.
    Although global temperatures have been rising over the past century, a slowdown in the rate of warming in the past ***few years has left some scratching their heads over a seeming “global warming pause.”…
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/04/140425-global-warming-pause-climate-science/

    found elsewhere online, VIDEO CREDIT AT END OF VIDEO: ” Made possible by the Joyce Foundation”:

    VIDEO: 25 April: National Geographic: Short Film Showcase
    Has Global Warming Stopped or Slowed?
    April 25, 2014—A recent lull in global air temperature warming has led people to ask if the rise in temperatures has stopped or slowed down. In this video by Earth Vision Trust, Jerry Meehl, from the National Center for Atmospheric Research explains the data that shows our global temperature is, indeed, increasing.
    Earth Vision Trust is a nonprofit founded by National Geographic photographer and grantee James Balog that seeks to educate and inspire the public through innovative visual exploration of the changing environment.
    For more about Earth Vision Trust, click here
    http://video.nationalgeographic.com.au/

    it’s more an infomercial for renewables, specifically wind turbines.

    i’m trying to make the argument at WUWT that setting up an org for sceptics would not attract more media attention because, in the media, it is the advertisers who pay the piper & play the tune (lobbyists/Congress?). the sceptic’s strength is in vigorous, unruly, non-partisan ONLINE debate. nothing disturbs the CAGW Team & their MSM facilitators more. the dinosaur MSM is self-destructing.

    30

  • #
    handjive

    Not satire …

    Quote: “But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.
    One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.”

    Quote - Ottmar Edenhofer was appointed as joint chair of Working Group 3 at the Twenty-Ninth Session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in Geneva, Switzerland.
    ~ ~ ~
    So, how is that wealth re-distribution masquerading as environmentalism going?

    Brazil looks to swap World Cup publicity for carbon credits

    “Brazil, looking to offset the carbon emissions generated by construction, travel and other activities related to hosting the 2014 Soccer World Cup, said on Tuesday it wants holders of United Nations-backed carbon credits to swap them for publicity during the games.

    The government will accept only certified emission reductions (CERs) from Brazil-based projects of the U.N.’s Clean Development Mechanisms (CDMs).”
    ~ ~ ~
    Yep. That’ll put shoes on that ‘activist’ soccer player’s feet. Thank Gaia for UN wealth re-distribution.
    But Wait! There’s more!

    UN’s carbon role questioned as $200 (million) cash pile sits idle

    “The U.N. body tasked with channelling hundreds of billions of dollars to cutting emissions is under growing scrutiny as its once booming investment programme dries up, leaving most of its funds unspent while other climate initiatives are short of cash.

    The Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has helped funnel almost $400 billion into emission-cutting projects in developing countries by allowing investors to earn carbon credits they can sell to companies and governments of richer nations that use them to meet emission targets.”
    . . .
    $400 Billion spent so far to ‘stop global warming’ (nudge nudge, wink wink)
    That is only on UN CDM’s.
    How is that going?
    It’s the End of the World as We Prefer It, and I Feel … Stupid
    Yes, Daniel, you are stupid. They don’t call you a ‘useful idiot’ for nothing.

    The UN claims $30 Billion a year is needed to end World Hunger
    ~ ~ ~
    Lawrence Solomon: The UN is de facto dead
    The UN no longer counts in the world. Like the League of Nations, it will thankfully disappear
    . . .
    For humanity’s sake, one can only hope the death of the United Nations is soon.

    20

  • #
    pat

    love that i can link to “Fashion Times” for their take on the Tampa Tribune piece:

    25 April: Fashion Times: Inigo Monzon: Nobel Prize Winner Plans To Reverse Climate Change
    Nobel prize winner Rajendra Pachauri hopes to reverse the effects of climate change on the world through the use of alternative sources of energy, the Tampa Tribune reported…
    Speaking before the faculty members and students of the University of South Florida’s Patel College of Global Sustainability on Monday, Pachauri encouraged his audience to put a stop to the global problem…
    Unlike other environmentalists, Pachauri does not use the term global warming. For him, this phrase carries a connotation that only applies to the world’s temperature, and not other factors that can significantly affect the world.
    He said, “I never use the term ‘global warming,’ because it conveys the impression that all you’re talking about is temperature. Climate change is much wider. What we’re seeing is changes to the planet.”
    Pachauri was awarded with the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for his work with the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
    http://www.fashiontimes.com/articles/5778/20140425/nobel-prize-winner-plans-to-reverse-climate-change.htm

