Whale deal falls: but who wins?
From the International Whaling Commission's annual meeting in Agadir, Morocco:
It had always seemed unlikely that a bridge could be built across this particular stretch of troubled water and so it has transpired.
In the end, after two years of formal talks and almost 30 private sessions crammed into the opening two days here, governments proved unable or unwilling to leap across the divide between those that see whales as a natural living resource to be harvested sustainably and those that see them as special, intelligent creatures that should be completely protected from harpooning.
The main stumbling block was what happened to Japan's annual whaling programme in the Antarctic, which is conducted under regulations permitting the catching of whales for scientific research in what has been declared a whale sanctuary.
Those two features of the programme illustrate perfectly why it's the undisputed bete noire of the conservation movement and the primary target of anti-whaling governments.
Yet as things stand, they're powerless to stop it; Japan says the sanctuary itself has no scientific validity, and that scientific whaling is perfectly legal.
Many activists are very excited by Australia's forthcoming legal challenge in the International Court of Justice, but lawyers I've spoken to are not, believing it has little chance of success and will in any case take about seven years to follow through.
The inability to enforce their will is the main reason why anti-whaling governments came to the negotiating table.
Japan was prepared to curtail the hunt from its current annual maximum quota of 935 minke whales and 50 fins down to a few hundred minkes - perhaps 200 in 10 years' time - and to five fins, which many believed could easily be negotiated away.
But accepting that Japan could indulge in an annual Antarctic hunt of several hundred whales proved too much for anti-whaling governments to stomach. With Japan unwilling to go further, the deal was dead.
There were other points of contention as well, but that was the big one.
What no-one knows is where we go from here. People are talking about a "cooling-off period" while governments decide what to do - but, to all intents and purposes, the "peace process" appears fatally harpooned.
Sir Geoffrey Palmer, the former New Zealand prime minister who has played a leading role in the diplomatic dance, will move on to other matters; Chilean IWC chairman Cristian Maquieira - another experienced diplomat - may not be permitted to remain in post, as his government frets about its image on the issue. The US is unlikely to remain as deeply in the game.
Without their leadership, there is no process.
Reactions from environmental activists have been mixed, and sometimes emotional. I was told of a heartfelt exchange between two former Greenpeace activists. One applauded the outcome. He thinks Australia will win its court case against Japan, and then impose trade sanctions that will force a stop to whaling.
The other counted the difference between the number of whales that Japan will now target each year in the Antarctic - a maximum of 935 minkes per year - and the number it might have been prepared to come down to in the event of compromise, probably around 300 per year averaged over the decade.
Over the 10-year period, that's potentially more than 6,000 extra minke whales killed.
Originally, Japan intended to target 50 humpback whales per year as well. It suspended that element of the programme while the compromise talks demonstrated progress. It's not adding them back in yet, officials told me; but it's a strong possibility for the future.
Those are the conservation costs potentially borne through the death of this process.
Groups that opposed a deal, though, believe that other factors - declining demand, rising costs, international pressure, direct action - will bring an end to Japan's whaling well before those costs materialise. For them, the element of legitimising whaling that was implicit in the deal would have prolonged Japan's programme beyond its natural life.
And the principle of the moratorium remains intact: whaling is not endorsed by the global community, and other countries that might have contemplated starting, such as South Korea, do not have that point of principle on which to stand.
So is the collapse of this process a victory or a defeat for the conservation movement?
Here, you'll find people prepared to tell you both stories and draughts to the different visions of defeat and victory will doubtless be drunk long and loudly in the bars of Agadir.
I'm Richard Black, environment correspondent for the BBC News website. This is my take on what's happening to our shared environment as the human population grows and our use of nature's resources increases.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~24~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I am sick of these leftist fools who are waging a war of cultural supremacism against Japan.
Respect Japan's culture: support whaling!
Complain about this comment
Why do people rely on governments to solve these matters when they never do. Write a letter to the Japanese government with a comitment not to buy Japanese products, of any kind, until this is resolved. There are no innocent people in this world and these arguments that you will only hurt people not involved is to encourage buying from those you oppose. Or, you may wish to donate to a Japanese anti-whaling organization, they do exist.Japanese elect their government and if the Japanese economy suffers because of this issue you will see the issue resolved. They met for two years, you can become fluent in Japanese in that amount of time. Two years and nothing accomplished, every bureaucrats' dream job. My concern is that the Japanese are replacing whale meat with Western fast food and declining health, but that is their choice. Although the Japanese have been the focus there are other whaling nations involved. The rank ordering of animals based on human likes and dislikes is hard to defend as it implies one set of cultural norms being superior to others. Wherever there are people who will pay for something there are people who will supply it. Rhino horns and bear claws to concoct ancient virility potions or those who find it exciting to eat endangered species, these are the human condition.
Complain about this comment
This strikes me as a hearts and minds job, as comment 1 only goes to show. Culture can be changed - we were also killing whales - mainly for candles! - not that long ago and thinking nothing of it.
If only there was a David Attenborough figure in Japan to promote the appreciation of living wildlife, including whales, for its own sake.
And how about encouraging a few Japanese politicans to go on whale-watching trips?
Complain about this comment
I had hoped that the compromise would be realized. It would probably have reduced the number of whales being killed by the Norwegian, Icelandic, and Japanese fleets each year.
Perhaps there will be some resolution next year.
Complain about this comment
The IWC whaling debate is quite frankly marred by racism against the Japanese and is only a distraction from the real issues the need to be addressed in whale conservation.
In reality, whether the Japanese hunt 200/year or 900/year Minkes whales won't make an impact to Minke populations that are estimated to be as much as a million. Sustainability is not really a question of Minkes, and never has been. No country hunts endangered whale species such as the humpback.
The real threat and killer of whales are more mundane yet serious; over-fishing, collision with boats, and pollution. Of particular concern is overfishing by Alaskan fisherman in the Bering sea and off the coast of Brazil of endangered species of whales that compete for food and resources with migratory whales.
Worse is the issue of pollution. For instance, the BP oil spill has already has already killed whales, and is destroying the one of only two bluefin breeding grounds in the world. The real impact of more ubiquitous and unseen pollution is more devastating.
Nobody wants to talk about stopping overfishing in key areas where humpbacks compete for food, nobody wants to talk about the fact that boat collisions in the Atlantic ocean are an extinction threat to the North Atlantic right whale or about altering shipping routes during migratory seasons, nobody wants to talk about real issues that require hard solutions.
Instead, we are talking about the Japanese and hunting of whale species that aren't endangered and require the least amount of human intervention. The real hypocrisy is that a complete ban of whaling won't help endangered species of whales (they aren't being hunted), but no country, even the ones that oppose whaling, want to talk about effective environmental policy that may actually have an impact in whale conservation.
Complain about this comment
Who wins?
Anyone who loves seeing proven liar, hypocrite and all round git Paul Watson get all huffy because the whole world doesn't think the hunting of non-endangered seabound mammals is the greatest crime in history.
It's almost as much fun as watching him realise the Japanese consider him to be about as serious a threat as barnacles on his tv show. I almost fell off my seat laughing at him practically biting the wheel in frustration as they slaughtered a whale in front of his ship, in full view of him and all his other make believe pirates.
Complain about this comment
What's amazing to note is that the whale rights people do not realize that they are the fascists in this cause, not even allowing a democratic process to pass a vote on how the whole industry should be handled. The anti-whaling representatives are so emotionally invested in their cause that they aren't willing to negotiate. They must have all learned that from studying Stalin, Che and Castro.
The funny thing about this whole affair is that now the anti-whaling people think they actually won a small victory. But by their own strategy, they were unsuccessful in reducing the number of whales caught legally, as Japan, Norway, Iceland, Denmark (and Russia, China, and other whaling nations included if they so desired) could, actually go out there and continue to catch the same numbers of whales as they have done for the past 20 years, until something really happens. The Aussies to think that they won something here is so typical of their arrogance, their horrifically racist attitudes towards the Japanese that seem to have no end.
Oh well, no matter - I shall visit Japan one of these days and taste the goodness of the amazingly fresh sushi of all kinds that they do offer, including whales, and laugh at the stupidity of the whole thing.
Complain about this comment
"So is the collapse of this process a victory or a defeat for the conservation movement?" (Richard Black)
===========
I think a victory. Surely there is a certain integrity in maintaining the moratorium for those opposed to whaling. That Japan will now hunt more whales than without a compromise agreement is not certain, possibly not even probable. That a compromise agreement is first and foremost a compromise is without question.
However, I am not angry with Japan. Dealing with people in denial has become second nature to me on this blog. Time heals all.
However, there is something that does make me angry!
\\\ Red Herring ///
I think we are being distracted from the real issue - how to phrase it??
Taking care of Mother Earth - How's that.
Ergo - IPBES - The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
"The new body will bridge the gulf between the wealth of scientific knowledge- documenting accelerating declines and degradation of the natural world- and the decisive government action required to reverse these damaging trends."
http://www.ipbes.net/index.php
How if we sent out a ship or two to clean up the plastic gathering in the various ocean basins?
How if we banned bottom trawling?
How if we limited our catch to between 3 and 5 percent of types of wildlife which are still at healthy levels?
Are there any healthy species of wildlife left?
Where do whales, of all types, fit into a healthy ocean ecosystem?
What is a healthy ocean ecosystem?
Are the 400 or so dead zones off of river mouths a sign of a healthy ocean ecosystem, and if not, what are we going to do to prevent their growth, and to then eliminate them?
Perhaps the Chinese will agree to teach us about raising carp on land?
Are the growing desert areas of the world ocean going to keep on growing due to global warming?
And what about the dying coral reefs, both shallow and deep?
What is the tipping point for ocean acidification? Will there come a point when the phytoplankton that produce 70 percent of Earth's oxygen start dying in sufficient quantity to affect us?
Will the oceans stratify, die to oxygenic photosynthesis and switch states to H2S producing bacteria?
I don't know about you, but I want to know these things before I get too carried away because Japanese like whale.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
Richard asked "So is the collapse of this process a victory or a defeat for the conservation movement?".
I think that no-one is the winner here - and that includes both the pro-whale and pro-whale-hunting interests. However the issue is bigger than 'conservation' because the collapse of the process has wider implications for environmental governance.
As someone who was present at the IWC meeting in Agadir (and actively engaged through the 'peace process' has noted on his blog:
"The incapacity of the 88 IWC members is bad news for the broader picture of international environmental governance too. If the international community is not capable of fixing an issue like this one, where – after all – the interests at stake are very limited and small, what hope does this leave us with that governments will put aside their narrow national interests and principles when they face much more important and complex challenges, such as climate change?"
See: http://chezremi.blogspot.com/2010/06/nothing-to-celebrate.html
Complain about this comment
#7 3LionsOnTheShirt wrote:
"What's amazing to note is that the whale rights people do not realize that they are the fascists in this cause"
There are indeed remarkable affinities between people who think "the race" should be kept preserved and those who think species should be preserved. Both are misinformed by cockeyed ideas about the supposed "sacredness" of groups.
