December 2013 Open thread

More thread.

Comments

  1. #1 chek
    December 20, 2013

    Oh FFS Stu.
    If they can’t do it for themselves by shorting average mortgage arrears 10 years hence, then they don’t deserve it
    That’s the kind of money Betty approves of.
    Anything else is just freeloading.

  2. #2 Mack
    December 20, 2013

    Speaking of polar bears and toasters,, here’s what passes for science education in schools and public education via the newspaper in little ol’ state controlled NZ.
    It’s headed up in our local newspaper…..
    ” Some pupils of Waimea Intermediate have been learning about survival and sustainability and paired up to write letters to the editor on their topics. The Mail (newspaper) will publish selected letters from them this week.”
    (notice how they’ve got these kids paired off for peer reinforcement) (Intermediate pupils are aged about 10 and 11yrs) Here’s the one of the best letters quote verbatum….
    Saving the polar bears
    “We have learnt about how polar bears are becoming extinct and we have been thinking of creative yet realistic solutions that could help save the polar bears in the future. They are endangered because the pollution is making global warming worse, so it is melting the ice which is affecting the polar bears because it is making it hard to get food.
    We have made five solutions and using a criteria grid we have chosen our best one. Our best solution is for scientists to make an artificial cloud that they put in the air that blocks out the heat that global warming and pollution is causing.
    The ice will melt less meaning that polar bears will be able to get their food. This cloud will not affect the air so the polar bears and other animals won’t get sick. We like this solution because it will help save the polar bears.
    A problem with our solution is that the cloud will be very tricky to make. We hope that someone likes our solution and puts it in to action.”
    Alexis Brough and Sophie Borlase
    Waimea Intermediate School, Dec 3
    So there you go Jeff Harvey ..the solution should be a great idea for you and all the looney AGW indoctrinated Doltoids here. The kids all take it as a “given” eh Jeff Harvey. …so no sweat .

  3. #3 Betula
    December 20, 2013

    “I’m still dying to find out what is so bad about taking some money from the Exxons and DeBeers of this world and using it to help developing nations.”

    But….won’t the further developing of nations cause greater CO2 emissions? Unless of course, that’s not really what this is all about…

  4. #4 BBD
    December 20, 2013

    It’s interesting that we have got to the character of Hugo Chavez without any commentary on how we account for paleoclimate hyperthermals and the Cenozoic cooling.

  5. #5 Betula
    December 20, 2013

    Mack…

    “We have learnt about how polar bears are becoming extinct and we have been thinking of creative yet realistic solutions that could help save the polar bears in the future”

    I’ve got the solution…..increase development. What we do is, we take money from developed countries to help develop other countries. Trust me, it will work.

  6. #6 Betula
    December 20, 2013

    “Our best solution is for scientists to make an artificial cloud that they put in the air”

    10-11 yrs old and they already have their heads in the clouds.

  7. #7 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    “It’s interesting that we have got to the character of Hugo Chavez”

    And who was it that brought up Hugo Chavez?

  8. #8 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Unless of course, that’s not really what this is all about…

    Then what IS it about, you weasel? Can you make a farking point for once?

  9. #9 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    (notice how they’ve got these kids paired off for peer reinforcement)

    Congratulations, that’s the dumbest thing you’ve said yet.

  10. #10 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    I think I was the one who brought up Hugo Chavez — partly to see if you were just visiting the failboat or booked a first-class cabin.

    Of course, you did not disappoint. Just one more Betty, for fun:

    Disregarding his silly education reforms, when did the Venezuelan people rise up (totally grass-roots, natch) and start protesting and rioting, while a coup was underway? What specific action of Chavez prompted this?

    Why do you think that is?

  11. #11 chek
    December 21, 2013

    “I’ve got the solution…..increase development. What we do is, we take money from developed countries to help develop other countries (whilst minimising their use fossil fuels). Trust me, it will work”

    After the inevitable correction, you may be onto something there Betty..

  12. #12 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    And Betty, there are those hyperthermals to explain.

  13. #13 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    Jeff Harvey @ # 59 previous page;
    “Its not just distaste: its more like revulsion, because we don’t live in true democracies but in plutocracies. Or, if you prefer, ‘managed democracies’ – meaning managed from the top down.”

    ianam @ # 61
    ” which makes it clear that deliberative global governance is a form of democracy, it is not a “benevolent dictatorship”. ”

    As I said earlier ianam, if you want to call it something other than ‘benevolent dictatorship’ you are welcome to do that.
    Jeff has coined it as a ‘managed democracy’ – meaning from the top down.

    So what form of governance or political/social mechanism is being advocated here that would be an improvement and a mechanism to achieve those MDG goals?
    I note distaste through to revulsion about variations of what is coined ‘right wing libertarianism’ or ‘western style democracies’ yet there is no clear alternative being offered.
    Surely you are not advocating a “left wing dictatorship” ?

  14. #14 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    I don’t understand, by the way — isn’t one of the “arguments” “we shouldn’t do anything because poor countries are building coal plants anyway, so there’s no point”? Now the same people are arguing against helping these countries to create a cleaner energy infrastructure?

    Talk about motivated reasoning. As long as you wind up with “don’t help the darkies”, it’s just fine.

  15. #15 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Jeff has coined it as a ‘managed democracy’ – meaning from the top down.

    Even if you were right, which I dispute, why oppose bettering the human condition?

    Let’s revisit the UN goals:

    1/. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

    2/. Achieve universal primary education

    3/. Promote gender equality and empower women

    4/. Reduce child mortality

    5/. Improve maternal health

    6/. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases

    7/. Ensure environmental sustainability

    8/. Global partnership for development

    Why are you against these things?

  16. #16 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    @Stu 2:

    Oh yes, it’s totally unfixable, so why try, right?

    Let’s start with these.