    24 April: Tampa Tribune: Education: Nobel laureate sees hope for reversing climate change
    Rajendra Pachauri can paint a pretty dour picture of the effect of climate change.
    Rising sea levels. Melting polar ice. Heat waves and heavy rains. Dwindling water supplies. The movement of fish from what had been fertile fishing grounds to more hospitable waters.
    Those aren’t concerns for the future – they’re happening now, said Pachauri, Nobel Prize-winning chairman of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change…
    Human activity has begun to change the planet “in a very short period of time, and in a very intense way, which is totally out of the track that you have seen over millennia,” Pachauri said. “Limiting climate change will require sustained and substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”
    How substantial?
    To reverse the doomsday scenario many expect by the end of the century, Pachauri said the use of renewable, nuclear and carbon-captured energy sources would have to increase from 30 percent of energy production today to 80 percent by 2050.
    Fossil fuel power generation without carbon capture would have to be phased out almost entirely by the end of the century, he said…
    The chief executive of the Energy and Resources institute in New Delhi was preaching to the choir at the Patel College, which is backing sustainability programs on campus and around the world. Given the nature of the audience, the subject of climate change denial was barely addressed; Pachauri did provide an anecdote about an airport employee who implied to him that the Midwest’s torrid winter cast doubts on his work.
    “I never use the term ‘global warming,’ because it conveys the impression that all you’re talking about is temperature,” he said. “Climate change is much wider. What we’re seeing is changes to the planet.”
    In a brief interview after the speech, Pachauri said scientists have to do better to communicate the global threat.
    “In any society, people have freedom to hold their own views, but it’s important for those of us working in the field to not only produce good and robust assessments, but also to communicate them to the public,” he said. “If we do that, I’m sure human society is altogether rational enough to take the right steps.”
    http://tbo.com/news/education/nobel-laureate-sees-hope-for-reversing-climate-change-20140424/

    LOL.

    20

    • #
      PhilJourdan

      The rats are deserting the ship! Everyone knows Obama already did that. Only he can control sea levels.

      10

  • #
    pat

    the thought police on patrol … again!

    26 April: WaPo: Letter: Charles Krauthammer misses the mark on climate change
    Charles Krauthammer is upset with my organization, Forecast the Facts, which organized 110,000 people to sign a petition calling on The Post and other newspapers to stop publishing misinformation on its opinion pages about climate change. In his April 11 op-ed column, “Thought police on patrol,” Krauthammer said that, by asking for factual accuracy, we are exhibiting “intolerance” and a “totalitarian” attitude.
    Krauthammer is missing the mark. We are not asking for censorship. We are asking The Post to apply basic journalistic norms before it publishes columns. It is not intolerant to ask a newspaper to give its readers a true and accurate accounting of the conclusions of climate scientists, whether it is printed in the news section or on the opinion page…
    As Krauthammer is fond of highlighting, the science of climate change continues to evolve. No science stands still, and there is always more to learn. Questions vex us, such as, how much carbon pollution can the atmosphere handle if we are to stay below the internationally agreed warming threshold of 2 degrees Celsius? What will civilization look like if we hit 500 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? What about 600 parts per million and beyond?
    Scientists have different answers to these questions. They use scientific modeling and observed data to make educated guesses, and they ask colleagues to test their assumptions and validate their conclusions…
    Not only will Krauthammer not accept this consensus, however, but he also communicates misleading information on climate change that unnecessarily confuses the issue. This is why The Post’s leadership should step in.
    In his Feb. 21 op-ed column, “The myth of ‘settled science,’ ” Krauthammer lent credence to the common fallacy that warming has stopped…
    In the same February column, Krauthammer said the link between extreme weather events and climate change has not been established with certainty. He is wrong…
    But Krauthammer’s quarrel with well-established scientific conclusions is not only unreasonable but also built on misinformation that should have no place in a space intended to further an informed debate.
    Brant Olson, Berkeley, Calif.
    The writer is campaign director of Forecast the Facts.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-misses-the-mark-on-climate-change/2014/04/25/2b87bc22-ca50-11e3-b81a-6fff56bc591e_story.html

    10

  • #
    ROM

    And right on cue with Jo’s headline post comes this post from Pierre Gosselin’s German climate and media commentary translated to English NoTricksZone blog.

    Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace has his say again on the modern so called environmental movement and the evil, killer of kids, cult it has morphed into today .
    And it is a view that coincides with what many skeptics have been saying for some time about environmentalism and the now increasingly radical far left cult trending Greenpeace, WWF, Sierra Club and other radical so called environmental organisations and the brand of disgustingly debased anti-human , human life sacrificing environmentalism they are all promoting today.
    ______________________________

    German Interview With Patrick Moore: Greenpeace Living “In An Absolute Dream World”…Poverty Is Biggest Threat

    [quoted ]

    German online Novo Argumente here features an interview with Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore. Today he is one of the environmental organization’s harshest critics.

