The Telegraph is weird. It has Booker and Delingpole raining curses down upon the whole climate science watermelon scam. But elsewhere on its plantation it has someone or something called “mytelegraph” saying things like this:
Scientists have called for Second World War-style rationing in rich countries to bring down carbon emissions, as world leaders meet in Cancun for the latest round of talks on climate change.
Do you agree that rationing is the best solution? Should governments be investing more in green technologies? Is there any point in agreeing carbon limits if some countries opt out?
What should leaders be trying to agree?
My thanks to “bravo” (who commented on Delingpole’s latest posting) for alerting me to this absurdity, and for in particular recommending that we all look at the comments on it.
Such as this:
They should agree how lucky they are to have such a fine old time on taxpayer money, then go home and get real jobs.
Or this:
Not to meet again?
To throw in the towel?
To admit they’ve being rumbled and now the greatest scientific scam of all time is collapsing faster than anyone could have predicted?
Or this:
Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Those being a few of the shorter ones. Many are longer. Many are far more abusive.
There is not one comment among the fifty odd that have so far accumulated that make suggestions of the sort that “mytelegraph” seems to have wanted.
On this particular matter at least, the best are now full of passionate intensity, while the worst now lack all conviction. It’s all over bar the defunding. In other words it is not all over by any means. It will take decades for the world to recover from this scam and clean up all the mess it has caused. But totally winning the mere argument is a necessary and excellent start.
Cancun, eh? Why don’t they convene in Gaza instead?
Ah – THAT’s why it’s snowing.
I though Al Gore must be in town.
Caution Brian, you might be looking under the street lamp for your car keys.
An equally valid intepretation would be that the last few denialist nutters are clustering in the few places they can still speak, while the winners have given up arguing because they don’t need to any more.
There is a period in Christian history in which Christian philosophers argued fiercely with Pagan philosophers, but then the arguing stops- because Christianity was triumphant and beating Pagan arguments didn’t matter any more. We are quite possibly living through the same kind of history, in which a religious faith which started on the margins and was denounced as ridiculous and dangerous gradually overwhelms the powerful classes and becomes entirely triumphant.
In that parallel, we are the last few pagani complaining to deaf ears about our shrines being torn down, while the winners ignore us as they getting on with the important business of raising their churches.
I don’t necessarily see this either as evidence victory or as letting the defeated bleat all they like, as in the scenario described in Ian B’s comment of 10:10. It looks to me simply as an illustration of how quickly a virtual crowd can gather on the internet.
Significant or not, I did enjoy the thing off Twitter from someone called aphofer: “You first. Walk back to Oxford.”
You must choose your company very carefully if you’ve become convinced that an argument has been won.
EXCUSE ME!!!
REALITY INTRUSION ALERT!!!!
Australia had it’s 3rd hottest year on record, going back over a century!
Greece has a very warm winter ahead.
The Arctic pole is still threadbare.
Something IS causing our climate to heat up, worldwide. My concern has mainly been that the Green policies need authoritarian governments to direct nations- but I have always thought that we should do what we can, individually! Whilst I thought climategate showed that some scientists have behaved badly, i never thought it discredited all the results. As I live in Australia, a country that is heating up, I have a vested interest in trying to cool things down. If it happens, I’ll let you know.
(And wasn’t Alisa pointing out that Israel is hot right now?)
A staple of fiction has always been the Mad Scientist, with his (I can’t remember any who were female) dreams of world domination. Perhaps the ones currently in Cancún are real Mad Scientists, with dreams of world domination using their Ultimate weapon: AGW.
It is called the Sun. Heating things up on Mars too.
Oh god, something is warming the planet? According to Phil Jones, he of climategate, there hasn’t been any significant warming. And even if there has, it’s quite remarkable that so called rational people can decide on the basis of a 30 year blip among the millenia of climate change to basically ditch the modern economy and hand control of our lives over to a cadre of myopic bureaucrats.
The science of climate was erased by the ideology of petty authoritarianism and quasi religious hysteria a long time ago.