    – Public campaign financing, prohibit corporate donations to political speech
    – Strict regulations against revolving door crap
    – Reinstate Glass-Steagal
    – Full statehood with representation for all territories if they want it
    – Maintain and upgrade infrastructure (electrical, roads, bridges) — could be Welfare to Work after making that program not criminally insane
    – Massive, permanent tax breaks on renewables
    – Massive increased funding for research into renewables, battery tech
    – Massive increased funding for basic research
    – Remove religious vaccine exemptions
    – Abolish state-level education standards and make them federal
    – Incorporate costs of use in everything (gas, etc)
    – Classify SUVs as cars
    – CAFE to 50mpg by 2020
    – I can haz EPA? Stop fracking, mountain-top removal mining, shale gas until proper controls and safety regs are in place
    – Restructure/abolish Federal Reserve
    – Heavily subsidize college fees (not private ones, thank you)
    – Corporate taxes at 30%, no more loopholes
    – Reinstate estate taxes (above 2M, adjust for inflation), no more loopholes
    – Massive subsidies for public transportation
    – No more offshoring for tax purposes
    – Living wage
    – No separate vote on debt ceiling
    – Enforce war powers act
    – Fix hiring/firing policies for federal/state employees
    – Capital gains tax at 30%, no exceptions
    – Break price fixing in energy, gasoline, telecom
    – Radio spectra for rent, not sale
    – Single payer healthcare (Medicare for all) — or at the very least the Dutch system
    – Governance accords, allow for recall votes
    – Withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as bags can be packed
    – Close Guantanamo
    – Nuke the NSA
    – Remove supplement loopholes, FDA to enforce
    – No more tax exempt status for religious institutions
    – Ma Bell the media conglomerates

  17. #17 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    BBD,
    Which part of ‘those are noble goals’ are you not understanding?

  18. #18 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    No, 2, we fully understand. You’re firmly in the “well, that would be neat, but they are impossible because you can’t trust government” camp. So why try, right? I mean, it might even raise your taxes.

  19. #19 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    @ # 16
    What social/political mechanism are you advocating to deliver?

  20. #20 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    @ # 19
    Does that mean you trust a particular government to deliver?
    Which one ?

  21. #21 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Okay, here’s a random pondering. I think one of the basic failings of libertarians, deniers and all of their ilk is that they fail to grasp two phrases:

    “[Life, liberty, and] the pursuit of happiness”

    and

    “consent of the governed”

    I just don’t really understand why basic selfishness can destroy even 3rd grade Civics class.

  22. #22 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    @2:

    I think the best way to describe it into terms you understand would be “social democracy”. As of right now, the closest thing would be the least corrupted European government, but even there the safeguards against corruption are laughably inadequate. To wit: when bureaucracies create a bureaucracy (European Parliament, for one), it removes the checks and look where that goes.

    Let me just ask you a random question: are you at all familiar with the concept of government accords and recalls?

  23. #23 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    @2:

    I think the best way to describe it into terms you understand would be “social democracy”. As of right now, the closest thing would be the least corrupted European government, but even there the safeguards against corruption are laughably inadequate. To wit: when bureaucracies create a bureaucracy (European Parliament, for one), it removes the checks and look where that goes.

    Let me just ask you a random question: are you at all familiar with the concept of government accords and recalls?

  24. #24 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    I swear to the baby Jeebus I only hit Submit once.

  25. #26 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    @ # 22 & 23
    What about countries such as Australia, NZ and Canada?
    Are they not also functioning ‘social democracies’ with at least some checks and balances (but of course not perfect)?
    Which particular Government in Europe is the ‘least corrupted’ in your view?
    Also, please note the question to Jeff Harvey earlier about the layering of extra bureaucracy.
    You have no argument from me that adding extra layers will likely remove checks and balances and contribute to more, not less, corruption.

  26. #27 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Olaus, you pathetic weasel clown.

    1. Watts? Seriously? Ah, never mind.
    2. Quoting Tisdale? Seriously? Ah, never mind.
    3. Greg Laden is now the conventional wisdom? Seriously? Ah, never mind.
    4. You just linked to an article with graphs showing ice loss, you unbelievable moron

  27. #28 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    @2

    In order…

    What about countries such as Australia, NZ and Canada? Are they not also functioning ‘social democracies’ with at least some checks and balances (but of course not perfect)?

    Of course. I was talking about the US because I live here and its foibles is what I keep up with.

    You seem to be leading up to another episode of Morons Attempt To Play Gotcha, so go for it, sweetheart.

    Which particular Government in Europe is the ‘least corrupted’ in your view?

    If I had a preference I would have stated it. I am not a child like you. I do not have time to keep up with the political ins and outs of 20+ nations. Unlike you, I have a job.

  28. #29 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Actually, this bears elaboration. In response to Greg known-to-go-off-half-cocked Laden’s assertion that “AGW models do NOT predict SEA ICE-reduction” (which is wrong, as our favorite TV weatherman points out… the IPCC says “Most CMIP5 models simulate a decrease in Antarctic sea ice extent over the past few decades compared to the small but significant increase observed.”

    So let’s just stop and go for reading comprehension levels here. What do you think the IPCC meant by that quote?

    Back to the issue at hand and my original point; pentax posted a link to a Watts article. Just to make sure, this is the link:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/20/greg-laden-once-again-expresses-something-other-than-fact/#more-99672

    Go look. You HAVE to see this. In this, Watts says

    In reality, about Antarctic sea ice, it is Greg Laden who is wrong and confused. Antarctic sea ice has been increasing and climate models say is [sic] should be decreasing.

    Go look at the article. Go look at the graph he posts right after that quote. Go look at the trend line. Note that this is a farking TISDALE graph he’s using.

    What the — I don’t even — **triple facepalm**

  29. #30 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    No, screw that. Betty will try to play 20 questions and Morons Try To Play Gotcha with this for days.