    Moore tells readers how things have run amok at the activist organization, claiming it has changed from one that “not only cared about the environment, but also about people” to one that has since transformed to today’s radical organization “that characterizes people fundamentally as enemies of the earth.”

    He continues:

    I believe that its refusal to make demands that are scientifically based combined with a leftist, anti-American and anti-market-economy attitude has led the environmental movement into an ideological dead-end in which it finds itself today.”

    Later in the interview Moore says that today’s biggest environmental challenge facing the earth today is poverty.

    Poor people today cannot afford to treat wastewater, to clean the air, to reforest, etc. Poverty is a problem for man and for the environment. Fighting poverty helps both. There’s no contradiction.”

    Moore says he left Greenpeace because the organization opted to follow a course based on confrontation and anti-development. He also believes that the organization’s popularity is because the environmental movement has indeed become a religion.

    Radical environmentalists he says are hypocritical and confused in that they don’t understand that the gadgets that they themselves love using, like mobile phones, bicycles and rapid transport, buildings and wind turbines, come from the very things they protest. “It’s an absolute dream world.”

    He illustrates further:

    To demonstrate against fossil energies, Greenpeace attacked a Russian offshore drilling rig with a large boat equipped with diesel engines. [...] When we sailed to Alaska to protest nuclear testing, we had no atomic weapons on board. They act like their new 32 million dollar boat is powered by sails when in reality it has a 5000 horsepower diesel engine. [...] I just want to underscore what a dream world these people live in.”

    Moore thinks that that fear and guilt play a big role in the religion. “This works the best with the global warming issue.”

    At the end, Moore blasts Greenpeace’s opposition to approving golden rice.

    Two million children die annually from diseases related to Vitamin A-deficiencies. If I take the precautionary principle seriously, then I can only demand that golden rice be immediately approved. If Vitamin A deficiency were a disease like malaria and someone discovered a medicine to heal the disease, it would not be long before people would use it.”

    The whole interview is well worth reading and it hopefully it will appear soon in English.

    [ end quote]

    30

    • #
      ROM

      For those who are unfamiliar with the Golden Rice Project which Greenpeace and the environmentqal organisations have been fighting the release of this life saving Golden Rice because it is suposedly a GMO since it’s dvelopment in about 2000.

      Greenpeace has used every possible legal means plus quite a few barely legal but morally corrupt and bankrupt means plus just straight out thuggery including the deliberate physical destruction of Golden Rice research plots plus life threatening threats against Golden Rice researchers all to stop the release of the life saving Golden Rice .
      And then has the total arrogance and gall to boast openly about it’s actions against the Golden Rice release.

      Meanwhile 2 million kids die each year from the impaired immune system that arises due to the lack of Vitamin A which Golden Rice provides when eaten.

      Since Golden Rice was first developed and could have become fully available to the rice eating populations of Asia who are from the poorest demographic in Asia, some 10 million or more little kids have died miserable deaths due entirely to Greenpeace fighting the life saving Golden Rice release and for no other reason than it was a GMO.
      Those ten or 12 million little kids along with the Greenpeace inspired banning of DDT in the early 1970′s, the best Malaria mosquito insecticide invented and developed to this day, has led, according to the World Health Organisation, to some 40 to 50 million avoidable deaths from Malaria in some of the poorest countries of the world since the 1970′s

      With the combined malaria toll and the toll from the all out attempts to stop the release of Golden Rice by Greenpeace and other so called environmental organisations, a total of some 60 or 70 million or more avoidable deaths due entirely to the policies and actions of Greenpeace since it’s inception in the 1960′s and early 1970′s makes Greenpeace and it’s executives amongst the greatest, most deliberate, most empathy lacking and deliberate killers of the poorest and weakest of humanity that has ever existed on this planet.

      30

      • #
        Kevin Lohse

        I’ve pinched your post for my Facebook page. I’m under assault from the human haters for daring to publicly support Fracking in east Kent and s bit of counter-attack is required. Hope you don’t mind. K

        10

        • #
          ROM

          Kevin
          If it helps then by all means use the post.