Complain about this comment
Business as usual! A lot of "brouhaha" and then ...NOTHING! The status quo remains! The IWC scientific committee does a lot of good work (no, this is not a compliment towards the Japanese ... not that science, but all that done by the other scientists... who have seldom seen any data from the J-scientific whaling) but the political meeting is just a "show off" by everybody: NGOs and politicians. I don't think anybody really cares to change the present situation ... "cares" meaning to get to a compromise that could bring the parties to engage in a dialogue ... really ... yesterday I've been asked to comment it ... I did not do a very good job, I admit. But the second Greenpaece person sums it up for me: Hundreds, thousands of Minkes will die because nobody really cared. I still believe the 50 Humpbacks are sort of a "hostage" by the Japanese: they know what "darlings" these whale watch-stars are, and hope in this manner to add pressure, in order to gain something when they will "graciously concede" not to catch them. It has not worked before, I won't probably now, but everybody is using their "stars" (movie, or whale watching) to put pressure on the public opinion ... I don't feel usually seasick, not even in bad seastate .. but I feel "seasick" right now ... sorry ... I have to run ...
Complain about this comment
Richard, not a lot of interest here in debating whales, lets have another climate article.
Complain about this comment
Who wins?
Certainly not the whales!
and I disagree with #12 Smiffie I am far more interested in whales than (the probable myth of) the Anthropogenic 'cause' of Climate Change (or indeed Global Warming.)
We can readily see than the way we are exploiting whales is undoubtedly reducing their numbers whereas the 'causality' relationship between our carbon dioxide emissions and 'climate change' is far more speculative and tenuous (and furthermore even if CO2 is the cause there is no hard evidence that anthropogenic reductions in CO2 will either reduce CO2 or modify the global climate in any predictable way.)
So give me more whales 'the last ones were delicious'! (Joke!)
Complain about this comment
#12 Smiffie wrote:
Richard, not a lot of interest here in debating whales, lets have another climate article.
---------------------------------
Or, to quote Eric Cartman: "I don't give a crap about whales, so go and hug a tree."
Complain about this comment
Richard, I hate to pass comment on this section. But where else can you make feedback on this site?
I think whaling is terrible. I also think that biased reporting is pretty awful also.
The story "Study examines scientists' 'climate credibility'" is particularly ironic. I suppose if the BBC had spent more then 30 seconds cut and pasting the story onto the website they'd have looked into the credentials of William Alderegg. Bill Love Alderegg comments on the qualifications of the critics; which would be funny should he actually be a climate scientist. But in fact he's a student biologist who's currently working on an IPCC backed study into bird migration.
So, at what point is he
a) Qualified to judge the merits of climate science
b) Unbiased in his opinion
He simply isn't. Oh, and I presume his colleagues are his fellow members of the "Make Stanford Sustainable" group.
Complain about this comment
#13 John_from_Hendon wrote:
We can readily see than the way we are exploiting whales is undoubtedly reducing their numbers
-------------------------------------------
Name one species where current hunting practices are having a significant impact on their numbers.
You would be correct, if you wrote that 30 years ago. Things have changed.
Complain about this comment
1. At 8:44pm on 23 Jun 2010, mvr512 wrote:
I am sick of these leftist fools who are waging a war of cultural supremacism against Japan.
Respect Japan's culture: support whaling!
------------------------------------------------------------------
You imply that Japan has "A CULTURE" - the fact is that there are many cultures in Japan, most of which believe that the whale is sacred and should never be hunted.
While I am a devout captialist - that is the only culture you are supporting - the right to kill whales for money - and the status of being able to eat whale. One thing many of the Japanese cultures have in common is 'status' - particularly among the 'new rich'.
Save the 'cultural lie' for someone who might buy it.
@Richard - nice article - thanks.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
Richard,
Somewhat off-topic but on "our shared environment" (including the media?). The BBC News Science & Environment page has this headline: "Climate credibility under review". It leads to a story:
Study examines scientists' 'climate credibility'
By Pallab Ghosh
Science correspondent, BBC News
When you read it you realize that the message is 180 degrees different from the conclusions of the study it is reporting on. Such truthiness -- and from an award-winning BBC science journalist, too. Do they give awards for the most elegant distortion and misleading headline these days? How about a new article:
Study examines journalists' 'climate credibility' ?
Complain about this comment
#10 bowmanthebard
"There are indeed remarkable affinities between people who think "the race" should be kept preserved and those who think species should be preserved. Both are misinformed by cockeyed ideas about the supposed "sacredness" of groups."
utter rubbish. to defend a species is to defend a significant amount of biodiversity built up over millions/billions of years. biodiversity loss and catastrophic damage to the biosphere is probably the second biggest challenge humanity faces.
the preferential treatment of one human race over the other is nasty, devisive and ignorant (plenty of studies show no significant genetic difference) and i abhor it and its proponents.
to conflate the two is disgraceful bowman.
Complain about this comment
#14 brunnen_g
i'm sorry, that just sounded like noise to me. anything intelligent to contribute? if what you have to say is no better than silence.....
Complain about this comment
manysummits:
I believe you are correct in identifying that there does not seem to be any umbrella statement of intent. The dealing with these as individual issues frees everyone to what has become the standard "compromise." Compromise also frees everyone from having to make judgements about right and wrong, and it always is stated as: the best we could do. There are connections in the enviroment, scientific structures called ecosystems. It is never in the interest of a bureaucracy to resolve an issue.
Complain about this comment
Dateline Gulf of Mexico Day 66
Well, the news this morning is not great. Over the weekend, we saw 'tarballs' washing up on the beaches in Dustin, Fort Walton Beach and Panama City - the 'crown jewels' of Northwest Florida. These were the common tarballs - about an inch or so in diameter. Today, we saw 'chunks' of tar and oil covering the beach. Most of these appeared to be around a foot across and several inches deep - it was just heartbreaking. They showed people on the beaches crying and machines on the beach the were going to use to try to pick these 'chunks' up with.
Yesterday, an ROV collided with the 'top hat' which is capturing oil from the top of the wellhead. The capture operation was shut down for 12 - 14 hours, but we are told capture has resumed this morning and will ramp back up to where they were (in terms of capture) within a few days.
BP has said they have a 'new top hat' which will 'do a better job' and capture 'most' of the oil leaking, that they hope to deploy mid-july.
Over the weekend, we saw wildlife affected on the Texas Coast for the first time - 130 oil covered pelicans as well as some other birds were rescued at Aransas Pass (about mid-way between Louisiana and Mexico - half way down the Texas Coast).
We also saw film from the air of hundreds of sharks congregating in the shallow waters off Alabama and Florida. While sharks are very common in the shallows here - they don't generally congregate like this except in the fall - mating season. Scientists believe that the sharks are being 'driven' to the shallows by the oil in the water and the 'plumes' which extend well below the surface.
Down here, we haven't seen anything of Tony Hayward since they showed photos of him at the helm of his yacht during the regatta over the weekend. There was a great deal of outrage (rightly or wrongly) expressed in interviews on the news here. Particularly when we had just been told that Mr. Hayward would no longer be in charge of 'day to day operations related to the spill'. As the photo's of Mr. Hayward were shown, we were told that the 'transistion' would be slow and Mr. Hayward would remain 'in charge' until the well is capped.
Personally - I don't fault the guy for taking a day or two off after two gruelling months - I don't think I could be in 'top form' without a break. The issue is the "PR" around how Mr. Hayward and BP have handled things. Going back to the 'I want my life back' statement - I believe he would have been 'a hero' if he had said 'I want my life back - but its on hold until you get your lives back' - which is probably what he really meant. Personally, I don't think having the Chairman of BP state that Mr. Hayward would no longer be 'in charge', then seeing him on his yacht and being told - 'he is still in charge' was the greatest PR move BP has made this far - just one more PR blunder in a long line.
The Obama administration also had their executive order for a moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf overturned in Federal Court this week. The Obama Administration is currently trying to 're-write' an executive order which will hold up in court.
Over the weekend, the estimates were revised upward again. I believe today we hit the 120M gallon mark for estimated oil spilled - quickly approaching the worst spill ever - Ixtoc I, Bay of Campeche, 140 M gal estimated spilled.
The price of shrimp has jumped 50% and oysters are up 33%. There is a lot of concern right now that the Texas Oyster Beds will be overworked as a result. I would expect the oyster 'season' to be closed before normal here.
While BP is certainly taking a lot of blame here - so too is the Obama Administration, which certainly shares a great deal of blame. As normal, the politicians in Washington are trying to play a game of re-direction and mis-direction and 'the blame game' - rather than focusing on what they should be - doing everything possible to support the clean-up efforts and BP's efforts to seal the well. Business as usuall in Washington. Meanwhile, in Louisiana this morning, we see the governer talking about equipment that can't be deployed (even still) because of 'federal red tape'...
Life will go on here. It always does. The Gulf will recover - it may take a while, but the tourism industry will be fine next year - the wildlife and fishing may take several years, but will recover as well. The important thing now is to 'step up the pace' - and do everything possible to protect those wetlands which have yet to be affected. Beaches are easy to clean - not so with the salt water marshes, wetlands, bogs and swamps - once the oil is in there - I think its pretty much up to 'mother nature' to clean it out. We need to have all our assets brought to bear to protect what we can now - it will make it much better next year and those to follow.
As a final note, there is a tropical system which the computer models suggest could enter the Gulf and strengthen. Gulf water temperatures are above normal right now (its been really, really hot down here the last month or so) - so it could strengthen quickly. Let us hope that this does not have any affects upon the operations to seal the well and protect and clean the shorelines.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
#20 rossglory wrote:
#14 brunnen_g
i'm sorry, that just sounded like noise to me. anything intelligent to contribute? if what you have to say is no better than silence.....
-----------------------------------------
Blah blah blah. I'm so shocked that another bleeding heart gets all worked up about whales being hunted.
Seriously, you, manysummits and a couple of others here are becoming laughable ecowarrior caricatures. Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Complain about this comment
Richard, comment posting to slow, so I've written a formal complaint to the Beeb on the Ghosah story and associated headline and link.
Complain about this comment
My post @ #12
Perhaps I should have said “lets have another climate article that we can tear to bits.”
The BBC is a good place to save the planet from eco-worriers and all their agendas, after all it is for our children.
Complain about this comment
Dateline Gulf of Mexico Day 66 - supplimental
Quick note - it is reported that none of the vessels involved in the operations over the DeepwaterHorizon site are 'hurricane ready'. In other words, if a storm enters the gulf, they will have to remove the 'top cap', letting all the oil leak out and seek safe harbor until the storm passes. This would apply not only to a hurricane, but to a tropical storm as well.
Lets keep our fingers crossed...that the disturbance in the Carribean does not make it into the Gulf and strengthen.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
Ghost #21 - Hello from Calgary!
I thought you might enjoy this?