    Hello, deniers. Please click on the Watts link Pentax provided and that I helpfully copied down (you, on the whole, seem to be scroll-up-impaired).

    Now pay close attention.

    When Anthony Watts says “Antarctic sea ice has been increasing”, you’re probably want to know how your favorite weatherman knows that.

    Well, he is helpful. One paragraph later he posts a graph to support his point. The graph is courtesy of Bob Tisdale, who is firmly in the denier camp. So no “herpa derpa wrong graph claptrap”, this is the best he could source from one of his denier buddies. Note I haven’t even verified the accuracy of this graph! This is straight from the shills’ mouth here.

    Go look at the graph. It shows a steady downward trend.

    Hang on, let me think for a second. What tardmuffin arguments can we expect here?

    Oh, yes!

    “But look! It’s been increasing steadily since 2009!”

    As it did from 1983-1986.
    As it did from 1988-1989.
    As it did from 1990-1995.

    Oh, wait. Too short?

    How about 1983-1994?
    How about 1997-2006?

    This is why there is a field called “statistics”. They invented things like “trend lines”. See the blue line? That’s the trend. In a graph Anthony Watts took from Bob Tisdale. This is not a commie IPCC graph, this is YOUR guys showing a graph that shows a clear, steady downward trend.

    In the same vain, Pentax… I hear Bob and Anthony want to talk to you. They’re doing an experiment in their bathroom and they say it is raining. Better get in on that.

  30. #31 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    @ # 28
    OK, so the US is not a good model in your view but Australia, NZ and Canada could pass muster?
    However you did say there was a sort of prototype of an ideal ‘social democracy’ in Europe:
    here :
    I think the best way to describe it into terms you understand would be “social democracy”. As of right now, the closest thing would be the least corrupted European government, but even there the safeguards against corruption are laughably inadequate.”
    Not in an attempt to play ‘gotcha’ but a genuine question ensued:
    “Which particular Government in Europe is the ‘least corrupted’ in your view?”
    Your answer is this?
    “If I had a preference I would have stated it. I am not a child like you. I do not have time to keep up with the political ins and outs of 20+ nations. Unlike you, I have a job.”
    Just so we’re clear, a wildly inaccurate assumption about my age or my employment status has zero to do with any relevance to the question.
    If we ignore that part can I assume that this is your answer?
    “If I had a preference I would have stated it….. I do not have time to keep up with the political ins and outs of 20+ nations. ”
    ?

  31. #32 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Oh, but wait! It gets better. Watts COPIED THE WRONG GRAPH.

    http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/06/15/model-data-comparison-hemispheric-sea-ice-area-2/

  32. #33 Lotharsson
    December 21, 2013

    So you’re saying “the idea of a carbon tax and redistribution of wealth” go hand in hand.

    No, you are and others are responding to your claim. That does not mean they are making your claim.

    As someone recently said, “do try to keep up”.

    BTW, this is exactly the same play you tried against me. You pretended for days that I had alleged there was a conspiracy when I was lampooning you claiming one. Bit of a pattern developing here…

  33. #34 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    Why is that the wrong graph Stu 2?
    When I read that post and the Tisdale reference, there are 2 graphs. One is the “Observed Hemispheric Sea Ice Area Anomalies”( NSIDC )and the other is the “Modelled Hemispheric Sea Ice Anomalies” (NSIDC)
    Greg Laden’s Comment was:
    AGW Models do NOT predict southern SEA ICE reduction. You are simply wrong. And confused.
    Isn’t that the ‘modelled’ graph?

  34. #35 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Jeebus Tapdancing Cripes. Is there a contest going on that I don’t know about? You know, the “who can say the most idiotic thing with a straight face” kind?

    OK, so the US is not a good model in your view but Australia, NZ and Canada could pass muster?

    I did not say or imply anything of the kind. @16, I give a long list of things I would change about the US way of doing things.

    Because I live there.

    Because it takes quite a bit of time and attention to follow the workings of a government.

    Which I stated.

    And as I stated I only have time for one. Which is the reason the list is US centric.

    But you knew that, if you read what I wrote. So either you do not understand basic English or you are not arguing in good faith.

    Probably both. You seem to have joined Betty in completely abandoning actually addressing the issues. No, scratch that. The issue is global warming, and you’ve both essentially ceded you are spectacularly wrong about how it works, what causes it and what can be done to fix it. You are now all engaged in Red Herring Gotcha… but you are all too goddamned stupid to do even that properly.

    Anyway.

    However you did say there was a sort of prototype of an ideal ‘social democracy’ in Europe

    I said nothing of the kind, you Jello-brained weasel.

    I think the best way to describe it into terms you understand would be “social democracy”. As of right now, the closest thing would be the least corrupted European government, but even there the safeguards against corruption are laughably inadequate.

    Hey, moron. Here’s a tip. Whenever you make a ludicrous bald assertion about what someone said, do not in the next paragraph directly quote what they said if it directly contradicts you.

    I can’t believe I had to write that. I have six dogs, and the only one of them who wouldn’t understand this is 17 years old and senile as all hell.

    Not in an attempt to play ‘gotcha’ but a genuine question ensued: “Which particular Government in Europe is the ‘least corrupted’ in your view?”

    Obvious and stupid lie. I already explained why there is no answer for this, let alone one I readily have. This is a whiny, tone-trolling failboat short-bus gotcha attempt. The only question remaining is who the fark you think you are fooling by asserting it is not.

    Just so we’re clear, a wildly inaccurate assumption about my age or my employment status has zero to do with any relevance to the question.

    Just so we’re clear, I called you a child because you lack the comprehension skills I idealistically assume adults have. I implied you do not have a job because you found it reasonable to demand of me I keep up with 50 governments, and the only reason you would do so is if you felt I have the same amount of time on my hands you do, which would suggest you have no job.

    On the other hand, maybe you were simply suggesting that one could keep up with 50 wildly differing governments on their spare time, which is even farking dumber.

