We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Oh he’s much worse than Hitler The Mayor of London (and you cannot begin to imagine how ashamed I am to have to type those words) Ken Livingstone is making a play for the Moonbat Demographic: [From the UK Times]
But the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, branded Mr Bush as “the greatest threat to life on this planet” whose policies will “doom us to extinction”.
Obviously the ‘global warming’ schtick has played itself out.
The mayor also said that he did not recognise Mr Bush as a lawful president and he condemned America’s rapacious capitalist agenda.
Those protestors are wasting their time. The President of the USA will not be in London this week. Just some guy from Texas.
Poor old ‘Red Ken’ must have been provoked into this outburst by the unbearable thought of those steel tariffs.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Can’t understand how a guy like this one can become a Mayor of London – of all places! You should promptly expel him to France (or Cuba?)
Well I don’t recognise Ken Livingstone as a lawful mayor of London either and I condemn his rapacious socialist agenda.
From what Brian says below it doesn’t sound much to me like Bush’s agenda, such as it is, has anything much to do with capitalism though, rapacious or otherwise.
Don’t be silly. Ken’s horrid, but he’s not worse than Hitler–or even than the average cabinet minister. 🙂
Since when is it the job of the mayor of London or anywhere to decide who’s a lawful head of state ? And why should we care what a mayor thinks of America’s agenda, as perceived by himself ?
Isn’t he busy enough running London ?
As far as “dooming us to extinction”, who’s us ? If he’s referring to his fellow leftists, I say amen to that.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again; Ken is a loon. I don’t mean that as an insult either, I mean it medically speaking. Absolutely mad hatter crazy. Loony tunes. Zong!
Forgive the typo. I obviously meant the noise to be Zoing!
Perhaps Red Ken should insist on the presidential motorcades paying his congestion charge.
By the way, has all that revenue fixed the tube yet?
You know, a normal, rational person would be embarrased to spout shit like this. I think that says all we need to know about “Red” Ken. Just keep marginalizing yourselves, leftists. You are making it so we don’t have to do anything to discredit you. Keep up the good work.
Seriously people here don’t take global warming seriously… but it seem to be a reality… Naturaly you sure all know a research saying it’s not true but damn, the vast majority of scientists says it’s highly propable. To trust a research because it tell you what you want to hear is irresponsable… I think a lot of the scientist who says it’s false at 100% are simply saying that to please people and make $$$ (seriously, a scientific theory is like anything else, if there is a very strong demand to produce a theory saying there is no global warming, trust me someone will produce one!… it’s the same thing with a LOT of theories, like the racists one or those who said mens and womens are pretty much identical)
No, the point isn’t that were all going to die… but many will in certain countries in the world if it’s true(highly propable)…
To loose some job is a sad thing but damn, to kill people is simply immoral… actually it’s not me whos going to suffer from that, in Quebec it would be pretty nice if it was to be a bit warmer… but for those in India? They are already dying there because it’s too hot….(humm, makes me think about France =)… you sure don’t want your beloved french buds to die, won’t you =P )
I don’t know whether that falls under trolling, utterly off-topic, or complete incoherence…but I’ll make a leap of faith and assume he’s honest. Ghaleon, the question is not so much whether global warming is occuring (although thats still VERY contentous) but what the source is. As you seem to think, and as most environmentalists would have everyone believe, that the raise in temperatures is caused by anthropogenic causes, has yet to be verified by practically any emperical data. Most of their “hard” data comes from projecting slope lines of graphs on current temperature trends, or else examples that are little better than local anecdotes.
For instance, back when I was taking an astronomy course, it was noted that since data started being gathered about a century ago from observatories, global rises in temperature have consistantly coincided with the “snapping” of the suns magnetic field lines every 22 years (11 years per half-cycle) and the subsequent increase in solar radiation. Then theres the usual (and never explained-away) argument that even if humans were to INTENTIONALLY start producing a large amount more of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, we could never hope to equal the output of even a single volcanic explosion.
Also, as to your claim that scientists will make up data to assist governmental or corporate sponsors, that is by and large bullshit. By necessity all scientific work is peer reviewed, which means if some scientist on the dole of an energy company for example, were to fabricate or fudge data to get indicators he wanted, it would never fly outside his conspirators in the company. After all, just as many suspicious or downright hostile scientists will be reviewing their data as those who are sympathetic or neutral. At best, they could make some *offshoot* school of thought, which if they couldn’t come up with good data quickly would fast gain a reputation as a bunch of worthless quacks.
Oh yeah, and far be it for me to dredge up moral equivalence, but how is alot of people dying from cold in northern latitudes all that very different than people dying from the heat in equatorial areas?
John Jo – But zong was good.