It speaks to 'bureaucracy' and politics:
"the wise know that foolish legislation is a rope of sand, which perishes in the twisting; the State must follow and not lead the character and progress of the citizen..."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson ("Politics" 1844)
=============
That of course leaves us with the present "character and progress of the citizen."
I have coming from the library a new book which seeks to answer this:
"Ill Fares the Land" by Tony Judt (2010)
I believe his main contention is that social democracy is the way to the future.
There is a startling graph in this book from another book, "The Spirit Level," by Wilkinson and Pickett, which shows the United States in comparison to the Scandinavian countries, Canada and Germany as regards social mobility on one axis and disparity of wealth on the other. The US is all by itself at the far lower right of a straight line, with the other countries I mentioned in a cluster at the far upper right.
A stunning depiction, hardly credible at first glance, until one thinks of the Michael Moore documentary "Capitalism - A Love Story," and the huge number of books out of the genre "Empire of Illusion" by Chris Hedges.
With such as Noam Chomsky and Naomi Kline on board, these books all tell a similar story - the collapse of the American Dream, and its rapid unraveling over the last three decades.
For myself, from the assassination of John Kennedy in 1963, things have been going downhill, until now we are here.
I wish I knew first hand how it is in other lands all around the world?
I just read a review this morning of a man who has spent years traveling the world on a motorcycle - and he says the world is not nearly as dangerous as depicted - in five years he never had one thing stolen from him, and encountered good will and welcome wherever he went.
This is my experience also in traveling extensively the lesser known byways of America and Mexico.
So we have two views of the world:
1) People are generally friendly and welcoming if one exercises common sense.
2) The G-20 billion dollar summit in Canada view with everyone a terrorist - promulgated by our politicians and the corporate owned media.
I think we are seeing a tired and worn out system in its final hours.
If the geophysical reality were not there - I too would welcome a retreat to your Yellow Mountains, but it appears to me that there is now nowhere to run - and so I stand and fight.
Regards,
Manysummits
Complain about this comment
#23 brunnen_g
nope, more noise. i'll tell you what it sounds like, the vuvuzelas at the world cup.
why not go and hug a tree?
i'm guessing the n_g in you peusdonym stands for noise generator.
Complain about this comment
Kealey!
I see absolutely no reason the Obama administration is in any way 'responsible' for your mess in the Gulf.
You are a self-declared capitalist and undoubtedly lobbying against the Democratic Party, with your tired and really old line about blaming Obama.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
#19 rossglory wrote:
to defend a species is to defend a significant amount of biodiversity built up over millions/billions of years. biodiversity loss and catastrophic damage to the biosphere is probably the second biggest challenge humanity faces.
If you can't explain what's valuable about it except in terms of human gain (or human non-loss), fine -- at least be honest enough to admit that you think human gain is what makes biodiversity valuable. So what has its being "built up over billions/millions of years" got to do with the value of biodiversity? If you think biodiversity is sacred in some way please be honest enough to admit it.
Complain about this comment
Sacred heh Bowman: (#30)
You have a Queen do you not?
Why is that Bowman?
What do you think of inheirited title Bowman - What?????????????????
Let's cut the BS - answer straight for once - if that is within your capabilities.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
29. At 4:40pm on 24 Jun 2010, manysummits wrote:
Kealey!
I see absolutely no reason the Obama administration is in any way 'responsible' for your mess in the Gulf.
You are a self-declared capitalist and undoubtedly lobbying against the Democratic Party, with your tired and really old line about blaming Obama.
- Manysummits -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you like Obama so much - why don't ya'll get him to run in Canada.
The Obama Administration failed to ensure that the 'disaster plans' where even remotely viable. The Obama administration allowed a 'cozy relationship' to continue to exist between the regulators and those being regulated (deepwater drillers) - a relationship that has been a bit more than 'too cozy' in my view for the last 15 years.
The Obama Administration has failed to mobilize the appropriate federal assets and direct those assets to protecting the wetlands and assist in cleaning up the spill. They have stood impotently on the sidelines.
The Governor of Louisiana, just this morning was complaining about equipment standing idle because of 'federal regulations' and 'red tape'.
Obama has sat up in Washington talking about 'deciding whose a** to kick' - give me a break - the man is a moron. Instead, he should be mobilizing and directing every possible assets to get those berms built, to protect those wetlands, to minimize the ecologicial damage.
You Manysummits, only like Obama because he is using this disaster to push his (and yours) 'carbon crazy' political agenda.
You don't care about the mess down here - and neither does Obama.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
#30 bowmanthebard
what is valuable about the biosphere? are you really asking that question?
i believe the biosphere has intrinsic value. but it would also be nice if my (or anyone's) descendents had a healthy planet to live on. however, just because it's our challenge does not imply it's just a human issue, it just means we're the only ones that have any chance of preventing it (because we are causing it!!).
the fact it's built up over unimaginable timescales means it's irreplaceable that's what it's got to do with it.
if you think this is anything to do with religion you're barking up the wrong tree (again - nothing like consistency). nothing, absolutely nothing i have ever said to you or anyone else on this post has a religious overtone. it is all in your head.
and i suggest you be honest (and gracious) enough to retract the accusation that those that wish to protect the biosphere are fascists purely because they wish to protect it (there's nothing to stop fascists also caring about the planet).
this really is like arguing with my ex......you're not a pudgy middle aged woman from south-east england are you?
Complain about this comment
#31 manysummits wrote:
What do you think of inheirited title Bowman - What?????????????????
Let's cut the BS - answer straight for once - if that is within your capabilities.
I think neither praise nor blame are inherited, if that's what you're asking. I don't anyone should become a head of state by simply inheriting a title.
Complain about this comment
#mannysummits
this just seems so surreal.
"Obama has sat up in Washington talking about 'deciding whose a** to kick' - give me a break - the man is a moron" - l kealey
makes one wonder what the term would be for the previous incumbent at the white house.
i find it difficult to tell with obama. he could be doing a lot more on many different fronts......but maybe he has to choose his fights carefully. the political/legal elite in washington is ram packed with powerful and wealthy enemies to any social/political/environmental reform. they have the whole thing sitched up and they like it that way.
this in no way suggests the uk or anywhere else is perfect but the usa has taken this to a whole new level.
Complain about this comment
@Manysummits
Let me be a little more concise - The Obama Administration has shown itself to be completely impotent with regards to this disaster.
First - this is way beyond the scope of any one company to deal with - and too important to allow any company to be 'in charge'.
From the get-go, the Obama Administration should have 'taken over' authority for the disaster. They should have implemented the disaster 'plan' (oh, but thats right - there isn't a real 'disaster plan').
OK, so they should have had the 'right guys' around the table right away determining how to respond. They should have been mobilizing and directing assets from get go. They should have had the Army Corps of Engineers and National Guard mobilizing and on the scene two months ago. They should have been building berms two months ago. They should have been calling on other companies and countries to send skimming ships and the like - two months ago.
No, they been sittin up in Washington, trying to hold BP's feet to the fire (not that BP doesn't need its feet held to the fire, but...) - and trying to decide 'who's a** to kick'.
Well, gee, kicking someone's a** just isn't going to do anything productive at this point. Is it??
Obama lacks the experience and leadership skills for the office he now holds - if the VP wasn't Joe Biden, I would be calling for his resignation. I just have to settle for the fact that he is definately a 'one termer'. I bet he won't even get the democratic nomination - first time in a long time that the nomination didn't go to the incumbent....
His silly energy bill isn't going anywhere - he doesn't have the political skill nor the capital to push anything through at this point - and thank goodness. Have you even read the 'climate bill'? Its another one of those massive pieces of legislation which none of our distiguished lawmakers have even read. I'd lay my bottom dollar that Obama hasn't read it either. I HAVE READ ENOUGH OF IT to know that it is just a really bad idea that isn't going to achieve anything positive. Oh, the lobbies all have what they want - its the middle class that gets it from this thing - as usual.
Cheers.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
#28 rossglory wrote:
#23 brunnen_g
nope, more noise. i'll tell you what it sounds like, the vuvuzelas at the world cup.
why not go and hug a tree?
i'm guessing the n_g in you peusdonym stands for noise generator.
--------------------------------------------
Just like manysummits, nothing of substance to say, so you go for ad hom attacks instead.
Pathetic...
It's true, the empty can rattles the most.
Complain about this comment
Kealey:
Calling your own President a moron is pretty tough stuff.
I'd take Obama in a heartbeat here in Canada.
He walked into the legacy of eight years or Bush and company - drill baby drill.
Into two wars, God knows how many covert operations, and he finally managed to get you Americans, dragging and kicking, into some semblance of the modern world with his health care reforms.
He fired the Minerals Management guy, and he has just fired McChrystal.
You and your Republican character assassins are a little worried now -
aren't ya'll Kealey??????????????????????????????????
There is a Man in the Oval Office - and you don't know what to do.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
#33 rossglory wrote:
what is valuable about the biosphere? are you really asking that question?
I'm genuinely surprised you are surprised. I'm not asking whether it has value, but what makes it valuable, which bits are valuable, and why -- and which bits (if any) are not valuable, and why. We have to ask questions like that if we are wondering what's the best thing to do.
There is a serious purpose behind those questions. Throughout history, murderous events have occurred in which the interests -- and often the lives -- of individuals have been sacrificed to some "higher purpose". All of these events were perpetrated by people who sincerely believed they were doing the right thing, be it the literal human sacrifices of the Aztecs or the Inquisition, or various "ethnic cleansing" exercises inspired by the "destiny" of this or that "Reich", or the sufferings of victims of communist ideology.
So we need to be clear: what is valuable, and why is it valuable?
i believe the biosphere has intrinsic value.
That is to put "the biosphere" into a realm where its value cannot be questioned, nor even reckoned. That's the way to the guillotine and the gas chambers.
Complain about this comment
It's strange how class wars and ancestral lineage can creep into a debate about whale overfishing. And creatures high and low in the food chain become metaphors for insults against the person who disagrees.
Complain about this comment
manysummits:
When someone like LK has nothing but a political agenda there is no reason to respond to his comments. He acts like this is the intital oil rig having been constructed in the Gulf. The oil companies are required to have the damage plan not the federal government. If the Federal government tried to initiate such a capability he would complain about big government. The agenda is political and narrow. The lack of inspection and regulation enforcement is the historic protection of local and State and Federal politicians insistings that agencies not do their jobs and that regulation is basically industry enforcement. Do you have a plan: please check the box. I read where the federal judge that overturned the moratorium on drilling is personally heavily invested in oil companies, but of course justice is blind, probably because it has oil in its eyes. The private sector and the constant cry of free markets and no government interference, that is until something happens and they want to shift the blame and responsbilities onto taxpayers and have usually been successful in doing so. The banks took all the taxpayers money so the oil companies are faced with an empty treasury for them to steal from.
Complain about this comment
Rossglory:
I'm reading the books by Americans now.
Ronald Wright wrote "What is America," but he is a Canadian.