    From your comment, actually, the latter is almost certainly the case.

    If we ignore that part can I assume that this is your answer?

    Please stop trying to tone troll on the side. You are too farking stupid to pull it off.

    “If I had a preference I would have stated it….. I do not have time to keep up with the political ins and outs of 20+ nations. ”

    Okay, the cupcake wants details.

    Russia is out for obvious reasons. France, Italy and the UK are far too corrupted by big money. Germany has way too many issues of its own. The Netherlands and Belgium are too racism-driven at the moment. Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and Greece are still complete bubble-burst trainwrecks. I cannot speak to any of the former Soviet-influenced nations. I do not know enough about Scandinavian politics to have an opinion.

    Australia, Canada, NZ? I could not even begin to have an opinion.

    All I know is that almost every single country I just mentioned has by almost any rational measure a better standard of living on average than the US has.

    Have you ever been out of work and without health coverage? Have you ever experienced stabbing pain in your kidneys during such a period?

    I have. And only in the US would I not and did I not go to a doctor. This kind of goes back to the “pursuit of happiness” part. It’s hard to pursue anything when you’re in bed hoping the pain will pass, because the only outcomes are A) getting better on your own, B) going to a doctor and going bankrupt or C) dying like a farking dog.

  35. #36 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    You have no argument from me that the US health care system is in a bit of a mess.

  36. #37 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Why is that the wrong graph Stu 2?

    Oh goodie. Thank you for confirming that your name is not, in fact, Stu. Other than being multiple-stroke impaired the only reason you would call ME “Stu 2″ is that you are yet another farking sockpuppet. And too stupid to cross the street unaided… but we already knew that part.

    Moron.

    However, do DID catch me. Ice extent is up, and so is snow cover.

    As predicted by many scientists. Precipitation will go up.

    I was thinking more along the lines of

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/Antarctica_Ice_Mass.gif

  37. #38 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    I wasn’t trying to “catch you” Stu (1)
    Sorry about the typo.
    I was just wondering why you thought it was the wrong graph.
    Apparently it wasn’t?

  38. #39 Olaus Petri
    December 21, 2013

    Stu 2, me on the other hand wonders about the text-wise difference between Laden’s claim and IPCC’s.

    I’m sure Stu will care to elaborate. ;-)

  39. #40 Jeff Harvey
    December 21, 2013

    More childish musings from Betty:

    “I’ve got the solution…..increase development. What we do is, we take money from developed countries to help develop other countries. Trust me, it will work”.

    Where on Earth does Betty thinks a lot of the “wealth” from the developed nations originates? From thin air? As has been said innumerable times, every developed nation on Earth fosters an ecological deficit – in other words they consume more per capita resources and produce more per capita waste than those contained within their own land masses. They depend therefore on resources originating elsewhere to maintain their prosperity as currently defined. The US alone consumes resources at the rate of 4 Earth-like planets. Read George Kennan’s now infamous 1948 post war memo and the agenda becomes abundantly clear.

    How do they get these resources? Through economic coercion and outright theft (the plunder and looting I alluded to earlier). This is hardly rocket science. But people like Betty appear to think that western economies are sustainable, or that the wealth we have accumulated (and concentrated upwards to the ruling elites) is somehow based on fair trade and just economic practices, and damn the evidence.

  40. #41 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    I wasn’t trying to “catch you” Stu (1)

    Like hell you weren’t . Can you clowns go at least one post without an obvious lie?

    Sorry about the typo.

    Oh, this is precious. You addressing me by your own handle is now a “typo”? Hey, that excuse would have worked if I was “Sfu” or “Sxu”. But no. You typed in the name, then you hit the space bar, then you hit 2. That’s not a typo. That’s you getting your sockpuppetry confused.

    So who are you? You are not a new user. You are a sockpuppet. Whose?

    I was just wondering why you thought it was the wrong graph.

    Because rather than showing the preferred shill graph of measured ice extent (which shows an increase for Antarctica — as expected, but it sure looks good if you want to argue against ice loss in bad faith), it showed the modeled graph of ice volume (which shows a loss on both poles, as expected).

    What you have proven is that Greg Laden’s tweet is wrong. Something nobody disputed. (Olaus, predictably, is happy as a clam for no good reason over this).

    Anyway.

    Whose sockpuppet are you, you pathetic little weasel?

  41. #42 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    @Jeff: I actually think “Confessions of an economic hitman” should be required reading at this point.

  42. #43 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    Once again Stu, you are peppering your comments with wildly inaccurate assumptions and accusations that are completely irrelevant.
    The typo error was quite a simple mistake. Every time I log in to post a comment here I type in Stu 2 as my name. I just made an error and did it again when I answered to you of the same name.
    But, if you want to argue it means something different and sinister you go right ahead.
    But yes, Laden’s tweet was incorrect and Watts did refer to the correct graph .

  43. #44 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    Whatever makes you sleep at night, precious.

    Whose sock puppet are you?

  44. #45 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Can you clowns go at least one post without an obvious lie?

    At the conclusion of an exhaustive review of the available evidence, the committee concludes that the answer to this question is “no”.

  45. #46 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    Sloth….”You pretended for days that I had alleged there was a conspiracy when I was lampooning you claiming one”

    So we agree then. The goal to redistribute the worlds wealth is not a conspiracy theory, and you never said it was. You were just claiming I said it was with your use of good old lampoonery..

    Sorry for the misunderstanding, and thanks for taking my side on this one Sloth. Finally, a bit of honesty from a Deltoidian. And I have to admit, that lampooning stuff was a riot..

    Would it be ok for me to use you as a reference should the word conspiracy reappear?

  46. #47 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Betty, you weasel!

    You are the one who thinks that there’s a conspiracy within the UN to redistribute wealth using fabricated claims about AGW as a pretext.