It’s difficult to fight this argument if, like me, you keep getting banned for bringing it up on blogs or newspapers just refuse to publish. Variation of tactics…
Ironic. The rationing in WW II was in an effort to fight the unchecked growth of the state, and here we have people advocating rationing in the service of unchecked growth of the state.
Well, I suppose as long as they get too stingy with my Victory Gin rations I’ll be able to muddle through the dark, cold winters. I wonder if his highness will be doing the same.
Although I can’t understand which side of the climate debate Ian B is coming from he makes an excellent point by drawing comparison between the clash of opposing ideologies in Christianity vs paganism and AGW vs human progress.
I would agree that the environmentalists “have given up arguing because they don’t need to any more.” Not because they have won a convincing argument but because they have the coercion of the state on their side.
“Christian philosophers argued fiercely with Pagan philosophers, but then the arguing stops- because Christianity was triumphant and beating Pagan arguments didn’t matter any more.”
What was the balance between reasoned religious argument (if there can be such a thing) and violent coercion in the domination of Christianity over the pagans? Were the pagans convinced by argument or coerced by force? Beating pagan arguments didn’t matter because Christianity was violently triumphant.
“…gradually overwhelms the powerful classes and becomes entirely triumphant” The domination of Christianity over paganism was not the bottom up process this comment seems to suggest. There was no mass of Christians peacefully convincing their pagan rulers to convert, rather the rulers violently suppressed majority paganism.
“In that parallel, we are the last few pagani complaining to deaf ears about our shrines being torn down, while the winners ignore us as they get on with the important business of raising their churches.”
This, like the first two quotes, seems more accurate. There was no scientific debate – the shrines were “torn” down.
Ian B does highlight perhaps the most important parallel between these two struggles for hegemonic domination – the “business” of raising churches. Churches make money for their owners who sell lies and now in our contemporaneous experience Environmentalists push evermore for carbon taxes.
I am probably misconstruing Ian B’s point however on the broader debate I still disagree that there has been any victorious argument convincing me to pay higher fuel/energy bills, ever greater taxes and accept further economic limits on movement. I would contest that this is merely yet another grab for power and money by coercion – a win for the new face of authoritarianism.
The Telegraph is a mixed bag, but I guess that shows an admirable variety of points of view. I think it is good that sheer, barefaced authortarianism of some AGW alarmists is put on display like this, with all these references to WW2, etc.
A lot of big government folk seem to enjoy references to total war as a sort of model. Krugman, of course, has asserted that the Great Depression was ended thanks to WW2. I never realised that the atomic bomb is now a symbol of Keynesian economics. I am sure the Japanese construction industry felt duly grateful for that example of Keynes’ “dig a hole and fill it up again” multiplier effect.
will,
With the greatesrt respect to yourself they don’t care about convincing you. Recall a few years ago it was decided by fiat that “the science is settled”. Essentially they have or feel they have won that one so it is now time to implement. The fact that you are not convinced, I am not convinced doesn’t matter because they are in charge. Essentially we are the children and they the parents and we are going to eat our greens whether we bally well like it or not. I think essentially (presumptious – I know) that was what Ian B was getting at. They don’t feel the need to convince the peasantry because we are peasantry and that means we don’t get a say. To expect otherwise is expect a medieval Pope to consult with the serfs as to whether another Crusade was called for. Do you think, all other things being equal, Comrade Kim in jolly NorKland gives a rat’s ass whether or not his slaves want to do 13 years compulsory military service? Or would rather have food than nukes? Note especially here the war metaphor which is unbelievably useful to the ruling classes to control damn near everything.
Some of you are commenting that it is hot where you are. can I just say that it is not hot everywhere. Here in the UK it has been snowing every day for over a week. In my fifty years of life I have never seen so much snow. It normally snows for a day or two, hangs around for a day or two and then melts. the only time it ever gets deep is when the wind causes drifting. At work the carpark was becoming unusable so on Thursday a gang of us went out with shovels and cleared it. Last night another foot came down and we are back to square one.
will,
Don’t take too much notice of Ian B regarding Christianity.
He seems to find the concept of an actual encounter with God through the person of the Lord Jesus to be anathema.
It is a question of getting beyond the satanic deceptions.
As that will not happen I guess we can expect the world to get hotter/colder, or whatever happens, and a lot more crooked.
The crooks/conmen will take whatever comes and use that to what they perceive as advantage. At the moment it’s global warming.
As a current example of the normality and acceptability of crookedness I don’t think one has to look much further than FIFA or the EU. It’s just the normal way it works.
It is about control and if the global warming agenda falls apart I am sure they will find another one.
Western civilisation is being taken down and the assets transferred to less accountable environments:
Stonyground, I think that’s the unusual thing about the snow. It’s not the snow itself so much, as the hanging around thing. We had an inch here 3 days ago and it’s still on the ground. You just don’t get that in Britain, normally.
John B, my comment wasn’t about whether or not Christianity is valid. It was a purely historical observation of how a despised outsider cult became hegemonic and ultimately compulsory. It’s a matter of historical parallels, not particular validity. Just 40 years ago, greenism, like most of the PC suite, was considered the preserve of a few cranks. Now these things are compelled by state force, and beyond question in “polite society”. It’s an interesting process.
Yes, Ian B. Apologies.
There are indeed other parallels with your historical example.
The way the crooked establishment came in and took over a completely contrary message and experience to the one they wanted to further, that was based on realities other than the ones they wanted to partake of, and used it to further their own short term political agenda and greed.
The way politicians whose true concerns seem to be more about personal advancement than great, noble goals, have moved in on a genuine concern for well being and turned it into an exploitative, rip off scenario.
Thanks John.
One of the central planks of Protestantism was the idea that the Church as it was was not consistent with God’s plan and was instead a corruption of it, so that’s why I don’t think that criticising the Church is the same a criticising the faith. One interesting parallel I’ve seen drawn is how carbon credits resemble the corrupt practise of selling indulgences.
“Go ahead and sin, just so long as you pay us some money for permission”.
And the ‘indulgences’ they sell won’t even help, whatever the problem.
However. If the aim of the Climate Change agenda is to establish a weak, effete attitude, a lack of robust concern for the truth, and rather being acceptably correct, then I guess, if it is primarily about control and the personal enrichment of ‘the elite’, it is succeeding.
They would seem to have the highest energy consuming lifestyles while they work out how to beat down that enjoyed by Joe Average in the West. Including his free spirit.
‘Nuke’ Gray: That was for comic relief wasn’t it?
It is early summer in SE Queensland and quite cool. Brisbane just had its first November on record where the temperature didn’t get to 30deg C.
The Australian(and rest of world) official temperature records have been folded, spindled and mutilated beyond recognition. Spend some time over at Jo Nova or WUWT and CA.
Climategate proved that the “scientists” involved were 3rd rate at best and a pack of liars and manipulators not to be believed about anything.
What we now have is minor climate noise during an interglacial(not as warm as during the Holocene Optimum).
“Climate change” will be when we re-enter a glacial period.
Regarding the real agenda:
(Link)
Thanks for the link, John – this needs to be spread.
I should have mentioned that it was through a link in this article at Pajamas Media that I came across it.
A lot of somewhat conspiracy (but it seems to be that which makes the most sense, Occam’s razor and all) stuff in the article:
(Link)
It would seem that the Canadian Government under Stephen Harper has decided not to re-fund the major source of funding for the climate warming/changing “research” programs . I believe they have now run out of funds and the government is in the process of binning it.
Johnathan, your reference to Krugman reminded me of a column he recently wrote extolling the Canadian banking system. It elicited this from a Canadian. After pointing out that Krugman’s description was similar to describing a chicken by its feathers and making no reference to its body, the writer then said that the “two most dangerous persons in the the world were a hooker with a chipped tooth and an economist with an idea”.
Mike, no, it was not comic relief, but genuine news. Australia, as a whole, has had some very hot years. Your corner of Queensland may not be as adversely affected, but that’s your local good luck!
As a responsible libertarian, I would like to improve the world if I can, because all these recent medical advances mean I’m going to be here for a long time.
“… two most dangerous persons in the the world were a hooker with a chipped tooth and an economist with an idea”.
Now that’s my quote of the day!