Theodopolous – Oh, pulleeeze, you are so behind! Red Ken has already said the President of the United States and his motorcade can’t get into central London without paying the congestion charges.
He hasn’t said how he’s going to stop them, but I’m sure there will be major grandstanding for the cameras of the tabloids and the BBC, which will show it with glee.
Ken Livingstone is, like Stop The War, Not In Our Name, ANSWER and all the others, a raving Marxist. What I find interesting is, the Marxists, no matter their apparent discredit, are still around and have enough money to fund this lunacy.
Yay for Pres Bush! People have been asking for more bobbies on patrol for years. Now Mr Bush is here we finally have them. He can stay at my house when her maj has got fed up with him.
I find it curious, in some sense, that the topic of global warming continues to cause strife. Clearly it’s found a sympathetic ear in those individuals who have an agendal, regardless of the scientific arguments over whether it exists or not.
I have some interest in the topic myself, as an engineer and researcher, but I know enough about meteorology that I realize how difficult it is to determine when a trend is in a dataset and when it is not, particularly when the data are so noisy (variable). So, it was with great interest that I read a paper, recently, in which the researchers reviewed the principal dataset that climate researchers use to try to ascertain whether global warming can be detected.
For those interested, the paper is available here.
Well, actually, incentives are also what produces most of the research that supports global warming theories. If governments are willing to give big grants and huge budgets to scientists researching global warming, you will see a lot of scientists to flow to the field. Others will cash in on the fad by writing the usual gloom and doom books. Science is unfortunately no different from may closed organizations in this respect : going against the grain is a career-limiting move, as was displayed by the many scientists who chose to support Bjorn Lomborg in Science and other magazines, but under anonymity, lest their position prejudice future grants. Which is not consistent with the notion of independent science. Which doesn’t exist anymore than impartial politicians. And which is why government-sponsored science is generally a conformistic abomination.
As for global warming, the usual suspects will milk it and move on to the next thing. In the late 70s, it was the coming Ice Age (no joke). Then the Amazon, the ozone layer, and now this one. Of course, each and every one of these problems had to be addressed now at great costs, with promises of great damnation for our sins if we didn’t.
This too, shall pass.
I think John Malkovich should add Ken Livingstone to his hit list. In fact, I say the order should be as follows: Fisk, Livingstone, Galloway.
Hmmm, S.A. Tough call. For sheer meanness of spirit, I may put Livingstone at the head of the list, but then, that would mean displacing Fisk …. oh.
“Planet.
Schmanet.
Janet.”
As Londoner living in Kenny’s socialist utopia, I am all for putting Kenny ahead of Georgie Galloway and Bobbie Fisky in the hit list.
For Kenny’s election to London Mayor, hey – people voted Adolf Hitler into power too. Thank god London Mayor’s got dick all power though.
Mob intelligence always goes down to the lowest common denominator…
First of all my, my argument about govt and corporation sponsor isn’t bullshit at all… it’s a reality, scientist are very more often interested in making $$$ or fame then discovering anything… Galineau is also right but the point is that both side are as interested that his idea prevail and both side is ready to put a lot of $$$ in play but most scientist end up in the global warming caused by human activity side, that might have a certain signification…
Scientific theory are like anything else really, if there is a demand there always someone to produce one… it’s not a plot theory, simply a reality… look at the amazing number of stupid and ridiculous theories that are created every years… Just think WWII and the nazis theory, youll understand… or sociological theory made to please the left, psychological theory made to please racists etc…
The point is not only that temperature is rising, its that it is doing so at a higher speed that it ever happened in history…
Here my hidden agenda: I don’t want to cause the death of anyone, directly or indirectly, exept for my self defence or the defence of someone else…
Action have been made to stop the ozone layer….
Finally, the difference with people dying from cold in northern latitudes …
1-We don’t cause cold…
2-Nothern latitudes are infinitly less populated
Northern latitudes are infinitely less populated because they’re cold. Warm ’em up, and it’s off to the races (not that we could do that, you understand).
Still, I am glad we stopped that pesky ozone layer.
Ghaleon, the assertion that temperatures are rising “faster than at any time in history” is not proven. It is based on assumptions, incomplete data series and extrapolation. Remember that Europe was once covered by half a mile of ice. And there were no cars spewing greenhouse gases to make it all melt yet it did.
And even if it was the fastest known to us, that still doesn’t prove in and of itself that we are responsible, or that it will keep going on ad infinitum until we tax ourselves to death and otherwise expiate our capitalist sins on some altar of environmental regulation.
I believe R.C. Dean linked to this recently : http://www.multi-science.co.uk/ee_openaccess.htm. Check it out.
Bjorn Lomborg’s Skeptical Environmentalist is also a good source of information on the debate the environmental crowd does not want to have.