    That is a conspiracy theory which is promoted by misrepresenters with political and financial motives to deny the scientific evidence.

    Stop weaselling and pay your taxes like a good boy.

  47. #48 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    And note, fellow Deltoidians, that Betty’s #46 confirms my #45 response to Stu’s question at #41.

    ;-)

  48. #49 Lionel A
    December 21, 2013

    Now here is a light on the real conspiracy that Betty & co’ should be worried about, unless of course they are amongst those who have benefited most by unconventional fossil fuel extraction including by hydraulic fracturing aka fracking:

    The Peak Oil Crisis: A Review of Richard Heinberg’s ‘Snake Oil’

    Note this:

    Heinberg concludes that the real winners, however, are the investment banks that have earned huge fees for raising the money that has fueled the boom.

    Now reading this book having finished ‘Fracking the UK’ by Alan Tootill. If you live in the UK and are unsure about the impacts and benefits of fracking you need to read these.

    Why do you think our GideonGeorge Osborne is so keen on fracking and can smirk whilst the other half of the Janus face Dave ‘slick’ Cameron makes out as a spiv..

    From that 2009 Mail article:

    However, regrettably, there is also the other David Cameron who – and I’m afraid there’s no way of putting it politely – is a bit of a spiv.

    This is someone who is at ease with the more louche elements of London’s media world and who, before entering Parliament, worked in corporate affairs for the controversial media mogul Michael Green.

    This Cameron trumpets about being a ‘moderniser’ and privately boasts that he is the ‘heir to Blair’. (Although he denies ever having made this comment, I know he did.)

    We had the opportunity to see both of these David Camerons on display this week.

  49. #50 Lionel A
    December 21, 2013

    Aargh!

    Why do you think our GideonGeorge Osborne is so keen on fracking and can smirk whilst the other half of the Janus face Dave ‘slick’ Cameron makes out as a spiv..

    From that 2009 Mail article:

    However, regrettably, there is also the other David Cameron who – and I’m afraid there’s no way of putting it politely – is a bit of a spiv.

    This is someone who is at ease with the more louche elements of London’s media world and who, before entering Parliament, worked in corporate affairs for the controversial media mogul Michael Green.

    This Cameron trumpets about being a ‘moderniser’ and privately boasts that he is the ‘heir to Blair’. (Although he denies ever having made this comment, I know he did.)

    We had the opportunity to see both of these David Camerons on display this week.

  50. #51 Lionel A
    December 21, 2013

    Of course this fracking bubble is the latest version of the frauds the investment bankers perpetrate on society. Not convinced:

    The End of growth-Richard Heinberg

    Special Briefing: Attacking Fracking’s Achilles Heel — Economics

    it is all part of the same coin that is driving the world’s climate over the edge.

    And now they are arguing over where to put a new runway in the South of England. Same with new giant handling facilities at sea ports. We should not be expanding such trade but quite the reverse.

  51. #52 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    Does anyone else find it ironic that development by rich nations is found to be the root cause of potential future catastrophic scenarios that will affect poor nations the hardest, and yet, at the same time, it is used as the justification for redistributing the worlds wealth from rich nations to poor nations in order that the poor nations may become more developed?

  52. #53 Stu
    December 21, 2013

    No, Betty — only morons like you do.

    Would you actually care to address anything? There’s a bunch of stuff up there just dying for your insightful commentary.

    8,10,14,16… have at it, hoss.

  53. #54 Turboblocke
    December 21, 2013

    Betula: MDG number 7 is “Ensure environmental sustainability”

  54. #55 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    “8,10,14,16… have at it, hoss”

    Well, let’s see dude…

    #8. You are just dense. Global Justice is the correct answer.

    #10. Because the people had Hope and wanted Change. They were led to believe there would be a redistribution of wealth and an end to corruption. How’d that work out?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/fernando-espuelas/hugo-chavez-is-no-hero_b_2814642.html

    #14. You state…”I don’t understand, by the way — isn’t one of the “arguments” “we shouldn’t do anything because poor countries are building coal plants anyway, so there’s no point”

    I don’t recall that argument so it doesn’t warrant a reply.

    #16. This is directed at Stu2. It’s not a question to be addressed…it’s a wish list.

  55. #56 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    TB

    I don’t think Betty’s really got his head around any of this.

  56. #57 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    “unless of course they are amongst those who have benefited most by ̶u̶n̶c̶o̶n̶v̶e̶n̶t̶i̶o̶n̶a̶l̶ ̶f̶o̶s̶s̶i̶l̶ ̶f̶u̶e̶l̶ ̶e̶x̶t̶r̶a̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2523726/Web-green-politicians-tycoons-power-brokers-help-benefit-billions-raised-bills.html

  57. #58 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    Betula: MDG number 7 is “Ensure environmental sustainability”

    And the financing comes from where and is justified by what authoritative consensus?

  58. #59 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Stu

    Thanks for the writing above. Wonderful. Still laughing. Keep it up!

  59. #60 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    #58 Oh fuck off Betty. You’ve had your crack of the whip. All previously explained.

  60. #61 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Anyway what about #47? When are you going to own up to being a conspiracy theorist? Which you most certainly are.

  61. #62 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    “When are you going to own up to being a conspiracy theorist?”

    When there is a hyperthermal.

  62. #63 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Betty

    Come on. You are the one who believes that implausible claims about AGW are being used to justify wealth redistribution. That’s a conspiracy theory and I would like you to have to moral courage to admit what you are doing here.

    Just admit it.

  63. #64 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Come on, Betty, or it’s going to hurt…

  64. #65 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    Okay, Betty. Time’s up. We do it the hard way.

    Wow. Could it be that the IPCC is a tool of the U.N. used to justify the needed financing of the MDG’s, and later the SDG’s….. with many members having similar ideologies with a taste for global justice through wealth redistribution?

    But how do we justify taxing carbon? And how do we make it so the rich nations pay the carbon tax and the poor nations receive it?