          I will point out that in my figures on avoidable deaths caused by the Greenpeace backed and heavily promoted climate catastrophe policies such as increasing the costs of energy to a point of unaffordability for many and limiting energy use so as to limit CO2 emission have not been included,
          The avoidable death toll has reached a point in where in the UK and Germany and even here in Australia according to the various community social working NGO’s, the avoidable deaths increases such as the 200 extra avoidable deaths per day in 2011 in the UK from cold and the lack of affordable energy for heating [ The Guardian ] , an avoidable death toll of the elderly which has been a feature of the past decade [ BBC 2001 ] of very cold winters in Europe, these many thousands of avoidable deaths have not been included in those Greenpeace policy inspired avoidable death numbers above.
          They are western deaths and additional to the already horrific death toll arising elsewhere from Greenpeace inspired policies and actions.

          Hundreds of millions of Greenpeace dollars have been poured into propaganda promoting the deliberate limiting of energy use and the promoting of making energy so costly so as to limit it’s use in a belief that this will control the emmissions of CO2 and therefore “save the planet” from a climate catastrophe.
          And the hell with the people!
          Which is what Patrick Moore is also saying about Greenpeace today .

          These Greenpeace and it’s many pseudo green, often tending violent front organisations inspired and promoted anti -human policies has led to that level of totally unacceptable and avoidable, many tens of thousands of avoidable deaths of the energy deprived, heat or eat, poorest and weakest and elderly in the UK and Germany and no doubt in many other countries that have swallowed the propaganda of Greenpeace and the other so called environmentalist organisations.

          Note I said “environmentalism” and “environmentalists” “, not “environmental” organisations.

          In many parts of the skeptic blogsphere, “Environmentalism” and “environmentalists” are now being classed as a near fanatical quasi religious / cult based anti - human belief system, a rather strong condemnation of “environmentalism” that is only recently starting to surface.

          Some now quite regular commentary is that “environmentalism” is no longer associated with any environmental causes but is basically an anti-human, sinning against nature obsessed, guilt based belief system with all the hall marks of a fanatical cult membership that is utterly incapable of seeing and recognising their own personal levels of total outright hypocrisy and bigotry against others who do not accede to their beliefs when their own salubrious life style and the comforts they enjoy are measured against the supposed strictures of the anti-human, totally unrealistic nirvana like natural, simple life promoting beliefs they so vehemently profess to believe in and promote and proclaim.

          30

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        This is the kind of activity that makes me understand that urge to kill. I can’t do it of course and wouldn’t even if I could. But I surely have the right to wish these people all the harm they will hopefully, someday get. They deserve to reap what they sow.

        If this shocks anyone I’m sorry to be so unapologetic about it. It’s time to stop being polite and politically correct and call them what they are, thugs, just as described by ROM.

        20

        • #
          ROM

          The JoNova caravan has moved onto other subjects but I decided to do some digging around on the role of the still hated by the anti human environmentalist cult, that supposedly notorious chemical , “dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane” otherwise known as DDT.

          There is no doubt that DDT being such a useful, effective, cheap and incredibly mammalian safe insecticide, attributes still unmatched by any other insecticides today despite DDT being first synthesised in 1877, was being used on a very large scale across crops and pastures in the 1950′s and 60′s
          [ My father used DDT himself via some of the first aerial spraying with converted Tiger Moths to spray for the pasture pest Red Legged Earth Mite in the early 1950's ]
          This would have invariably led to a wholesale resistance in pest insects such as the Malarial Mosquito developing very rapidly.

          All that was really neccesary to maintain DDT as an incredibly effective insecticide against the Malarial mosquite and other disease bearing insects and to minimise any effects on the holy environment would have been to completely ban the open field and open air agricultural spraying of DDT.

          For the effects of the DDT ban as promoted by the likes of the so called rather nasty Environmental Defense Fund who are now calling for the return of DDT spraying after some 40 or 50 million avoidable Malaria induced deaths, nearly all of small kids in Africa, due to their nefarious policies of the past plus the then new Greenpeace organisation and other so called environmental organisations in the 1960′s and early 1970′s there are a number of credible articles from WHO and other governmental sources.

          Links are given below if you would like the DDT story and how DDT is again being used in combination with other insecticides in the effort to reduce the death toll from Malaria .

          Well worth reading is this short Facts versus fears: DDT from the American Council on Science and Health.

          To quote from this article and see once again the devastation of humanity that occurs when so called scientists do some seriously bad science and then claim it has been proven that [ insert whatever baddy so called science has currently blaming or has blamed in the past '] to the environment or what ever, the case in point here being that the so called research of two scientist who later reversed and admitted their research had been bad cost some 40 million lives when the environmental organisations took it up as gospel and forced the banning of DDT.

