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]
|
There are no problems, only opportunities The travails of Greenpeace continue to entertain.
If ever John Vidal tires of being the Guardian‘s Environment editor, he will be well placed to audition for the role of David Brent. How about this for an attempt to see the silver lining behind a very dark cloud: “Greenpeace’s £3m gamble could yet reap dividends in the fight against climate change”. What? How? Oh yes, of course:
If it only costs £3m for Greenpeace to prove to the world that speculation on risky markets to raise money is madness, then it may be money well spent.
O-Kaaay.
Meanwhile, and though I often mock the Guardian I must concede that it has diligently reported all this, it has also emerged that in an effort to prove to the world that the question “What kind of compromises do you make in your efforts to try to make the world a better place?” can be a bit of a toughie for a sought-after young Third Sector exec with a work-life balance to maintain, Greenpeace’s International Programme Director has over the last couple of years been flying from home to work several times a month.
|
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.
|
So not then. Insert P.T.Barnum quote here.
I know I’m just a dumb redneck Bogan but how does 400 parts in million of CO2 in the atmosphere turn it into a thermal blanket? and,
Today winter although slow in arriving is here and it’s effing cold with heavy snowfalls in the alpine regions and likely to continue.
Greenpeace in the speculation business?
Oh, just like college endowments, or “trust funds”?
Except colleges, and trust funds, generally aren’t shackled to “environmental”, or “humanitarian”, swindle “investments”, nor “reckless speculation” on magic beans.
There’s evidence that they actually “invested” the cash, instead of simply saying they did, and now it’s…um…been “lost”, RIGHT? Commune, People’s Party (by any other name), and cult “religious leaders”, have all been known to live inexplicably plush lifestyles.
“how does 400 parts in million of CO2 in the atmosphere turn it into a thermal blanket?”
In itself, it doesn’t. But there’s supposed to be a positive feedback effect. Water vapour is a much more powerful “greenhouse gas” than carbon dioxide. It’s by far the biggest contributor to the Earth’s greenhouse effect. So the idea is that a little CO2 makes it a tiny bit warmer, which, supposedly, makes the atmosphere wetter and, supposedly, makes it even warmer. Which, supposedly, makes it wetter.. and so on. They call it “positive forcing”.
Except it doesn’t seem to be happening that way. A quarter of all human CO2 emissions have occured during the 15 year “pause” (despite all the efforts at limitation). Maybe there’s some kind of “negative forcing” going on that nobody’s paying any attention to, or maybe this theory is just flat wrong. But the science is settled.
Sam,
‘maybe this theory is just flat wrong. But the science is settled’ and these are educated people in universities?
From New York to Paris? London to Tokyo? Sydney to Singapore?
No. Luxembourg to Amsterdam, a 4-5 hour drive.
The shame of it all is that it was only £3m. Chump change. Just think what a valuable lesion would have been provided by losing £30m. Or £300m. Such a pity.
Wander over to Spiegel for profile of Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace’s International Executive Director, career causes person, under whose watch this happened. He hasn’t even told the membership that Greenpeace is about social justice now, rather than the environment. He wants to extend to poor countries the joys of expensive unreliable energy.
Ah the Guardian – a newspaper that denounces tax havens, which is owned by a trust based in a tax haven.
If it only costs $91.4B for California to prove to the world that building high speed railways is madness, then it may be money well spent.
Except it didn’t prove anything to, for instance, David Cameron.
A fool and his money are soon parted goes the ancient saw, but a high minded individual with a savior complex and lots of other people’s money…
Luxembourg to Amsterdam, a 4-5 hour drive.
Or about the same time by high speed train. There is no direct service, so the poor chap would have to change trains in Brussels. The horror of inflicting such a thing upon him…..
High speed trains don’t make many stops otherwise they wouldn’t be high speed trains.
Regional: Well, indeed. There’s quite clearly something wrong with the positive forcing theory- or at least the idea that it’s the only game in town – because the global average temperature is steadfastly refusing to follow the predictions made with it. Yet the Scientists™ will not countenance any dissent.