Noam Chomsky is a super intellectual - Naomi Klein is - different!
But now mainstrean America is speaking, from Thomas Friedman through to Chris Hedges and Tony Gadt ("Empire of Illusion" - "Ill Fares the Land").
And the bookshelves are full of what amounts to a cry -
The America they knew and loved is "Gone with the Wind."
The Copenhagen Non-Accord - the IWC - etc... all the same.
Today the US is one thing structurally - a military superpower without an enemy, and they don't know what to do, lest the dogs of war which they have loosed on an unsuspecting planet turn in hunger upon their own and devour everything.
Obama is a decent man in a hard place. No one, not Obama, not Clinton, not Jimmy Carter, could possibly have been prepared for what the true reality is of the United States post JFK - a country hi-jacked by the powers that be - a coup if ever one existed - as surely as I stand here.
Why do you think Kealey is here on this board?????????
You and I know why we are here - what is this man here for, posting like he has no other job????????????
You are entirely correct Ross - the situation is actually surreal - it has to be - everything we thought about the future is going up in smoke, in the greatest conflagration the planet has ever seen - the bonfire burning of hundreds of millions of years of sequestered sunlight -
by a handful of naked apes.
The denialists on this board sicken me - they fill me with cold fury.
In the end, if we do not grasp a hold of ourselves soon, this pent up fury will break out all around us - as if we were actually embedded in a thunderstorm.
I can tell you what this is like from personal experience. You just hunker down and hope for the best, and you pray to whatever gods you believe in.
The IWC and their like - out with them I say.
It is time for new ideas, from new people - people who are still capable of thought and compassion.
Off the top of my head, and at once deep in my heart, I believe in the concept of the United Nations and the World Courts.
We cannot leave any place open for these hoodlums to run to - no rock can provide them shelter, no den can they be allowed to hide their iniquity in.
Warmist,
Manysummits
Complain about this comment
Grannie!
We're just the same tribal hunters we have always been.
Civilization is thread bare on all of us - the Emperors - US - have always had no clothes.
But it is only the civilized who see in a naked man something humorous - or worse.
We are born naked, the last time I looked, which was about five and a half years ago.
Grannie - we just killed how many people - legally - in two world wars!!!
Science has this attribute - it seeks truth like a heat seeking missile, and it is just as deadly if you are a purveyor of fantasy.
Manysummits
Complain about this comment
@ManySummits
I am an 'equal opportunity' assassin - republican or democrat.
Obama - a 'man in the White House' - yeah right.
He fired McCrystal - he just finished making a speech - so he can at least be seen doing 'something' - rather than standing around like the impotent fool he is.
What has he done today regarding the ecological disaster - worst in American History unfolding at this moment?
Kealey
Complain about this comment
#31 manysummits wrote:
Sacred heh Bowman: (#30)
You have a Queen do you not?
Why is that Bowman?
---------------------------------------
In case you've forgotten, you have a queen too, manysummits.
In fact, you have the same queen as bowman, do you not?
Why is that manysummits?
Complain about this comment
If you were to get a truthful answer from someone who breaks rules, laws etc. (to the detriment of society) they would reply, "because I can."
And that's it! Because they can, they will. If they can't, they won't. The really determined ones would say, "there is no such word as can't."
Perhaps those acting for the power of good should adopt the same mindset.
Complain about this comment
@ManySummits wrote:
Why do you think Kealey is here on this board?????????
You and I know why we are here - what is this man here for, posting like he has no other job????????????
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Get real - lets just add up how many posts we have from ManySummits over say the last six months and how many posts from LarryKealey - and then lets talk about 'posting like he has no other job'...
Fact is, I am on disability and have no other job. My only check every month comes from my Social Security - what about you ManySummits??? Since you 'withhold your services' as a Geologist - where does your paycheck come from? What interest do you represent?
My views are mine, mine period.
The difference between you and I is a Gulf - a giant Gulf of Reality. You just don't live in the same reality as the rest of us.
Besides, I just can't respect ANYONE who 'hero worships' Al Gore.
Kindest.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
re #39 Bowman- " I'm genuinely surprised you are surprised. I'm not asking whether it has value, but what makes it valuable, which bits are valuable, and why -- and which bits (if any) are not valuable, and why. We have to ask questions like that if we are wondering what's the best thing to do."
indeed we need to ask these questions, but wouldn't you agree that untill we have the answers and know genuinely what is and isn't (if anything isn't) important that we should protect everything? as once its gone we can't bring it back and who knows what impact that might have.
on that basis everything has an intrinsic value to the bioshpere.
the questions you highlight are of incredible complexity and we are only just begining to understand some of them.
Complain about this comment
PS:
At the bottom of that graph I spoke of earlier - I almost forgot - there was the United Kingdom, not quite as bad as the US, but the only one even close.
I know that many are the UK citizens who are repelled at this association - it is however a historical fact.
The US is the child of the Imperial UK, and here is the result.
History can be made as well as studied by academics.
I suggest we write some of that history now.
A good start would be to get rid of the Queen and all inherited titles.
What do you say?
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
#46 sensibleoldgrannie wrote:
If you were to get a truthful answer from someone who breaks rules, laws etc. (to the detriment of society) they would reply, "because I can."
And that's it! Because they can, they will. If they can't, they won't.
------------------------------------------------
You got a truthful answer from Paul Watson?
Complain about this comment
re the ridiculous argument about obama's lack of action on the oil spill, where would you be if the alternative option at the last election was in place?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/jun/23/sarah-palin-prayer-oil-spill-gulf
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/23/judge-drilling-ban-shares-oil
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2010/jun/19/naomi-klein-gulf-oil-spill
that is just a taste of what obama has to deal with before he can do anything.
Complain about this comment
Manysummits:
The old man bent over from years of work walks into a bar to meet his friend who comes in after work with his usual limp from a work accident. At the end of the bar is a younger man having a beer. Another man comes in and sits at a table. The old man asked the bartender "isn't that Jesus that just came in?" The bartender says, "yes it is." Jesus gets up and walks over and heals the old man's back, touches and cures the limp of his friend. The young man at the end of the bar jumps up and says: "don't touch me, I'm on disability."
Complain about this comment
#42 manysummits wrote:
"The denialists on this board sicken me - they fill me with cold fury."
You are evidently a sick man, and I suggest you seek help soon.
Complain about this comment
#39 bowman
you started of fairly sensibly. there are difficult questions to be answered wrt how the biosphere is to be protected. as i've mentioned before we are in no position to judge which bits of it should be saved and which shouldn;t because we don;t understand it well enough. my view remains - protect as much as we can whenever we can.
from a human perspective we need to allocate a value, not because a dollar value has meaning per se but it's the only way to get corporations to internalise the 'cost' of the damage and prevent it.
but then you come up with this:
"That is to put "the biosphere" into a realm where its value cannot be questioned, nor even reckoned. That's the way to the guillotine and the gas chambers."
No, no, no absolutely not. just because something has value intrinsic or otherwise, does not mean you start building gas chambers. that assertion is bizarre. are you saying gas chambers will only be dismantled when nothing has value? the fact that human lives are devalued is exactly why the gas chambers were built not the other way around.
are you going to retract you statement that anyone concerned about the biosphere (without being able to define why to your satisfaction) is a fascist?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"are you going to retract you statement that anyone concerned about the biosphere (without being able to define why to your satisfaction) is a fascist?"
Where did I say that?
Complain about this comment
Let me get this straight.
Manysummits can call me a monster living a pervert's existence but I can't accuse him of being a coward for refusing to give me the apology I'm due?
No, the BBC aren't loading the dice in favour of one side in any way...
Complain about this comment
bowmanthebard #39.
"I'm not asking whether it has value, but what makes it valuable, which bits are valuable, and why -- and which bits (if any) are not valuable, and why. ... So we need to be clear: what is valuable, and why is it valuable?"
yawn...
define value.
Complain about this comment
Kealey #47:
You are right - a Giant Gulf of Reality separates you and me.
You seem to have conveniently forgotten Kealey that I am the one who took seven years off work to climb mountains - for no pay - NADA!
While you pursue whatever it is you pursue on Wall Street and in the military. You still believe in coal - you have pipe dreams you say of these super sources of energy in 40 or 50 years - and in the meantime, well, we'll just have to drill baby drill.
I see your lessons in public relations are being used - the bleeding heart over the Gulf spill, the anguished cries for Tony Hayward and BP's blood - bankrupt them you say - what a pile - from a man who knows it's a pile.
And now, phase two - we ease the public back into deep water drilling - again.
That's convenient - but of course necessary.
Only it's suicide if the warmists and I are right - isn't it Kealey?
So you and the lobby must at all costs keep the public guessing - sow the seeds of doubt - be totally obnoxious like Brunnen; cloud the skies with philosophical BS like Bowman, etc... With a variety of posters and techiques, you and the lobby dominate these blogs two to one.
I have been taking more time off work - hence my ability to post here - again - for no pay - NADA.
To you and the Sarah Palin group, to the hard-working American - this is anathema - so you would have us believe.
But you're scared Kealey - your world is coming apart - both the obscene plutocracy of which you are a part, and the geophysical world of which we are all apart.
You say you don't believe in AGW - PROVE IT!
You are an engineer with mathematical ability - if you do not understand the science - you are surely aware of the people who do.
You call them morons - like you just called your own President a moron.
Now that's intelligence manifest surely. At which University did you learn that Kealey?
At what military academy did they teach you to defame your own President?
Head out and see McChrystal won't you - I'm sure you and he have much in common.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
Ghost!
Nice story.
I do have to calm down - I'll try.
Saludos y Gracias,
Manysummits
Complain about this comment
LarryKealey #47.
"My views are mine, mine period."
yep, 'Lone Star' indeed.
Complain about this comment
Well, good to see the gang's all here... and wandering well off this rather boring topic.
I see Larry Kealey trying to make some rational observations about the failings of the federal government to adequately deal with the results of the spill, and manysummits resorting to his usual angry tactics and diversions in defense. Yes, let's plug the leak with the Queen. LOL.
Here's yet another example of the feds making things WORSE, from a New Orleans newspaper:
Federal Gov't Halts Sand Berm Dredging
Nungesser Pleads With President To Allow Work To Continue
UPDATED: 3:56 pm CDT June 23, 2010
http://www.wdsu.com/news/23997498/detail.html
---------------------
And here's some background on the Messiah Obama. NO change. But its easier for the simpletons to keep blaming Bush, of course:
"The Spill, The Scandal and the President"
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/111965
Complain about this comment
52. RainyDayDreamAway wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/23/judge-drilling-ban-shares-oil
Yes. All the clones are falling for this red herring. Of course, they NEVER read the ruling to see the basis of it. Here's the real reason why it was quashed...
"Members of a panel of experts brought in to advise the Obama administration on how to address offshore drilling safety after the Deepwater Horizon disaster now say Interior Secretary Ken Salazar falsely implied they supported a six-month drilling moratorium they actually oppose.