          DDT became the prime target of the growing anti-chemical and anti-pesticide movements during the 1960s. Reasoned scientific discussion and sound data on the favorable human health effects of DDT were brushed aside by environmental alarmists who discounted DDT’s enormous benefits to world health with two allegations: (1) DDT was a carcinogen, and (2) it endangered the environment, particularly for certain birds.

          &

          In 1968 two researchers, Drs. Joseph J. Hickey and Daniel W. Anderson, reported that high concentrations of DDT were found in the eggs of wild raptor populations. The two concluded that increased eggshell fragility in peregrine falcons, bald eagles, and ospreys was due to DDT exposure.9 Dr. Joel Bitman and associates at the U.S. Department of Agriculture likewise determined that Japanese quail fed DDT produced eggs with thinner shells and lower calcium content.10

          In actuality, however, declines in bird populations either had occurred before DDT was present or had occured years after DDT’s use. A comparison of the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Counts between 1941 (pre-DDT) and 1960 (after DDT’s use had waned) reveals that at least 26 different kinds of birds became more numerous during those decades, the period of greatest DDT usage. The Audubon counts document an overall increase in birds seen per observer from 1941 to 1960, and statistical analyses of the Audubon data confirm the perceived increases. For example, only 197 bald eagles were documented in 194111; the number had increased to 891 in 1960.12

          At Hawk Mountain, Pennsylvania, teams of ornithologists made daily counts of migrating raptors for over 40 years. The counts—published annually by the Hawk Mountain Sanctuary Association—reveal great increases in most kinds of hawks during the DDT years. The osprey counts increased as follows: in 1946, 191; in 1956, 288; in 1967, 457; and in 1972, 630.13 In 1942 Dr. Joseph Hickey—who in 1968 would blame DDT for bird population decline—reported that 70 per-cent of the eastern osprey population had been killed by pole traps around fish hatcheries.14 That same year, before DDT came into use, Hickey noted a decline in the population of peregrine falcons.15

          Other observers also documented that the great peregrine decline in the eastern United States occurred long before any DDT was present in the environment.16,17 In Canada peregrines were observed to be “reproducing normally” in the 1960s even though their tissues contained 30 times more DDT than did the tissues of the midwestern peregrines allegedly being extirpated by the chemical.18 And in Great Britain, in 1969, a three-year government study noted that the decline of peregrine falcons in Britain had ended in 1966 even though DDT levels were as abundant as ever. The British study concluded that “There is no close correlation between the decline in population of predatory birds, particularly the peregrine falcon and the sparrow hawk, and the use of DDT.”

          &

          Conclusion

          The ban on DDT was considered the first major victory for the environmentalist movement in the U.S. The effect of the ban in other nations was less salutary, however. In Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) DDT spraying had reduced malaria cases from 2.8 million in 1948 to 17 in 1963. After spraying was stopped in 1964, malaria cases began to rise again and reached 2.5 million in 1969.
          The same pattern was repeated in many other tropical— and usually impoverished—regions of the world.
          In Zanzibar the prevalence of malaria among the populace dropped from 70 percent in 1958 to 5 percent in 1964.
          By 1984 it was back up to between 50 and 60 percent.
          The chief malaria expert for the U.S. Agency for International Development said that malaria would have been 98 percent eradicated had DDT continued to be used.

          In addition, from 1960 to 1974 WHO screened about 2,000 compounds for use as antimalarial insecticides. Only 30 were judged promising enough to warrant field trials. WHO found that none of those compounds had the persistence of DDT or was as safe as DDT. (Insecticides such as malathion and carbaryl, which are much more toxic than DDT, were used instead.) And—a very important factor for malaria control in less developed countries—all of the substitutes were considerably more expensive than DDT.

          Other links;
          WHO gives indoor use of DDT a clean bill of health for controlling malaria
          &
          The ultra green leftist “The Guardian” ; Banned pesticide backed for malaria control

          Science is credited with saving many hundreds of millions of lives but I am really starting to wonder just how many tens or hundreds of millions of human lives have been destroyed by incompetent scientists and their even worse, corrupted, improperly researched results that are passed off as peer reviewed science, a question and a view that I have never seen raised before anywhere and a challenge for science to answer truthfully if that is still possible amongst a large proportion of what passes for scientists and science today

          30

          • #
            ROM

            And another thought;

            Out of all the mistakes that science has made and the cost of tens or thousands of human lives that have resulted from those mistakes, the really big losses of human life running into the many tens of millions of deaths have arisen directly from botched and inadvertently or deliberately corrupted environmental so called peer reviewed science and the implementation of policies based on that badly corrupted climate and environmental science.