    Whew. You can practically hear the tinfoil rustling.

    Loads more where that came from and I’ve got all evening…

  65. #66 ianam
    December 21, 2013

    ianam @ # 61
    ” which makes it clear that deliberative global governance is a form of democracy, it is not a “benevolent dictatorship”. ”

    As I said earlier ianam, if you want to call it something other than ‘benevolent dictatorship’ you are welcome to do that.

    It’s easy to go back to the immediately earlier comments to see how dishonest this is (2Stupid previously denied that my comment was *about* deliberative global governance) but why even bother when the sack of shit’s dishonesty is so entirely predictable and expected.

  66. #67 Stu 2
    December 21, 2013

    ianam @ # 66
    The point remains that it appears most of the commenters here believe in some sort of trustworthy, benevolent global dictatorship.
    You are welcome to call it as many different names as you like but the mainstream research (fully accessible as it is mostly funded by government grants) usually calls it ‘deliberative global governance’ or ‘global governance’. ‘Deliberative democracy’ is a related term in some of the research.
    But as Jeff Harvey comments, that is not what most would believe is a true democracy as it would clearly be managed from the top down.
    Calling it a different name is just calling it a different name; it doesn’t change the basic concept.
    I note that BBD has negotiated a full circle and is once again attempting to argue that this is a conspiracy theory and once again making references to tin foil hats.
    The comments and references by Lionel @ # 49, 50 & 51 would be a better fit for the definition of a conspiracy theory.
    In an attempt to forestall more irrelevant abuse however, I don’t disagree that institutions such as banks and multinational corporations and big government bureaucracies and big NGOs very often end up being the financial beneficiaries of or, the winners in most global activities.

  67. #68 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    I note that BBD has negotiated a full circle and is once again attempting to argue that this is a conspiracy theory and once again making references to tin foil hats.

    No, that’s consistency. And you have not addressed the elephant over there. Betty is inarguably indulging in conspiracist ideation. You have a problem.

    * * *

    “2Stupid”. Wish I’d thought of that…

  68. #69 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    The point remains that it appears most of the commenters here believe in some sort of trustworthy, benevolent global dictatorship.

    No, we don’t, and this has been clearly explained to you. So why are you repeating nonsense?

  69. #70 BBD
    December 21, 2013

    More tinfoil-rustling from Betty:

    We need some sort of official organization that is the sole authority, a world authority if you will, that we can point to and say…..”Look! The debate is over! This group of experts, made up of some scientists and other people lobbying for representing their countries, but all with the same ideological mindset, have proven beyond any doubt, that hypothetical future catastrophic scenarios will most likely definitely occur if the rich don’t pay what are they are morally obligated to pay!”

    But where can we find such an organization?

  70. #71 Turboblocke
    December 21, 2013

    Stu2: that is a huge leap you’ve made there. As I pointed out a while back, agreements between sovereign nations are all that’s necessary.

  71. #72 Betula
    December 21, 2013

    Barney…

    “Okay, Betty. Time’s up.”

    I didn’t know I was supposed to be sitting around the computer all day on a timer.

    ” We do it the hard way”

    BARNEY PLEASE DON’T!…. No! ….No! Anything but the…

    Let me get this right. By posting what I already posted, this is supposed to bother me? Strange, because it didn’t bother me when I posted it.

    If you disagree with what I wrote….prove it wrong.

  72. #73 Stu 2
    December 22, 2013

    @ # 71
    How is that theory about ‘agreements between sovereign nations’ working ?
    According to Jeff Harvey; it isn’t.
    There is no ‘leap of faith’ and there is no ‘conspiracy’ about the research etc on ‘deliberative global governance’. It’s very easy to find, it is an academic funded research program and is funded by different Governments around the world.
    BBD @ # 68 and 69.
    What is the ‘elephant’ and if you don’t believe in ‘global governance’ or ‘deliberative democracy’ or whatever else you would like to call it (although Jeff Harvey’s term – managed from the top down- is a good description) , what is the political and social mechanism that you do believe can deliver the MDGs?

  73. #74 BBD
    December 22, 2013

    Betty

    The problem here isn’t specifically whether I disagree with what you wrote but that you have yet to acknowledge that it is a conspiracy theory.

    Since it clearly is, you have only two options:

    – Admit that you are endorsing a conspiracy theory

    – Stink to high heaven of intellectual dishonesty

    It’s up to you. And so far, you are choosing the hard way.

    Let’s review:

    Wow. Could it be that the IPCC is a tool of the U.N. used to justify the needed financing of the MDG’s, and later the SDG’s….. with many members having similar ideologies with a taste for global justice through wealth redistribution?

    But how do we justify taxing carbon? And how do we make it so the rich nations pay the carbon tax and the poor nations receive it?

    And:

    We need some sort of official organization that is the sole authority, a world authority if you will, that we can point to and say…..”Look! The debate is over! This group of experts, made up of some scientists and other people lobbying for representing their countries, but all with the same ideological mindset, have proven beyond any doubt, that hypothetical future catastrophic scenarios will most likely definitely occur if the rich don’t pay what are they are morally obligated to pay!”

    But where can we find such an organization?

    This is a conspiracy theory wherein the IPCC is complicit in misrepresenting climate science in order to enable global wealth redistribution.

    You wrote it, so you are a conspiracy theorist. Why do you refuse to acknowledge what is obviously the case?

  74. #75 BBD
    December 22, 2013

    2Stupid

    What is the ‘elephant’

    Oh FFS. Go home.

  75. #76 Stu 2
    December 22, 2013

    BBD @ # 75.
    Maybe you could consider answering the rest of the question @ # 73 ?

  76. #77 Lotharsson
    December 22, 2013

    So we agree then. The goal to redistribute the worlds wealth is not a conspiracy theory, and you never said it was. You were just claiming I said it was with your use of good old lampoonery..