Salazar's May 27 report to President Barack Obama said a panel of seven experts "peer reviewed" his recommendations, which included a six-month moratorium on all ongoing drilling in waters deeper than 500 feet. That prohibition took effect a few days later, but the angry panel members and some others who contributed to the Salazar report said they had only reviewed an earlier version of the Interior secretary's report that suggested a six-month moratorium only on new drilling, and then only in waters deeper than 1,000 feet.
"We broadly agree with the detailed recommendations in the report and compliment the Department of Interior for its efforts," a joint letter from the panelists to various politicians says. "However, we do not agree with the six-month blanket moratorium on floating drilling. A moratorium was added after the final review and was never agreed to by the contributors.""
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2010/06/experts_seek_to_clarify_their.html
"In a scathing document, eight of the "experts" the Administration listed in its report said their names had been "used" to "justify" a "political decision." The draft they reviewed had not included a six-month drilling moratorium. The Administration added that provision only after it had secured sign-off. In their document, the eight forcefully rejected a moratorium, which they argued could prove more economically devastating than the oil spill itself and "counterproductive" to "safety.""
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704198004575311033371466938.html
Or: http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20100611/pl_mcclatchy/3533610
Complain about this comment
How offensive does manysummits does have to get before he breaks house rules?
The bias is showing...
Complain about this comment
This is fun... Australia's version of Al Gore answers questions, something that Gore himself refuses to do.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/06/20/how_to_expose_a_warmist_andrew_bolt_interviews_australias_al_gore_106015.html
Complain about this comment
Surprise surprise - Canadian Rockies is back!!!
Where'dya git that name pardner???
Not copycatting me are you - no never.
/////////////
Complain about this comment
Yes, the gang's all here - two to one - fair odds for the denialists.
\\\\\\\\\\\
Complain about this comment
This is reality.
There are a number of graphs, they are figments of nobody's imagination.
Scroll down one by one, and see the future.
You do want to see what's in store, I presume - otherwise you'd be putting your head in the sand, like the proverbial ostrich, now wouldn't you.
Note the Sun's returning activity.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
Forgot to post the link - for #69:
http://www.columbia.edu/~mhs119/UpdatedFigures/
- Many - posts !!
Complain about this comment
Brunnen_G #65.
"How offensive does manysummits does have to get before he breaks house rules?
The bias is showing..."
quit moaning, if you've cause for complaint use the bleedin' button.
n_g for 'noise generator'? too right.
Complain about this comment
67. manysummits wrote:
"Surprise surprise - Canadian Rockies is back!!!
Where'dya git that name pardner???"
When I look out the window they are right above me. And a truly beautiful peak dominates that view, with nice meadow and mixed forest in the foreground. Yes, tis a beautiful world.
What do you see when you look out your window? Doomsday?
Complain about this comment
Meanwhile, back in the real world:
Energy Myths Can't Replace Fossil Fuels
By ROBERT J. SAMUELSON
"Oil, coal and natural gas now supply about 85% of America's energy needs. The U.S. Energy Information Administration expects energy consumption to grow only an average of 0.5% annually from 2008 to 2035, but that's still a 14% cumulative increase. Fossil fuel usage would increase slightly in 2035, and its share would still account for 78% of the total.
Unless we shut down the economy, we need fossil fuels. More efficient light bulbs, energy-saving appliances, cars with higher gas mileage may all dampen energy use. But offsetting these savings are more people (391 million vs. 305 million), more households (147 million vs. 113 million), more vehicles (297 million vs. 231 million) and a bigger economy (almost double in size).
Although wind, solar and biomass are assumed to grow up to 10 times faster than overall energy use, they provide only 11% of supply in 2035, up from 5% in 2008."
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/538287/201006231849/Energy-Myths-Cant-Replace-Fossil-Fuels.aspx
Complain about this comment
Brunnen -
"The wicked man flees though no one pursues, but the righteous are as bold as a lion."
- Proverbs 28:1
CR - Do you climb - or hike? How about a visit to Exshaw Creek, to see the Exshaw shale type section, where an anoxic ocean caused a mass extinction?
Or is your real world to do with retirement?
///////////
Complain about this comment
To jr4412:
Can you believe these guys? A year and a half of calling virtually every climate scientist in the world fools, of denigrating every institution under the Sun except those funded by business as usual.
We must be doing something right - making noise - finding signal.
We cycled aroung the Glenmore Reservoir yesterday - and coming back we stopped at an overlook, where the Elbow River runs still mostly wild into the artificial lake. Giant meanders through brand new land as the reservoir silts up rapidly, threatening the sailboats now only hundreds of meters away.
All along the southern and southwestern horizon a curtain of virga and rain held us spellbound, as a line of moderate thunderstorms headed our way.
We donned raingear and biked home under wind and wet, literally singing in the rain.
Cloudrunner was pleased - and is learning the ways of the world.
Cheers from Calgary,
Manysummits
Complain about this comment
>17. At 2:14pm on 24 Jun 2010, LarryKealey wrote:
>You imply that Japan has "A CULTURE" - the fact is that there are many >cultures in Japan, most of which believe that the whale is sacred and >should never be hunted.
I have spent many years in Japan and I can assure you the above is incorrect. Most parts of Japan while active in fishing don't have much to do with whaling at all. Whales are not part of Japanese folklore. The few areas where whaling does exist do in fact elevate the whale to a level of worship and respect, similar to the way American Indians paid respect to the game they took. Nowhere in Japan, or Northeast Asia for that matter are whales considered sacred and not to be hunted.
Complain about this comment
In the real world to come, we're going to take care of the Earth, and we are going to downsize.
I suspect a reduction in energy use across the board on the order of 90 percent.
We are just going to turn things off, park cars and use public transit most of the time, and get rid of attitude.
We will learn to live within our means - that is as certain a fact as you will find anywhere, anytime - like a law of the Universe, which it in fact is.
We are going to grow up, and in doing so there will be rites of passage, probably both painful and humbling, and yet - inspiring.
- Manysummits in Calgary -
Complain about this comment
Interesting...
"An alarming 58% of respondents across the European Union agreed that:
"We can no longer trust scientists to tell the truth about controversial scientific and technological issues because they depend more and more on money from industry."
The figure falls to 49% for UK respondents...
Worrying too is the finding that 53% of European respondents (46% of UK respondents) agree with the statement that, because of their knowledge, scientists "have a power that makes them dangerous". Not potentially dangerous, notice, but dangerous. When you take into account the 23% who didn't know or who neither agreed or disagreed, the survey suggests that just 24% of EU citizens believe that scientists are not dangerous...
The majority of EU citizens (63% of respondents) feel that scientists working in university or government laboratories are best qualified to explain scientific and technological developments. Just 32% believe that scientists working in industry are best placed and a mere 16% of respondents (14% in the UK) that newspaper journalists are best equipped to discuss such developments."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2010/jun/23/survey-eu-scientists-dangerous-eurobarometer
Of course, the public doesn't realize that the AGW industry is a government/corporate sponsored industry.
Complain about this comment
Brunnen re 'monsters':
"People who shut their eyes to reality simply invite their own destruction, and anyone who insists on remaining in a state of innocence long after that innocence is dead turns himself into a monster."
- James Baldwin
http://quotationsbook.com/quote/21035/
//////////////
Complain about this comment
The hard core anti-whaling nations as well as some conservation groups who have advocated a no-compromise policy have done a great disservice to the whales. For them, whales are no longer animals but some creature on a par with human beings. Much of the "trans-science" supporting the intelligence of whales (which differ greatly from dolphins) is submitted by researchers biased towards their anti-whaling stance. And yet, we have just witnessed these radical environmentalists doom thousands of whales to be killed LEGALLY under current IWC rules, and attempt to destroy the only international regulatory organization we have for the management of whaling and protecting the worlds whale population. These fanatics are the equivalent of religious fanatics, they are no longer conservationists in the real sense of the word. Their arguments are based on emotion, no science other than their own trans-science, racism and in the case of Australia, both racism and territorial aspirations.
Complain about this comment
#74. manysummits wrote:
"CR - How about a visit to Exshaw Creek, to see the Exshaw shale type section, where an anoxic ocean caused a mass extinction?"
I'm not partial to views of cement plants, and that whole area is far too yuppified and crowded for me. For seeing spectacular results of ancient extinctions I prefer the Burgess Shales, but haven't been there for years as its too regulated now. Was much better in the good old days.
But everywhere one goes in the Rockies ancient and living natural history is on display. All those peaks carved by glaciers. Its almost as if climate change is a constant.
Complain about this comment
CanadianRockies #72, #73.
"When I look out the window they are right above me. And a truly beautiful peak dominates that view, with nice meadow and mixed forest in the foreground. Yes, tis a beautiful world."
it's an accident of birth of course, you could have been born into looking over, say, one of Kolkata's municipal dumps; I wonder, would you still say "tis a beautiful world"??
"Energy Myths Can't Replace Fossil Fuels"
say the people of www.investors.com -- surprise, surprise.
Complain about this comment
manysummits #75.
"..denigrating every institution under the Sun except those funded by business as usual."
www.investors.com have all the answers -- apparently. :-)
Complain about this comment
CanadianRockies #78.
"Worrying too is the finding that 53% of European respondents (46% of UK respondents) agree with the statement that, because of their knowledge, scientists "have a power that makes them dangerous". Not potentially dangerous, notice, but dangerous."
no surprise really, many remember names such as Oppenheimer.
also, I think that many if not most people realise that R&D is largely driven by defense monies, after all, what good is new technology if it doesn't allow one to kill more efficiently (and cheaper too!!).
Complain about this comment
CR #81: re Exshaw Shale & Burgess Shale
I don't want to offend - not this time at any rate.
But you will find very few people, probably no one at all in fact at the type section of the Exshaw Shale, as it is a few kilometers back from the road. An inky black pyrite filled shale sits atop a normal grey limestone which was as full of ancient life as you can get - solid fossils so to speak, from a shallow and warm sea. The transition to no life is razor sharp, and ended this abundant life - probably an anoxic ocean event, in the late Devonian. There's a little waterfall nearby, and it is actually worth a look see.
The Burgess Shale is entirely different, and is not a mass extinction at all, but rather a serendipidous preservation of what many paleontologists will call the greatest flowering of life bar none, in the warm seas above the zone of preservation.
This was in the Cambrian. Mt. Burgess is a dark Mountain, shaly, like the zone of preservation, while Mt. Field is a lighter colored mountain, a zone of life. The demarcation line between them was probably some type of off reef slope, and some type of mudslide took a wildly interesting bunch of early soft-bodied for the most part muticellur life down into the anoxic depths, where they were not only preserved against all odds, but found and brought to light by Charles Walcoot of the Smithsonian.
They were desribed in full by the brilliant Whittington et al, and later brought to public attention by the great Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in "Wonderful Life."
These scientists were of the first rank, and I presume you believe them?