            Examples being the DDT story plus many other similar but smaller scale incidents and today the deliberate limitations and deliberately climate catastrophe based [ from climate model predictions but no observable data to support the climate models outcomes or the climate modellers claims ] policies which are supposedly to be the means that negate climate change and CO2 emissions by forcing the reduction in energy usage and therefore CO2 emissions by using, for many, no longer affordable prices for energy.

            The consequences being the truly distressing for anybody with a social conscience of any level which eliminates the climate catastrophists “heat or eat” consequences for the poor and the increase in avoidable winter death rates running into many tens of thousands and thats in the most developed nations let alone as to what is happening in other nations that have swallowed the green organisations and climate catastrophist’s claims.

            10

  • #
    pat

    he may have a Ph.D., but Cusumano – like most CAGW believers – has obviously not been taking note of Hansen’s nuclear advocacy over the years. hansen was calling for a “nuclear renaissance” in his 2009 book, “Storms of my Grandchildren”, yet even those who see him as a hero don’t appear to have bothered reading the book. MSM has helped to keep the faithful ignorant on Hansen’s position.

    however, at least HuffPo has found an outraged believer, which is more than i can say for ABC/SBS/Fairfax/Murdoch & the rest of our media, which either ignored IPPC’s endorsement of nuclear & fracking in their latest report or, conveniently ignored the report altogether (a welcome first for the MSM when it comes to IPCC pronouncements):

    25 April: Huffington Post: James A. Cusumano Ph.D.: Climate Change Advocate Goes Rogue!
    Dr. James Hansen, a leading world expert on climate change, has been my hero for more than a decade. But he now has brought me great disappointment. On Nov. 3, 2013, Dr. Hansen decided to support the construction of large numbers of nuclear plants as a way to save the day for climate change.
    Dr. Hansen, what in the world were you thinking?…
    1. Nuclear power has always required taxpayer subsidies as well as publicly financed indemnity in case of an accident. No nuclear plant anywhere has ever been completed on time and on budget. Overruns are most often huge, in the billions of dollars, and these costs are always placed on the shoulders of taxpayers through an increased electric power rate structure.
    Furthermore, taxpayers are never informed upfront that when the plant is decommissioned 30 years down the road, it is they or their children who will pay for this decommissioning with significant increased taxes. The costs are prohibitive due to the requirement to safely deconstruct a large facility contaminated by long-lived radioactive materials…
    Dr. Hansen, ask yourself this simple question:
    Wall Street investors who pounce on nearly any investment that will make even a modest return have never shown even the slightest interest in putting up their investment funds for a single nuclear plant, even so-called fourth-generation nuclear power you are supporting. Why is that?
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-a-cusumano-phd/climate-change-advocate-goes-rogue_b_5210317.html?utm_hp_ref=green

    re the ABC Big Ideas “Stranded Assets” program with Ben Caldecott/Jemma Green/John Hewson, which i linked to on a previous thread:

    at one point, Jemma does an anti-nuclear rant.

    Caldecott follows & quietly slips in mentions of fracking & “nuclear replacement” being necessary, but in such a way you would barely notice.

    10

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      1. Nuclear power has always required taxpayer subsidies as well as publicly financed indemnity in case of an accident. No nuclear plant anywhere has ever been completed on time and on budget. Overruns are most often huge, in the billions of dollars, and these costs are always placed on the shoulders of taxpayers through an increased electric power rate structure.
      Furthermore, taxpayers are never informed upfront that when the plant is decommissioned 30 years down the road, it is they or their children who will pay for this decommissioning with significant increased taxes. The costs are prohibitive due to the requirement to safely deconstruct a large facility contaminated by long-lived radioactive materials…

      Advocates have been telling us for years that nuclear is the cheapest power we could use. I guess they forget the upfront and back end costs and only see the rates at the meter — are they using rose colored glasses? But even the operation of the nuclear plant is more costly than conventional power plants. Just the security problem alone is more serious and more costly. But the cost is going to rise one way or another.

      So I would rather have conventional power plants. On the other hand, we aren’t getting the additional capacity we need for an ever more electricity dependent world. So I, who once was opposed to nuclear, am now an advocate. If that puts me in the company of James Hansen — and you all know what I think of him — then I say, good for him.

      Some of the problems can be mitigated by better management and it’s now possible to build reactors using fuel that can essentially be recycled. I reject the argument that those reactors can lead to even more nuclear bomb proliferation because it’s happening anyway, right in front of our eyes and in spite of efforts to prevent it. If we need to return to the cold war stance that relied on mutually assured annihilation then so be it. No one can argue that such a policy didn’t work. I would prefer to think that good judgment prevails in the right places instead of fear. But if it takes fear, then yes, so be it.