    So you’re still being obtuse, or thick, or both.

    I never said there was a conspiracy which is different from saying that someone else is advancing a conspiracy theory. One may dub a claim a conspiracy theory which almost always implies that one does not agree with the claim, whereas claiming that a conspiracy exists generally is an agreement with a claim.

    Ask a high school student for help with English, please.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding, and thanks for taking my side on this one Sloth.

    I am still not taking your side on this one, as has been explained several times. I do not agree that the goal is to redistribute wealth and the means to achieve it is ginning up false concerns about climate change by producing fraudulent scientific work.

    Ask a high school student for help with English, please. (That is on the presumption that you are having comprehension difficulties rather than being mendacious which I suspect is generous.)

  77. #78 Lotharsson
    December 22, 2013

    The point remains that it appears most of the commenters here believe in some sort of trustworthy, benevolent global dictatorship.

    I’m not sure anyone here believes this.

    Governance is not the same as Government no matter how fervently Monckton tries to gull his audience into believing it. Dictatorship is a form of government.

    You haven’t been gulled by Monckton into that belief, have you?

  78. #79 Jeff Harvey
    December 22, 2013

    Stu2,

    Our democracies ARE already managed from the top-down; nowhere is this more apparent than in the US. And there’s no point in trying to make my views appear to be exteme, as when for example you say that I say that ‘agreements between sovereign nations’ aren’t working’….

    You almost package that statement in some kind of candy coating. Nation states aren’t sovereign, at least those in the south. Rules of trade and commerce are made by the developed nations in the north (the ‘quad’) and yet we fiercely protect our own markets, whilst tearing those of the weaker undeveloped nations open. Read Michael Parenti’s quite outstanding opus on Imperialism (2010) and the agendas become abundantly clear. Also, as Stu mentioned, John Perkins book, ‘Confessions of an Economic Hit Man’ makes quite disturbing reading. But there are plenty of sources. Mark Curtis details recent British history quite well in ‘Web of Deceit’ and ‘Unpeople’, whereas Patrick Bond’s ‘Looting Africa: The Economics of Exploitation’ is an eye opener. Historian Greg Grandin details how the US has traditionally plundered the wealth of Latin American countries in ‘Empire’s Workshop’, and how it has used this model more recently for its global economic designs. Anything by John Pilger and Naomi Klein also put the current global situations in some sort of perspective.

    As it is, you write as if my points are somehow dredged up out of thin air.

  79. #80 Jeff Harvey
    December 22, 2013

    “I don’t think Betty’s really got his head around any of this”

    BBD, you sure aren’t kidding. He has the audacity to try and question of of Hugo Chavez’s many election victories – verified by the Carter center as completely authentic no less – and turns a blind eye to the supreme court coup that put Bush into power in 2000. Gore won Florida for sure, and almost certainly would have taken his home state of Tennessee as well as Ohio but for ‘voting counting irregularities’. And besides, the entire US government is now a wholly owned subsidiary of the banks and corporations.

    Talks about pot, kettle, black.

  80. #81 Mack
    December 22, 2013

    Stu @ comment # 35
    Sounds like you had a kidney stone there Stu , (outcome A)
    I agree that health is one thing socialism should have a very big hand in., but how, in a country whose very philosophy is capitalism (and guns) .
    Anyhow, keep well and Merry Xmas. PS. feeding 6 dogs equals heavy on pocket — could have bought you a bottle of diclofenac tabs for the kidney stone. Only one of man’s best friends required Stu. ; )

  81. #82 Betula
    December 22, 2013

    Barney,

    I have a few questions for you.

    How do we justify taxing carbon? And how do we make it so the rich nations pay the carbon tax and the poor nations receive it?”

    Wouldn’t it be nice, if we could find some sort of official organization that is the sole authority, a world authority if you will, one that we can point to and say…..”Look! The debate is over!”…”This group of experts, made up of some scientists and other people lobbying for representing their countries, but all with the same ideological mindset, have proven beyond any doubt, that hypothetical future catastrophic scenarios will most likely definitely occur if the rich don’t pay what are they are morally obligated to pay!”

    But where can we find such an organization?

  82. #83 BBD
    December 22, 2013

    Betty I have only one question for you:

    When the fuck are you going to admit that you are endorsing a conspiracy theory?

    Just how fucking intellectually dishonest do I need to make you look before you see the wisdom of owning up to what you are doing here?

    More rending tinfoil:

    ..because that is what this is really all about, the redistribution of the worlds wealth…. compensation that is due, not for faux futuristic catastrophic scenarios, but for plundering the poor.

    Note the “faux”, Betty. Fake, false, contrived, made up, falsified etc.

    You are a conspiracy theorist. Now man up and sodding well admit it.

  83. #84 BBD
    December 22, 2013

    what is the political and social mechanism that you do believe can deliver the MDGs?

    Sigh.

    Negotiated agreements between sovereign states. See above. Read the fucking words you moron.

    Then go home.

  84. #85 chek
    December 22, 2013

    Betty has effectively conceded that he has no answer to the scientific case for AGW, and has retreated into to repeating his fave conspiracy theory of the poor, victimised right-wing, yet again.

    I’m not sure even the Ebola virus can be that dumb.

  85. #86 BBD
    December 22, 2013

    Ebola doesn’t have pretensions to intelligence.

  86. #87 ianam
    December 22, 2013

    The point remains that it appears most of the commenters here believe in some sort of trustworthy, benevolent global dictatorship.

    The point remains that you are (blatantly, obviously, clearly) a lying sack of shit.

  87. #88 ianam
    December 22, 2013

    What is the ‘elephant’

    Oh FFS. Go home.

    Truly. That 2Stupid can’t parse simple English is enough reason to ignore him … but there are so many more.

  88. #89 Lionel A
    December 22, 2013

    And now another data point on climate related ecosystem shifts:

    Right Whales Go Wrong Way, Is Climate A Factor?.