James Hansen, Richard Alley, Lonnie Thompson, Wallace Broecker and many many other climatologists, glaciologists, geochemists etc... are in the same first rank of scientists as those mentioned earlier, yet you choose to believe one and not the other.
From your post it is entirely clear to me that you are not a paleontologist at any rate, and I wonder how you decide which science you choose to believe and which you do not. Same for all the other denialists here - I don't want to single you out.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
LarryKealey #47.
"The difference between you and I is a Gulf - a giant Gulf of Reality. You just don't live in the same reality as the rest of us."
"They [concepts] are the exclusive prerogative of conscious beings, and represent in a general fashion the scope and direction of an interest in reality. Related to this generality is the flexibility of the demands we place there."
I'm certain that bowman will enlighten you, if necessary (or, rather, whether or not :-)).
Complain about this comment
manysummits,
(at 8:21pm on 24 Jun 2010)
“... The truth will out - it's a law of nature.
Our planet and its universal laws will expunge any and all who spit in the face of truth, who live a perverts existence - monsters who prefer fantasy to the real world.
The real world is infinitely more interesting a place than the delusional one you and yours seek to create on this board.”
History suggests otherwise.
Complain about this comment
LarryKealey,
(at 8:04pm on 24 Jun 2010)
“@ManySummits . . . The difference between you and I is a Gulf - a giant Gulf of Reality. You just don't live in the same reality as the rest of us. . . .”
In a sense, yes. If the accepted paradigms of two people are sufficiently different, then, yes, their realities are incommensurate (“The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”, Thomas Kuhn, 1962).
Complain about this comment
JohnDamer,
(at 00:20am on 25 Jun 20100
“The hard core anti-whaling nations as well as some conservation groups who have advocated a no-compromise policy have done a great disservice to the whales. . . .”
Alas, all too true!
Complain about this comment
85. manysummits - I suppose I need to write lengthy essays to address your questions... but its not worth it.
I think I'll pay more attention to what Gould says about what the creatures preserved in the Burgess Shales REPRESENT than what you do... and that was my point. That, and the fact that I enjoyed going there long ago, before it became a restricted area and a guided tour for tourists.
And it was Walcott, not Walcoot.
And Hansen is a joke, but that's another matter.
And, no, I am not a paleontologist... but I guess I'm supposed to believe that you are one. Google on!
Complain about this comment
85. manysummits -
Exshaw - I'm not sure if I have been there but if its up the canyon, then I have. Long ago. Did not know about that feature.
I think I'll pay more attention to what Gould says about what the creatures preserved in the Burgess Shales REPRESENT than what you do... and that was my point. That, and the fact that I enjoyed going there long ago, before it became a restricted area and a guided tour for tourists.
It was Walcott, not Walcoot.
And Hansen is a joke, but that's another matter.
And, no, I am not a paleontologist... but I guess I'm supposed to believe that you are one.
Complain about this comment
77. At 00:08am on 25 Jun 2010, manysummits wrote:
In the real world to come, we're going to take care of the Earth, and we are going to downsize.
I suspect a reduction in energy use across the board on the order of 90 percent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please, by all means, lead by example - cut your energy use by 90% - show us SOMETHING, aside from 'hot air'.
How dare you demand this 'world government' thing as well as rationing of necessities without yourself 'living by the creed'...
Please - show us Manysummits - while your hero Al Gore jets around the world in a Gulfstream, you live in a cold house in winter and a hot one in Summer - no air conditioning, very little heat - and only the heat you can generate from wind and solar - please please Manysummits - show us...
Oh, you can't - well, keep posting from your 'fantasy world'...
Cheers.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
#85 - Oops. I thought the first one did not go through... so I edited it to maximize niceness and sent it again.
Complain about this comment
@Ghost
you want to dismiss me because of my 'political agenda'???
Hello. Old proverb - those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones...ever heard it?
Political Agenda - thats a good one from someone who is Manysummits' buddy and greatly desires the 'new world order'.
I want to thank you for the nice laugh. My agenda at this moment is my wedding and being married to the most wonderful lady in the world. Sure, I write my "Datelines" regarding the disaster in the Gulf - but I get dismissed because you guys love Obama - because he supports your political agenda.
Good luck with your 'new world order' - you are gonna need it - a whole lotta luck and a whole lot more...
I am thankful that you and Manysummits are more impotant than Obama - there is absolutely nothing behind your words - no actions whatsoever...just too much time on your hands and a very overactive imagination.
Cheers.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
LarryKealey #94.
"Sure, I write my "Datelines" regarding the disaster in the Gulf - but I get dismissed because you guys love Obama.."
utter tripe.
if only you could see only a little further than the end of your nose, like perhaps acknowledging the disasterous situation in southern Nigeria with a passion similar to the one evident for 'your' disaster.
but that would be asking too much of an 'average' flag-waving American.
Complain about this comment
#91 CanadianRockies: Paleontology
What a nasty attitude you have.
A paleontologist - that would presume specialization, an advanced degree.
I have a Bachelor of Science, major geology, best geology subject - paleontology - major geological interest - the history of life on Earth, necessitating a rather significant understanding of both mass extinctions and planetary geology.
I have witnessed and been a part of three major revolutions in geology.
The first, continental drift, or plate tectonics, late 1960's while at McGill University, taking Marine geology.
Second, bolide interactions with the Earth, from the Hadean to the present - galvanized by the work on Meteor Crater by Eugene Shoemaker, and later the Alvarez Hypothesis in 1981 on the extinction of the dinosaurs (Father and son, Luis physicist, Walter geologist). This following my degree in Saskatchewan late 1970's.
Third, climatology and paleoclimatology as revealed especially in the work of Milutin Milankovitch near the beginning of the twentieth century, and later by the ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica - the results of which are still being digested and expanded upon. Mass extinctions due to CO2 from flood basalt provinces of the past, possibly linked to impact events - are now cutting edge. In the early nineties, while the ice cores were underway, I took a couple of geophysics courses at the University of Calgary.
So I've sort of geologized my way across Canada, and across the years.
Unfortunately, much of this research on climatology is being driven by mankind's fossil fuel and land use CO2 emissions, which look like they are now replicating, possibly even surpassing, the CO2 emissions of these gigantic and episodic flood basalt provinces, or in one case, the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum, a possible outbreak of methane clathrates.
In the public vernacular, there isn't a doubt in the world that we are directly heating up the planet, that this type of CO2/positive feedback heating has in the past probably caused mass extinctions, including but not restricted to the Big Five, and that we are pretty much set to have an early extinction event ourselves, along with the mass extinction amongst other species now documented and increasing as we swarm the Earth with our numbers.
It is the way of science to couch their words in phrases such as 'with confidence,' or 'with very high confidence' etc... Caveats are always welcome and required.
Unfortunately, these nuanced phrases are lost on a rather large portion of the public, and used by disinformation specialists to cast doubt big time, when in fact the doubt is often nearly non-existent.
The significant doubts these days are in the forecasts of future climate - the models are not yet up to high accuracy.
There is vanshingly little doubt about AGW however, and knowing this, professional and unscrupulous lobbyists seek to create major doubt where there isn't, and to castigate, ridicule and denigrate not only climatology and its practioners, but also science and the scientific method.
To be a part of this disinformation campaign when the stakes are life as we know it qualifies anyone indulging in active tactical disinformation, at least in my mind, as a monster.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
Nice try Kealey at # 92:
First you say I post too much, and now not enough.
Perhaps you think I will fall for your trap and try and convince you of both my exemplary lifestyle and while I'm at it, I'll just outline what everyone else in the world should do!.
The answers you pretend to seek have already been outlined in any number of books:
Your friend Al Gore's "Our Choice" for one.
Your fellow coutryman Lester Brown in "Plan B 4.0"
and in the UK, George Monbiot's "Heat"
Almost forgot another countryman of yours, Thomas Friedman and "Hot, Flat and Crowded."
Do you need any other suggestions for further reading Kealey?
If so, you know how to reach me.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
Kealey's Fantasy World:
By the way, just to maintain clarity, it isn't really my fantasy world, now is it Kealey?
After all, I am the one so many of your fellow denialists accuse of hero worship and appeal to authority, charges which I will happily agree to.
So in truth Kealey, wouldn't you have to in all honesty, and I know you are an honest man, admit that it isn't my fantasy world that you are after, it's the fantasy world of Al Gore, of Thomas Friedman, of Noam Chomsky, of James Hansen and Richard Alley and Lonnie Thompson and Wallace Broecker, and of every academy of science on the planet.
We do want to be clear on that don't we Kealy - you don't engage in shooting the messenger now do you Kealey - even though you defame your President, and betray your military training.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
#96. manysummits
Well, that was the most lucid, rational, and reasonable post from you that I have ever read.
It simply leaves me baffled that you can take Al Gore seriously... like you just did in your #98.
I have plenty of extremely very well educated friends who do accept the whole AGW hypothesis - mostly because they NEED to for their careers -but even they cringe at the mere mention of Gore's name now. Yet you actually refer to his latest book as some kind of credible source.
I don't suppose you actually take his science fiction movie seriously too???
Perhaps your fundamental doomsday view of things has clouded your thinking?
Why are doomsday cults so popular? They have been part of human history for a very long time...
H. L. Mencken: “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-face for the urge to rule it.”
Complain about this comment
Oh. Reading lists!
The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg.
Caution: may disturb doomsday views.
Complain about this comment
#101 CanadianRockies
"The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg.
Caution: may disturb doomsday views."
only those disturbed by fiction
Complain about this comment
#brunnen_g
"The bias is showing..."
it's turning into a paranoid whine now.....think i preferred the vuvuzelas
http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2010/vuvuzela-concerto-p1.php
Complain about this comment
Yes the queen might be impotent and useless but is democracy any better? I think of the long list Bush Thatcher Hitler Blair Regan etc. Sadly democracy is the system where an aggressive opinionated few generally always seem to sway the (dumb) masses to any point they want. Democracy is the modern republican party, it is Murdoch and Fox, it is Bush it is the "we are all right" rabid climate skeptics, it is eternally the short term over the long term, and has become graft and thieving and corner cutting over everything.
Psychologically people are very like sheep, give most of us a strong enough charismatic leader or some kind of reward or a nice war and they will follow them anywhere even straight into the slaughterhouse.
I loath and detest the UK's NuLabour but in the end I still voted for them - there was literally no choice. I know from reading American blogs that for most on the left there it is just the same, they loathe the (often very right wing, weak, corrupt) Democrats but they have no choice. I know that for many on the right its exactly the same - how many people in the Republican movement actually wanted to vote for Bush on that second term. And the next clay pigeon climbing up to the slot for them is Palin, Wow!
BTW In measure of evil
the Nazi's killed some 6 million over about 8 years.
Stalins rule killed some 20-40 million but over a longer period.
Mao killed maybe 15 million but probably saved more.
Pol Pot killed just less than 2 million.
All that pales into insignificance compared to global internationalist capitalism which kills around 30 million people a year most of them children and has a total kill over the last hundred years of around 500 million to 2 billion*.