      Oh boy, will this be controversial.

      00

  • #
    pat

    feeling stupid…on Slate, no less:

    24 April: Slate: Future Tense: Daniel Sarewitz: It’s the End of the World as We Prefer It, and I Feel … Stupid
    (Daniel Sarewitz co-directs the Consortium for Science, Policy, and Outcomes and is professor of science and society at Arizona State University. Future Tense is a partnership of Slate, New America, and Arizona State University.)
    That’s right: Millions will die; still more will be displaced; nations and economies will teeter at the edge of disaster as populist demagogues rise, regional stabilities are tested, and environmental despoliation expands.
    Judging by the attention it’s getting on the various scientist and environmental listservs that find their way into my inbox, the recent New York Times Magazine profile of the writer and environmental activist Paul Kingsnorth has hit a highly resonant chord. Having accepted that (as the REM song goes, and the article is titled) “It’s the end of the world as we know it,” Kingsnorth is retreating to “rural Ireland” to wait out the coming climate-change-induced collapse of civilization, teach his children the skills necessary to survive without a supermarket, and enjoy good wine. It sounds lovely, actually—I wish I had the courage to do something like that…
    Of course, even if the climate change apocalypse that Kingsnorth accepts as inevitable magically failed to materialize, every one of my dire predictions would still be likely to come true. Climate change, added on top of all the other causes of these problems, will often make things worse. But for the most part there will be no way to tell which ones are worse than they would have been anyway, or how much worse they have become. So it’s not that apocalyptic fears about climate change are utterly fantastic—climate change may well exacerbate a range of serious and potentially even disastrous problems—it’s that the monomaniacal, apocalyptic version of climate change gives us a picture of the world that is so incomplete that it’s much worse than simply wrong. Worse because, just like religious and political orthodoxy, it cannot be falsified…
    The real problem is not the few Kingsnorth’s who actually have the mettle to drop out; it’s the hysterics that they leave behind who insist, often in the name of science, that all the suffering to come will have only one true cause, and that redemption can be achieved only by following one true path. No matter that long and sad human experience teaches us where such absolute orthodoxies lead. Indeed, with climate change being blamed for almost everything these days, the one phenomenon that seems to have escaped the notice of scientists, environmentalists and the media alike is that, perhaps above all, climate change is making us stupid. http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/04/24/paul_kingsnorth_and_predictions_of_a_climate_change_apocalypse.html

    20

  • #
    handjive

    As our hostess often allows, going o/t …

    One for the Anzacs from Larry Pickering’s site:

    THE ANZAC ON THE WALL

    Sure to be a classic.

    10

    • #
      handjive

      *
      poem Via a commentator @ pointman.

      GET REAL, GET ORGANISED AND FINISH IT

      10

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        I posed the question to Pointman: There needs to be someone taking the leadership role. Will you do it?

        10

    • #

      handjive,

      thank you for posting that link.

      Best thing I’ve read in ages.

      Funny how for Australia, The Great War was sort of bookended by two actions against the Turks.

      That Light Horse Charge at Beersheba ranks up there with Balaklava. That charge at Beersheba was the last great horse charge in history and also has a place in history as the fastest pursuit in Military History.

      It’s well worth reading, and here is the link for that great charge.

      General Harry Chauvel was the main planner for that, and odd, isn’t it, how two Australian Generals were so instrumental in that War.

      The other was John Monash, who was actually instrumental in ending the War earlier than was expected. His story is one of the most amazing military stories you could read and if you can, get hold of the book by Roland Perry on Monash.

      After all those years of stalemate in France/Belgium, Monash was tasked with the planning for The Battle of Hamel, and was meticulous in his planning. The battle was planned for the morning of 4th July 1918, significant, and specifically chosen by Monash because it was the first time Americans came under the control of a non U.S. leader, here a small force under Monash.

      The battle was over in 93 minutes, which was actually 3 minutes longer than Monash planned, an astounding result considering the British Generals had Battles that lasted Months and didn’t achieve the result Monash got in an hour and a half. From that point forward, Monash was given more control and with each battle, his force got bigger and bigger, as he drove the Germans back. At the end, he had 210,000 Australian men under his control, and added to that, 50,000 U.S. troops also under his control.

      Montgomery said Monash was the best General in the First Great War.

      The book has much more detail, but I have a condensed version in the Post at this link.

      Tony.

      30

      • #
        jorgekafkazar

        Interesting, but Monash’s success may have been partially (or even mostly) due to scarcity of German food and munitions. Timing, in other words. The naval blockade continued the starvation, in violation of International Law, until Germany signed the disastrous Treaty of Versailles. The result was WWII. Hitler thought he was perfectly justified in what he did, a Messiah, just like most warmists today.

        You’ve read “Now It Can Be Told,” regarding all the other British military successes of WWI?

        /s

        10

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Good reading. Thank you for posting it.

      00

  • #
    pat

    24 April: AFP: Shaun Tanden: Bollywood called to arms against climate change
    TAMPA, USA – Bollywood’s glitterati on Thursday heard an appeal to use their star power to fight climate change as they opened their first awards ceremony in the United States.
    Bringing a somber note in the midst of Bollywood’s trademark festive dancing, Rajendra Pachauri, the Indian scientist who leads the Nobel Prize-winning UN climate panel, took the stage in Tampa, Florida, to urge stars to channel their influence for the planet.
    “We are all residents of spaceship Earth and anything we do – anything that happens on that spaceship – has implications for everybody else,” said Pachauri, who was invited to Bollywood’s annual awards extravaganza as a special guest.
    “What I would like to urge all the stars who are here is to see that they associate themselves with the larger problems that humanity, and all living species of the world, face,” he told Bollywood celebrities assembled in a heavily air conditioned hotel ballroom…
    Pachauri said that he spoke before the Bollywood ceremony to Florida Governor Rick Scott, a Republican who has expressed doubt about the science on climate change, and told him that the coastal state was “particularly vulnerable.”…
    http://news.yahoo.com/bollywood-called-arms-against-climate-change-232426279.html

    not going down too well in the comments…

    00

  • #
    Neville

    Good to see Jo Nova highlighting the ridicule suffered by the German govt over its extreme waste of 100 billion $ on clueless green energy schemes. And ditto the rest of the EU as well.

    Of course zip change to climate or co2 levels or temp by 2100 or for thousands of years. Just refer to the latest RS and NAS report.

    Why doesn’t anybody want to tackle this CAGW mitigation fraud head on? It took Mark Markopolos just five minutes to discover the Madoff ponzi scheme but nobody would listen. You see the numbers just wouldn’t add up. But it would take another 9 years before Madoff was arrested and charged. He is now serving 159 years in prison for his fraud.

    This super dooper ponzi mitigation fraud is actually FINANCED and PROMOTED by nearly every major govt on the planet and yet can only deliver a zero return on the investment for thousands of years. Yet everyone dives for cover and won’t even discuss these obviously fraudulent practices. Why is that?

    10

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      We certainly discuss them here. The problem is that the people who need to wake up don’t read joannenova and the other blogs that discuss the problem. Their nightly TV news doesn’t expose it. Their elected officials for the most part don’t expose it. So the people fall prey to the oldest fraud in the book, say it often enough and it becomes true.

      10

  • #
    john robertson

    Thanks Jo, I laughed out loud.
    Sure wish satire was not dead here in North America.
    Neville @ 10:54.
    I agree equal justice for Bernie Madoff.
    Bet the kleptocracy ain’t buying into that.

    10

  • #
    Owen Morgan

    Never mind German solar panels. There’s a village in southern Scotland (where the sun is pretty much a creature from mythology), that I know, where a farm is absolutely festooned in solar panels, hoovering in subsidies, no doubt, but creating about enough power to keep a 5W light bulb going.

    40

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Owen,

      Sounds like par for the course. Even where there’s better sun exposure they put these panels in facing every way but directly toward the sun. They do get something out of them but nothing like the best performance you would want if you were serious about it.

      It’s like some surreal game. I’ve got to have solar panels but what the heck do I care about how well they perform? It’s being there that counts apparently.

      10

  • #
    sherlock1

    German humour – well, there’s a surprise..! I thought that occupied a very SLIM volume like the Jewish Book of Gifts..
    (The best bit was where the guy in the smock implored everyone to take the crucifix off their walls and put a little wind turbine in its place..!)
    Anyway – where is Spitting Image in the UK when you need it..?

    10

  • #
    sherlock1

    Our Energy Minister in the UK, one Michael Fallon, let slip a little gem recently about wind turbines – he said that we now had ‘more than enough to meet our EU 2020 targets…’
    Read into THAT whatever you like…

    10

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    For the record, I worked with nuclear matters from age 29 when I bought a fast neutron generator for what would now cost a half million $.
    Anyone who parrots anti nuclear electricity production has been duped by propaganda. There is no impediment to expansion.
    Please, do some reading about France, if you can pick the gold from the dross on the Net.

    10