    While no-one is sure what is causing the change in the whales’ behavior, a report in the Yale environment360 online magazine says alterations in the whales’ feeding patterns are taking place against a backdrop of major climate-related ecosystem shifts throughout the north-west Atlantic Ocean.

    and

    Shifts in stocks of species at the base of the food chain — phytoplankton and zooplankton — are thought to be due both to warming waters in the north-west Atlantic and to changes in ocean currents. Scientists have shown that the melt of Arctic sea ice, together with more melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Canada, is likely to mean more freshwater being poured into the north-west Atlantic, leading to increased stratification of ocean waters and alterations in plankton stocks.

    Also what happens to other species reliant on the lower strata of this food chain species that cannot move geographical area?

    Answer, the fall in numbers and may even become extinct. But that will not be official recognised for 50 years. We can be sure that there are many now extinct species not yet declared as such.

  89. #90 Stu
    December 22, 2013

    @Mack:

    I agree that health is one thing socialism should have a very big hand in., but how, in a country whose very philosophy is capitalism (and guns) .

    Medicare for all. There. Everyone is covered and we save 30% instantly.

    Any other headscratchers, moron?

  90. #91 Stu
    December 22, 2013

    Let’s see. Betula’s linked to a pathetic six degrees of separation hit piece (in the Daily Mail, for crying out loud).

    Gee, I wonder what the proportions are.

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/07/fossil-fuel-subsidies-green-energy

    global subsidies to fossil fuel producers totalled $523bn a year in 2011 – dwarfing subsidies to renewable energies. For every $1 spent to support renewable energy, another $6 were spent on fossil fuel subsidies, says the report.

    Seems all those Green grifters are in the wrong racket.

    Any other poorly researched tripe you care to share?

  91. #92 Stu
    December 23, 2013

    True story of the wonderful capitalist US health care system:

    We have had the same doctor for years. My company did not switch providers or plans from 2012-2013, but they did change who was in and out of network. I stupidly failed to check this (I mean, really — how could I not have dug through the 400 page booklet!), took my wife in for surgery (interestingly, the provider didn’t say squat about network changes). The insurance covered it, discovered the provider was now out of network and fully clawed back their entire contribution.

    Think of how many levels of fail this demonstrates. I am out $9000. Someone at insurance company is getting paid to screw me out of that $9000. I am appealing to my provider, where someone is getting paid to complain to yet another person in another department of the insurance company. Who is getting paid.

    Most medical institutions in the US have more administrative people than medical. This is all waste.

    Here’s another true anecdote.

    I wanted some Zovirax (acyclovir, glycerine, filler, 5g tube). My PCP could not confirm right away whether my insurance covered it, and quoted me the raw price: $693.

    I am not kidding you. That is not a typo, that is not a joke, I made him show me. The other one (name escapes me, name brand of the other antiviral) was in the $800 range.

    Good thing I AM covered. It wound up costing me $5.

    Cost in Europe, where Zovirax (no, not generic acyclovir, full-on brand-name 5g tubes) are OTC?

    $8. No, seriously.

    I guess what I am saying is that we could do with some benevolent government to cut some of this out.

    Speaking for the US, it seems denialists are unaware of the concept of “consent of the governed”.

  92. #93 chek
    December 23, 2013

    Ah, but doesn’t Bishop Limbaugh make it absolutely clear to the flock that they are living in the best of all possible worlds?

  93. #94 Stu
    December 23, 2013

    Yes, where you can have organ pains when you don’t have health insurance and sleep on ice packs hoping it will all go away.

    I’ve never felt so much in “pursuit of happiness”.

  94. #95 Stu
    December 23, 2013

    And in the damned if you do, damned if you don’t category:

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/100840148.

  95. #96 Lotharsson
    December 23, 2013

    Ah, but doesn’t Bishop Limbaugh make it absolutely clear to the flock that they are living in the best of all possible worlds?

    Of course! ;-) That is a necessary function of a defender of entrenched privilege, paid to help convince those disadvantaged by said entrenched privilege not to engage in any kind of thought or actions that might lead to upsetting the very nice apple cart the 0.01% currently have control of.

    (One might entertain an analogy between rich countries exploiting poor countries, and the rich within a country exploiting the poor within it…)

  96. #97 BBD
    December 23, 2013

    Bloody hell, Stu.

  97. #98 Stu
    December 23, 2013

    Luckily the ice packs only lasted a day. Of course, it was my own damned fault for not getting COBRA coverage for only $1100 a month (on $293 a week unemployment).

  98. #99 Betula
    December 23, 2013

    “because that is what this is really all about, the redistribution of the worlds wealth…. compensation that is due, not for faux futuristic catastrophic scenarios, but for plundering the poor”…

    Barney…..”Note the “faux”, Betty. Fake, false, contrived, made up, falsified etc”

    The scenarios are based on incomplete models full of uncertainties…

    “However, climate change violates the postulates of predict-then-act on two related counts. First, climate change is associated with radically diverse decision contexts, geographic scales, and time scales. It comprises many different types of policy problems involving many different types of actors, and thus is not even theoretically optimizable (Jaeger et al., 1998; Arrow et al., 1996). Second, climate change is associated with conditions of deep uncertainty,
    where decision-makers do not know or cannot agree on: (i) the system models, (ii) the prior probability distributions for inputs to the system model(s) and their interdependencies, and/or (iii) the value system(s) used to rank alternatives.

    http://www.cetesb.sp.gov.br/userfiles/file/mudancasclimaticas/proclima…/file/publicacoes/politica_economia/ingles/characterizingclimatechange.pdf

    And Barney, I noticed you didn’t mention the plundering. You do agree that we need to redistribute the wealth from rich nations to poor nations to compensate for plundering, don’t you? A simple yes or no will do.

Current ye@r *