Looking into the future, over the next 100 years global capitalism is set to kill at least 3 to 5 billion* most of them children. If it continues climate change will make that around 5 to maybe 10 billion*.
(* these are extremely complex aggregate statistics and can only be crude rough approximations. Over the last 100 years the total aggregate population is assumed to be around 10 to 15 billion, and over the next 100 years around 15 to 25 billion. The numbers are heavily distorted by areas with high birth and death rates, and high 'cycle' rates where the average human lifespan may often be less than twenty years.
The final solution had a slogan - paraphrasing, "The Death of One is a Tragedy, the Death of a billion a Statistic." (Sorry if all thats to down and grim, I'm afraid I do sometimes love statistics rather to much.)
Complain about this comment
#bowmanthebard
"are you going to retract you statement that anyone concerned about the biosphere (without being able to define why to your satisfaction) is a fascist?" - me
"Where did I say that?"
here:
"There are indeed remarkable affinities between people who think "the race" should be kept preserved and those who think species should be preserved. Both are misinformed by cockeyed ideas about the supposed "sacredness" of groups."
in responding to threemiceonashirt's
""What's amazing to note is that the whale rights people do not realize that they are the fascists in this cause""
and here:
"That is to put "the biosphere" into a realm where its value cannot be questioned, nor even reckoned. That's the way to the guillotine and the gas chambers."
'whale rights people' and those that value the biosphere are clearly being equated by you of behaving with fascists. that is an outrageous accusation.
Complain about this comment
#73 CanadianRockies
"Meanwhile, back in the real world:"
oh yes, the world of an ostrich is of course as real to him as any existence
Complain about this comment
so let me summarize the lobby position:
1. whales are crap
2. if you don't agree that whales are crap you're fascists planning to gas millions
3. the old saw from bjorn lomberg proves it and should be on a reading list
4. and btw oil will go on forever
.....and we're accused of living in a dream world?
Complain about this comment
@ 106
as an ex-lobby memmber (i'm now in the stairs) i'd like to distance myself from points 1-4.
Whales are awesome, beautiful, intellignet creatures- whalling should be stopped- except (unfortunatley) for those cultures that LITERALLY rely on them (certain inuit tribes if i remember correctly- but then they only kill like one every year and use every last bit).
Complain about this comment
106. rossglory wrote:
".....and we're accused of living in a dream world?"
Well you obviously don't want to deal with reality so... yes. But since your dreams all seem to be about doomsday, maybe you're living in a nightmare world.
Why are doomsday cults so popular?
Complain about this comment
#107 labmunkey
i've never considered you part of the lobby labmunkey.....far too intelligent for that :o)
Complain about this comment
#104 rossglory wrote:
'whale rights people' and those that value the biosphere are clearly being equated by you of behaving with fascists. that is an outrageous accusation.
Yes, I am likening some of them to Fascists, and with good reason. The mark of the fanatic is that he has no "scale of values". He considers this or that to be intrinsically valuable, which means that it cannot be compared to other values, and hence compromise (which involves a trade-off between values) is impossible. Toleration (which is a difficult subject, by the way, and very easy to see as a failing rather than a virtue) is impossible to such people. How many ecologists have you heard saying "there can be no compromise" or calling for "zero tolerance" as if these were admirable virtues rather than execrable vices?
We see that sort of fanaticism all over the place: for example, among anti-abortionists who say abortion is worse than murder; among feminists who say rape is worse than murder; among sexual puritans who say that contraception or masturbation is worse than rape; and so on. However, most of the above fanatics at least observe the centrality of individuals in our moral/political decision-making. Out-and-out Fascism goes a bit further.
The distinguishing marks of Fascism are (a) fanaticism of the above sort, combined with (b) the subsumption of the individual to the group, usually inspired by mystical claptrap about teleology (which the Third Reich called "destiny"; but there are many synonyms for a vision of the world "as it was meant to be" -- be it minus Jews, or with total equality, or with a merely imagined biological "balance" maintained).
The Fascist movements of the twentieth century were closely associated with ecological and health-and-fitness movements such as the greenshirts, but you might dismiss that as a mere historical accident. I don't.
Complain about this comment
#108 CanadianRockies
"Why are doomsday cults so popular?" - sounds like something an Anakena chief, Easter Island might have said c1700
so, a 21st century scientific conscensus is a 'cult'? this comment board becomes more orwellian every day.
H L Mencken - "Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under."
H L Mencken - "Conscience is a mother-in-law whose visit never ends."
Complain about this comment
#110 bowmanthebard
"Out-and-out Fascism goes a bit further."
are you having a laugh? fascism is a particularly vile political system that devalues just about everything. millions of jews, gypsies and mentally ill were gassed....not in the name of ecology, but in the name of ignorant, racist hatred.
to you it seems if i wear a brown shirt, i'm a nazi. if i have a stiff leg, i'm a nazi. if i have a small moustach, i'm a nazi. if i like flowers, i'm a nazi.
your rewriting of history is revisionist nonsense.
some fascists will use any excuse to further their vile aims, but wanting to preserve the biosphere for whatever reason is NOT fascist behaviour.
so are you going to retract your egregious accusation?
Complain about this comment
Will you chaps kindly leave the Queen alone. If you are a republican (little c) then kindly consider the following two words and be cured of that disease.
The two words are PRESIDENT and BLAIR.
Complain about this comment
#112 rossglory wrote:
to you it seems if i wear a brown shirt, i'm a nazi. if i have a stiff leg, i'm a nazi
I gave you a couple of clear criteria, which I think you should address. It is naive of you to think fascism is a twentieth-century phenomenon. A serious political-philosophical tension has existed for many centuries between "communitarian" ( = anti-individualistic) philosophers such as Rousseau who put "nature" on a pedestal and take what's "natural" as a moral guide, and liberal philosophers such as Hume and JS Mill who sharply distinguish between "is" and "ought".
Complain about this comment
111. rossglory
Re: "Why are doomsday cults so popular?"
Just a question... why are they?
Again... could this be a clue? H. L. Mencken: “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-face for the urge to rule it.”
And this is funny... "21st century scientific conscensus."
#101 - You called Lomborg's book, a statistical analysis with a particularly juicy expose about the WWF's Madoffian tales of 'mass extinction,' fiction. Also funny.
#105 - You referred to an factual assessment current and projected US energy needs by the U.S. Energy Information Administration as a case being an "ostrich." Also funny.
You write "H L Mencken - "Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under."
Yet you seem positively slavish to follow your government's big 'green' push... also funny, in a sad way.
You seem to be in a deep state of denial about anything that does not conform to your beliefs. That is typical of cult members.
There's no glory in being a lemming.
Complain about this comment
#102 rossglory wrote:
#brunnen_g
"The bias is showing..."
it's turning into a paranoid whine now.....think i preferred the vuvuzelas
-----------------------------------
Really?
He calls me a monster living a perverted lifestyle, and that's just fine. I call him a coward for refusing to apologise for calling me a liar on something I was able to prove I was telling the truth about and that breaks house rules.
What else am I supposed to assume, if not bias?
Complain about this comment
Ah the old arguments about fascism again.
Fascism isn't simply the opposite of democracy, it is a corrupt form of democracy. It is 'popularism', rule by the majority against the minority. Above all it is the control of people through the control and manipulation of information. The other thing is that it caters to the lowest common denominator, usually hate - yes things like racism, homophobia, anti-smoking, left - right, climate denial verses belief, etc, etc.
The ugly conclusion using this definition is that almost everyone is a little fascist about something, even the BBC tend to behave like fascists when they encounter the ultra right. :) I admit I'm sometimes an intellectual fascist because I believe in science and technology and Progress, and see Luddism and willful stupidity as forces of evil.
Of course traditional fascism was based on racism and racist hatred. In Germany the Nazi's used German antisemitism and patriotism as a key to rise to power, Hitler was voted in with something like 70% of the vote.
What has disappeared from modern accounts though is that both sides in WWII were pretty close to being fascist - certainly by todays values. British society and American society were both openly quite racist, both were controlled by conformity and heavy propaganda. The media didn't give you news, the government told you what to think. If you don't believe me just find some movies or uncensored newsreel footage from the 30's or 40's. If you were Jewish Hitler was worse, if you were black or Asian they were about the same, if you were gay or homeless or mentally ill the Nazi's were probably worse but either could be very bad.
---
BTW On the biosphere, its not fascist to want to preserve the biosphere, not unless almost everyones a fascist. After all the biosphere scientifically is the whole region that supports life on earth - so without it no life could survive on Earth at all, even humans.
Complain about this comment
#115 CanadianRockies
Re: "Why are doomsday cults so popular?"
"Just a question... why are they?"
you're asking the wrong person....oh sorry by cult you mean someone who accepts scientific consensus. ok, let me explain what science is.....on second thoughts find out yourself.
with regard the danger of climate change (which is what i suspect you are referring to) this is what a consesnsus looks like:
http://logicalscience.com/consensus/consensusD1.htm
not the rantings you subscribe to.
"Yet you seem positively slavish to follow your government's big 'green' push."
big green push? what on earth are you talking about, just look at the stats for co2 growth. look at the collapse in copenhagen. i'm more worried about those slavishly touting the corporate brainwashing they're unable to recognise.
beliefs, cults....trying to smear with pseudo religious mumbo-jumbo is (as my 4 year old likes to say) rubbish. string a proper argument together.
lomberg? - his work has been debunked so many times i don;t know why you guys keep dragging him up. makes life easier for us i guess so i shouldn;t complain.
There's no glory in being a lemming.....says the ostrich.
H L Mencken - "Democracy is only a dream: it should be put in the same category as Arcadia, Santa Claus, and Heaven."
it's pointless seriously quoting mencken, you can get his quotes to mean just about anything.
sorry need to move on to bowman's post, at least his nonsense is interesting (if outrageous).
Complain about this comment
#114 bowmanthebard
firstly i do not and never had claimed fascism is a 20th century problem. you couched our debate in the 20th century by mentioning amongst other things gas chambers.
thanks mostly to support from western so-called liberal nations fascism is alive and well and will continue for some time yet.
i'm happy to have a philosophical debate but this has nothing to do with your outrageous conflation of environmentalism and fascism (which i note you still have not retracted).
for a start rousseau was talking about 'human nature' not the biosphere,
hume i think understood people like yourself bowman very well. which one are you?
"Disputes with men, pertinaciously obstinate in their principles, are, of all others, the most irksome; except, perhaps, those with persons, entirely disingenuous, who really do not believe the opinions they defend, but engage in the controversy, from affectation, from a spirit of opposition, or from a desire of showing wit and ingenuity, superior to the rest of mankind." - have saved this quote...sure you'll be seeing it again :o)
and mill has been accused g e moore of '"the naturalistic fallacy," identifying good with some natural property' - hardly the libertarian you take him for.
my politics are in fact pretty liberal, i have little trust in government and total distrust of corporate pr. i totally adhere to grayling's defence of civil liberties and enlightenment values.
the world we live in now is threatened by so called libertarian interests and whereas a liberal believes in freedom for all (remeber rousseau's 'Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains') a libertarian only believes in his own self interest no matter the cost (greed is good etc).
even the so-called arched libertarian adam smith would cringe at the people quoting him. he would recognise well the corporate dominated dystopia we've created, as he observed:
"the merchants and manufacturers of england were the principle architects of state policy, and made sure that their own interests were most peculiarly attended to however grievous the effects on others including the people of england"
quite prescient i would say. so corporate backed libertarian govts is where you want to be looking for rise of fascism not those trying to protect whales.
Complain about this comment
To Robert Lucien #103:
That helps - it helps a lot - to have company.
All the best,
Manysummits
Complain about this comment
To CR #99: lucid / Al Gore
I don't know why some are so down on Al Gore?
He is not a scientist, but he has a thorough knowledge base, and a lifelong commitment to environmentalism.
He styles himself a 'recovering politician', which says worlds.
He is a businessman - why would the righteous right mind this?
I think it's either envy, or simply a need to attack someone who has swat, and is effective in messaging.
His book "Our Choice" is all about how to repair the damage we have done - 'best practice', in farming, energy, water conservation...
He is still just a man, like other men.
Why the hatred?
Have you read 'Earth in the Balance" or "The Assault on Reason" or "Our Choice"?
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
Kealey:
Everything posted by you is somehow attributed to "Obama", apparently you are unable to address him as President, furthing your political agenda. Your confusion over ownership of responsbility and defense of corporations that have clearly been shown to have traded safety for profit is an ethical issue with me, not political. The politics is that elected officials always cover for these corporations and although you constantly blame democrats you fail to link the Republican governors along the coast with any state responsbility for oversight on these matters. I have no political agenda. Would rather see consensus than than confrontations but the right wing lives on confrontation and emptying the wallets of the ignorant to enrich themselves while convincing them that they should work againist their own interest. The American political system is corrupt to the core, it is that simple, regardless of political affiliation..it has lost any moral leadership it once held and is nothing more than a military machine to protect corporate interest and corrupt elected officals who pass laws that allow the abuse of citizens for profit. The American Dream is dead..it looks like the worn out governments of Europe and is happy to adopt the corruption of Asian politics and business as that is the model most desired by American investors. All nations die from within.
I think a new energy source will be developed and that the position of manysummits about dramatic changes in lifestyle are overstated, but that is his opinion and as none have a view of the future we should be careful not to condemn ideas about based on "what if.". As I do not believe that President Obama will change the US into a socialist state or that somehow he has some secret agenda when he has difficulty getting thing through his congress. The Republicans are a bit scary and I am afraid when the charletons take over in any country. The bankers and big business are abandoning the US and Europe for Asia....the rats are always the first to leave the sinking ship after they have spoiled the stores. As Asia is also corrupt they will find many welcoming governments...but they may get their heads hacked off if they try there what they have done in the West...I would not be opposed.
Complain about this comment
#121 manysummits wrote:
I don't know why some are so down on Al Gore?
He is not a scientist, but he has a thorough knowledge base, and a lifelong commitment to environmentalism.
-----------------------------------------------
People generally don't like liars, hypocrites and opportunists.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
To Ghost and Rossglory:
None of us can see the future -
My lifelong commitment has always been to 'seeing' the present. To this end I have always admired those who can desribe what they see and know in as crystal a voice as possible, leaving prediction and theory in a separate niche - worthy of discussion - but always separate from direct observation.
It is possible however to 'see' the past very clearly, at least in some respects. If in addition all of the tools of mutiple lines of evidence are brought to bear, and statistically evaluated as to probability, one can arrive at conclusions which are very to extremely robust.
If I overstate a future scenario, which is of course very possible, I wish to make clear the separation of prediction from observation.
The present state of the planet, directly observable, from multiple and disparate lines of evidence, ranging from societal observation through economic appraisal through all of the natural sciences suggests in the strongest possible terms that the Earth we presently inhabit, at this time and in this ecosphere, is in imminent jeopardy of a change of state.
Past reconstructions of both climate and ecosphere suggest this change of state will resemble a mass extinction, details still uncertain.
I am absolutely and totally opposed to continuiing down this path, which is a form of abberant behavior given our capacity to see the present and the past.
It is equally clear that certain forces are both willing and able to continue down this same self-destructive path, due to a combination of greed and corruption of the few, and the abysmal ignorance of science and its findings of the many, including those in power, most of whom know only about power and wealth, and are even more ignorant than the public, who have the benefit of intuition and compassion.
Upon the slender thread then of this compassion and intuition rests our future.
If ever the many can be made aware of the present state of the planet, and the danger it poses to humankind and the ecosphere - we will change course - details unknowable.
- Manysummits -
Complain about this comment
#123 Brunnen_G wrote:
People generally don't like liars, hypocrites and opportunists.
Perhaps we should say: they like them for a while, but then they begin to see through the lies, hypocrisy and opportunism. Some see through it faster than others. I think time is almost up for "call me Al!"
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I personally wish Al Gore was president, despite what he says I just get the impression that Obama just doesn't take the environment that seriously.
Despite all the criticism I always get the impression that Al Gore is one of the few politicians to have a real grip on all this, the man really understands the science and has moved the debate on hugely. Its been his primary issue for a long time and the depth of knowledge makes a difference.
For me the nightmare is Blair trying to sell green issues or sell himself as some great new green messiah. Blair as slippery as a snake (sorry snakes), always reminds me of the Salesman from Clive Barkers Weaveworld.
Complain about this comment
#128 Robert Lucien wrote:
I personally wish Al Gore was president, despite what he says I just get the impression that Obama just doesn't take the environment that seriously.
--------------------------------------------------
Ye gods! Are you insane? Of course Gore takes the environment seriously. If it wasn't for the green crowd, he might have to do an honest day's work to earn money.
Every night I'm certain he falls to his knees and thanks the lord for a planet chock full of gullible fools willing to buy his snake oil.
Complain about this comment
Brunnen_G #129.
"If it wasn't for the green crowd, he [Gore] might have to do an honest day's work to earn money."
Gore never had to work:
"In the last personal finance report he filed as vice-president, Gore disclosed on May 22, 2000, that the value of his assets totalled between $780,000 and $1.9 million. In addition, Gore listed an interest in his father's estate that included Occidental Petroleum Corp. stock worth as much as $1 million."
Complain about this comment
Dateline Gulf of Mexico Day 67
This morning on the news we saw a lot of beaches with a lot of oil on them.
I spoke yesterday regarding the fact that none of the equipment involved in the oil recovery operation is 'storm ready'. Well, it now looks like Alex, the first storm of the season will cross the Yucatan over the weekend and emerge into the Bay of Campeche and then the Gulf. Down here it means that we go to 'stage 1' - planning and preparation - we do this every time a storm enters the Gulf.
Right now, most of the computer models have the storm tracking westward, into Mexico or Deep South Texas. Let's hope that is what it does. There are a couple of models which have the storm taking a northerly track toward the spill area - this would be very bad news indeed. All the ships and boats involved in the operation - both to capture oil, drill the relief wells and collect oil would have to seek port. It was reported this morning that it would basically put everything on hold for two weeks - and during that time, the 'top hat' would have to be removed and all the oil and gas would be pouring into the Gulf.
The Gulf water temperatures are also above normal, creating conditions in the Gulf which could allow the storm to intensify rapidly once it enters the Gulf.
In addition to shutting down all the operations, a storm surge from Alex could push the oil miles and miles into wetlands yet unaffected. Very bad news indeed.
Let us all hope the storm travels westward - which would be good for a number of reasons - if so, it won't be over open water for long and so will not have the opportunity to intensify as much - and keep it away from the spill area.
Well, things to do...thats all for today - keep your eyes on Alex and let us hope...
Kealey
Complain about this comment
@Manysummits
(multiple posts)
LOL
Cheers.
Kealey
PS - thought you were going to take a break dude? What happened to that? Oh, and it must be nice to take seven years 'off' to go climb mountains - how did you support yourself??? Must have that 'silver spoon'
Complain about this comment
@Ghost
Yes, I have been critical of Obama - I have also been very critical of Tony Hayward and BP - with good reason. The Obama Administration certainly shares in the responsibility for the disaster and their actions since this began have been 'less than adequate'. The plans in place before the disaster were 'less than adequate'.
So, his first scapegoat was to fire HIS minerals management service head...typical washington redirection and misdirection.
Make no mistake - I don't like politicians - none of them. I don't trust them - democrat or republican.
There have been policies from presidents on both sides of the aisle which I have supported, and many more which I have not.
The thing I have with Obama is that he has done nothing since taking office except push through legislation which he never even read - remember the 'bail out bills' - which included massive bonuses??? It took two weeks before someone actually read it and said - yep, we are giving them big bonuses for creating this mess...
In my view, the man lacks the experience to hold the office (as I also believe Ms. Palin lacks the experience for the office). And no, I don't like most of his policies nor his agenda. Having been very ill without health insurance - even I don't support his health care agenda. I had to deal (and still deal with) a whole lot of 'bunk' to get health care - but I still get health care. Obama would just put everyone in the same shoes - which I do not believe would be a positive thing.
He will be a 'one-termer' - he doesn't even enjoy the support of his own party at this point.
Kindest.
Kealey
Complain about this comment
96. At 04:46am on 25 Jun 2010, manysummits wrote:
#91 CanadianRockies: Paleontology
What a nasty attitude you have.
------------------------------------------------------------
Do you not own a mirror??
Pot, kettle, black...
-Kealey
PS - Only my friends call me 'Kealey' - please refer to me as LarryKealey or Mr. Kealey - my real name - tell me, why do you hide behind a silly moniker???
Complain about this comment
130. jr4412 wrote:
Gore never had to work:
"In the last personal finance report he filed as vice-president, Gore disclosed on May 22, 2000, that the value of his assets totalled between $780,000 and $1.9 million. In addition, Gore listed an interest in his father's estate that included Occidental Petroleum Corp. stock worth as much as $1 million."
----------
Now that's interesting. That was the company that had the most fatal - by far - off shore oil rig accident, the Piper Alpha in 1988 off the coast of Scotland. Think it was 188 dead. But the Brits didn't go all anti-oil because they know accidents happen... whereas the Obama gang finds demonizing things here very convenient for their agenda.
Complain about this comment
111. rossglory
Is this the "21st century scientific conscensus" you meant?
IPCC "Consensus" on Solar Influence was Only One Solar Physicist who Agreed with Her Own Paper
Thursday, June 24th 2010,
http://climaterealists.com/?id=5910
Best you gulp down another glass of green kool-aid before you read that.
Complain about this comment
Just as killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people(intelligent with a brain as large as that of dolphin) of the land thousands of miles away from your homeland is unmistakably your culture, killing and eating whales and dolphins is our culture, periods!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS