‘Politicians SHOULD be afraid of the people!’ says dangerous US radical politician | James Delingpole

14th January 2011

His name was Thomas Jefferson, third US president and the principal author of the US Declaration of Independence.

The full quote goes like this:

“When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.”

What Jefferson wasn’t talking about here, I suspect, was the threat of total nutcases coming at politicians randomly with guns. (Only a total nutcase – or, perhaps, a liberal – would seek to regulate society on the basis of what other total nutcases might or might not do). What he meant simply was that for government to be in a state of apprehension about the people’s likely response if it overstepped its mark was a healthy thing, not a sign of civil society’s imminent collapse.

It’s in this context that we need to examine – or rather dismiss with proper contempt – the attempts by the American left (and, come to that, the European left) to co-opt the senseless, deranged killing of a 9-year old girl and five others in Arizona into its ongoing campaign to silence its political opponents.

Of course I understand why US liberals should try this cynical, poisonous ploy. For one thing they are very sore about both the mid-term election results and the disastrous ongoing performance of their ex-White House poster boy, the former Obamessiah. For another, in a straightforward, no-holds-barred battle of words, the political right is almost always going to win.

Consider, for example, why it is that so few of America’s Talk Radio stations represent liberal or “progressive” values. It’s not for want of trying. Former New York mayor Ed Koch, California governor elect Jerry Brown, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, actress Janeane Garofalo and ex-presidential candidate Gary Hart are among liberals who have had their radio shows cancelled due to lack of listener interest. The big guns (if you’ll excuse such dangerous, inflammatory language) – Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Levin, Beck, Ingraham, O’Reilly, Liddy, Miller, et al, are all on the political right.

And the same is true of the blogosphere. Sure, there are exceptions such as the flabby, effete libtard smug-fest that is the ineffably tedious Huffington Post, but by far the liveliest, most incisive political commentary and investigative exposes on the internet come from people who believe, more or less, in liberty and limited government and other essentially Tea Party values.

I’ve talked about the reasons for this – the psychopathology of liberalism et al – a lot before in books like Welcome To Obamaland and also in my new one 365 Ways To Drive A Liberal Crazy. What it comes down to is that as Margaret Thatcher once said: “The facts of life are Conservative.” It only requires the most basic commonsense to appreciate, for example, that you know how to look after and spend your money better than the government does; that talent and hard work deserve better rewards than laziness and ineptitude; that education requires a certain amount of discipline and “elitism”; that people behave better when they accept responsibility for their own actions; that the law should be blind to race and religion, offering no special favours to privileged minorities; and so on.

This is why you’ll so rarely hear the liberal-left arguing its case on the basis of facts or hard evidence. Instead, when it’s not emotionally blackmailing us with false sentiment, it’s busy besmirching the name of its opponents by making out that the reason they think they do is not because they’ve thought long and hard about the world and seen it as it is but because they’re evil.

It’s funny to read in the Guardian this morning a liberal called Michael Tomasky (H/T Ed West) claiming that this technique is the preserve of the right.

This kind of rhetoric will go into hibernation now, but only for a bit. Because not only is it too central to rightwing mythology; it is central to Republican electoral strategy. This is one of those things that no one says, because it can’t really and truly be proved forensically, but everyone knows. Get people to hate liberals. Get them to think not only that liberals have ideas for the country that are wrong – get them to believe that liberals despise the country and are actively attempting to hasten its demise. Say progressivism isn’t just invalid or even dangerous, but “evil” and a “cancer,” as Glenn Beck says. Fear gets people to the ballot box.

Funny because it’s such a warped inversion of reality. I’m not saying that conservatives and libertarians don’t ever diss their opponents with colourful insults – I certainly do: it’s fun. But the idea that inflammatory language is the preserve of the political right is bizarre to the point of lunacy. What about all those snarling leftist mobs protesting against “Bushitler”? What about the socialists over here who fantasise almost daily about how joyously they’re going to celebrate when the hated Margaret Thatcher is dead? If we on the right have started upping the rhetorical ante, it’s because we’ve learned our lesson from the rabble-rousers of the left.

The language of politics has, in any case, always been the language of combat because politics is a life or death issue. Whether we live comfortably or on the breadline; whether or not our children have an economic future; whether or not we get blown up by home grown terrorists on our way to work; what quality of healthcare we can afford: these are all, to a degree, issues which will be decided by the success or failure of our politicians to do the right thing. Of course people on both sides of the argument are going to get angry about it because there’s a lot right now to BE angry about.

UPDATE: great post from Michelle Malkin abounding with examples of left-liberal hate in action (H/T Brad Lundgren).

Related posts:

  1. Nigel Farage – the only politician who dares say what we’re thinking
  2. Lady Thatcher was a statesman. Blair and Cameron are mere politicians
  3. David Cameron, renewable energy and the death of British property rights.
  4. Be afraid: German ex-Chancellor demands ‘United States of Europe’.

Post navigation

2 thoughts on “’Politicians SHOULD be afraid of the people!’ says dangerous US radical politician”

  1. Chris P says:14th January 2011 at 4:22 pmHow do you twist that into meaning that people should kill them? You’re condoning violence?

    Like nutcase Mormon Beck and opportunist Palin?

  2. Velocity says:15th January 2011 at 11:06 pmChris P

    “Opportunist Palin” – surely the biggest scumbag opportunist is Obama himself?

    “You’re condoning violence” – protest is the greatest form of democracy. Living with tyranny is debilitating. Are we getting close to a few of the elite scum losing their heads, aka the French Revolution? Mmmm well when 99% of MP’s believe in climate change and over 60% of the British population don’t, you have to say it’s getting mighty close to “listen up you a-holes or its pay-back time”!

Comments are closed.

Television: Weekly Shockers

Did you hear the one about Jordan’s disabled son? Unlikely, since you probably don’t watch Tramadol Nights (Channel 4), nor read the Mirror (‘Katie Price furious after Frankie Boyle joke about her disabled son’), nor the Guardian (‘Frankie Boyle’s Katie Price joke sparks Ofcom investigation’).

Don’t worry, I’m not going to repeat it here. What kind of sicko do you think I am: Rod Liddle? It’s an issue, nonetheless, on which my sympathies are more torn than common decency tells me they ought to be. Sure, it’s absolutely disgraceful that a nasty Scottish comedian should make light of the suffering of an eight-year-old boy with septo-optic dysplasia and autism. On the other hand, any joke that provokes the collective handwringing of the entire libtard media, the world’s dullest celebrity (Price), the world’s most stupid celebrity (her ex Peter Andre), Amanda Holden, Mencap and Ofcom must, almost by definition, be one we should cherish and Re-Tweet as often as we possibly can.

And what on earth were these people expecting of Frankie Boyle anyway? It’s not as though he’s the new Ronnie Corbett, tickling us gently with his relaxed armchair monologues. Frankie Boyle uses comedy like a broken bottle in a rough pub. He’s genuinely scary and hard and unpredictable. That’s why people go to see shows and even to sit in the front row and be hideously abused by him. They want to see just how low Boyle is prepared to go. And the answer, hence his career, is lower than anyone else.

An expert on violence once told me that similar rules apply in street fighting and gangland warfare. It’s not how good you are at martial arts that counts, or even how big you are. The one who wins is the one who turns more brutal, more quickly than the opposition. It’s the theme of the Bob Hoskins classic The Long Good Friday. It’s the theme of real-life gangs in cities around the world: whichever has the heaviest- duty weaponry and most merciless footsoldiers is the one that gets to control the trade.

Not, you understand, that I’m brandishing Boyle as a small-willied man does his Ferrari or his pit bull. Though I admire his fearlessness — such as the way the week after the Jordan furore, he moved on to telling jokes about cancer victims — I don’t find him nearly as funny as I do, say, Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse, or Armstrong and Miller, or Mitchell and Webb. I never go, ‘Oh good. Mock the Week’s on!’ Still less do I have any urge to watch again his latest sick-fest Tramadol Nights.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. How the BBC censored my monstrous, hideously offensive ‘Irish joke’
  2. Am I offending the wrong Americans?
  3. The fake disabled are crippling our economy
  4. Dumbing down: the awful truth

2 thoughts on “Television: Weekly shockers”

  1. Chris P says:11th January 2011 at 4:20 pmAnd yet you yourself call people “libtards”. Are you still stuck with playground vernacular.

    You have zero useful knowledge that could be used to move the planet forward. You are just like all the other scum on the other side of the Atlantic. Getting paid to write garbage that puts fear in the hearts of the gullible.

    Scaremongerer.

    The people I know who come up with new ideas and solve difficult technical problems aren’t gun carrying Tea Partiers at a political rally.

  2. Don Stuart says:12th January 2011 at 5:57 pmThere there Chris, go and soothe yourself with a nice rub down with the Independent. Mummy will be along in a minute to tuck you in with a piece by Polly Toynbee.

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

My Records of the Year

John Grant – Queen of Denmark (Bella Union)

Queen of Denmark

“I feel just like Sigourney Weaver/ when she had to kill those aliens”, sings the ex-vocalist of The Czars. We all do, John, and for expressing that eternal verity so perfectly in your honeyed baritone in this funny, messed-up, charming, endlessly beguiling collection of 70s-style folky, floaty, dreamy, trippy soft rock – with Midlake as backing band, no less – you win this year’s coveted top prize. Well, first-equal with Grasscut below.

(buy Queen of Denmark here)

Grasscut – 1 inch/1/2 Mile (Ninja Tune) 

1 Inch Half Mile
With Queen of Denmark this masterpiece by Brighton duo Andrew
Phillips and Marcus O’Dair is my most adored and played-to-death album
of the year, which is why it gets first equal prize. Imagine DJ Shadow
meeting Withnail & I in a Brighton bric a brac shop before making a
trippy excursion to the South Downs: samples of Chinese folk songs and
plummy- quavery-voiced old men meld with bleeps and shuffling hip hop
beats and pastoral melodies to create something poignant, beautiful,
nostalgic and quintessentially English.

(buy 1 inch/1/2 Mile here)

Caribou – Swim (City Slang)

Swim

Dan Snaith’s latest album will totally do your head in. Where it’s similarly brilliant predecessor Andorra was pastoral and gentle, this one is  like a distillation of the very essence of classic, rave-era dance music, condensed into nine brilliantly realised tracks of, thought-provoking, intense, infinitely subtle, textured, techno genius. And he’s got a PhD in Maths, so he really is that clever.

(buy Swim here)

Phantom Band – The Wants (Chemikal Underground)

The Wants

Think early Nick Cave’s gravel voiced Sturm und Drang meeting the mournful alt folk of The National with the proto-dance inventiveness of Krautrock in a forest of tuned percussion, fuzz guitars and medieval electronics. “What is this? Who are they?” your friends will ask. Epic, moody, poignant, swaggering, raw – but with naggingly lovely tunes – this Scottish sestet’s second album is the year’s dark horse.

(buy The Wants here)

First Aid Kit – The Big Black And The Blue (Jagadamba)

Big Black & the BlueCute sisters Klara and Johanna Soderberg (16 and 19) became internet viral sensations with their artless cover of Fleet Foxes’ Tiger Mountain Peasant Song. Their debut album is even better: clear, penetrating vocals, the sweetest close harmonies, the most delicious country twang and gorgeous melodies, none of them predictable or samey – you’d swear they were from the Appalachian backwoods, not Sweden.

(buy The Big Black and Blue here)

Midlake – The Courage Of Others (Co Op)

Courage of Others

It’s a measure of how stiff the competition is this year that an album this good can come so far down the list. With their twittery flutes and gentle harmonies, these melancholy Texans sing and strum as if we still lived in the era of the Laurel Canyon folkies, After The Goldrush and maybe a hint of Jethro Tull. Or The Decemberists meet Fleet Foxes if you prefer. And why not?

(buy The Courage Of Others here)

Robyn – Body Talk Pt 1 (Konichiwa)

Body Talk Pt 1

Sweden’s Robyn Carlsson is the Madonna it’s safe to like. Her Scandi-pop melodies are so insanely catchy and the production so slick that it teeters perilously on the brink of Euro Cheese. But there’s a darkness, sadness, an edge of daring and invention too, in this richly varied and intensely more-ish album that make you realise: “No. This record is genius!”

(buy Body Talk Pt 1 here)

Husky Rescue – Ship of Light (Catskills)

Ship of Light

More essence of Scandi-pop perfection, this time from Helsinki’s Husky Rescue whose gloriously catchy third album strikes a perfect balance between radio-friendly melodic jauntiness and fragile, yearning melancholy. Reeta-Leena Korhola’s fragile, tender bitter sweet vocals add a fairy tale magic. Live, the band resemble a glorious cross between Joy Division and a Seventies porn movie.

(buy Ship of Light here)

Charlotte Gainsbourg – IRM (Because Music)

Irm

Don’t expect instant fireworks: this is a slow burn grower, sweetly folky and Francoise Hardy in places, lightly industrial and post-rave in others, with a slightly shambolic, small-hours feel. That’ll be the influence of Beck who produced and co-wrote the songs, based on fragmentary lyrics suggested by Gainsbourg. An odd couple but a match made in heaven.

(buy IRM here)

UNKLE – Where Did The Night Fall (Surrender All)

Where Did the Night Fall

Like you, probably, I’d rather written off James Lavelle’s UNKLE project as a tired throwback to the days when you could talk of “trip-hop” without inverted commas. But this is a cornucopia of pulsing, trippy, beat-driven tracks ranging in style from psychedelia to afrobeat, and fronted by sundry cultish vocalists from South’s Joel Cadbury and Autolux’s Elle J to mister gravel larynx himself Mark Lanegan. Every one’s a winner.

(buy Where Did The Night Fall here)

Kanye West – My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy (Roc-A-Fella/Def Jam)

My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy

Yeah, like Kanye West needs the extra sales or the publicity. But I can’t not include this record because it’s so preposterously awesome: a towering confection of overblown hip hop egoism, polished by ten of the world’s top producers and featuring everything from Elton John to Bon Iver and La Roux, with influences from King Crimson to Aphex Twin. It’s really, REALLY good.

 

(buy My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy here)

Related posts:

  1. Records of the Year 2011
  2. Records Of The Year
  3. Delingpole: not just for the nasty things in life
  4. Oasis: just how rubbish were they?

7 thoughts on “My Records of the Year”

  1. EagerSpectator says:28th December 2010 at 11:00 amA very eclectic and interesting taste James.
  2. Jack Savage says:28th December 2010 at 5:08 pmGood on you , dude. Life is not JUST about being right about global warming!
  3. Velocity says:29th December 2010 at 9:51 amDid my best not to commit suicide listening through this far fro light entertainment. All a bit ‘wrist slitty’ for my ear i’m afraid.Best I could find Track 8, “Heavy Drugs’ on UNKLE album.

    Got any funky chill house with a heavy baseline, you know ‘up’ stuff you don’t have to physco-analyse the hell out of the words to enjoy as i simply can’t be arsed to work hard listening to music???

  4. Matthew Wilson says:1st January 2011 at 1:21 pmThanks for the recommendations, James. I got into John Grant through reading about his association with Midlake and seeing him support them on their recent UK tour. Given how good The Courage of Others is, it was slightly shocking to realise that they’d gone one better with their collaboration with Grant on Queen of Denmark. They’re supposed to be recording another album together next year.
  5. Matthew Wilson says:8th January 2011 at 12:26 amFor the benefit of anyone who’s interested, here’s a link to John Grant playing a club in Stockholm on his recent tour. Well worth a look for anyone enamoured of Queen of Denmark.http://www.gimmeindie.se/live/konsert/johngrant.html
  6. wastrel says:24th February 2011 at 5:10 pmOn the money as usual James.Its always disappointing when your reviews do not appear in the ST Review.

    Grasscut is good, John Grant better, Charlotte Gainsbourg tremendous!

  7. Matthew Wilson says:16th June 2011 at 9:55 amJames, are you on Spotify and/or Facebook? I ask because I’ve just gone through Spotify adding all these albums into a playlist called “Delingpole Recommends (2010)” which can be shared via Facebook. Insane to think that not so long ago it would have cost more than £100 to buy all these albums to check them out, even at Amazon (Marketplace) prices. I would feel guilty about that, except that if I like an artist’s music I will end up buying their records anyway and will make an effort to see them live.

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

Julian Assange is not a Climategate hero

Warped perspective

Assange: Soap-dodging creep; probably a vampire

Assange: Soap-dodging creep; probably a vampire

My friend Jonathan Foreman has written two superb pieces on Julian Assange – one at Frumforum and one at Commentary – explaining in persuasive detail why the creepy, soap-dodging Australian isn’t quite the selfless hero his supporters claim he is.

Some of my libertarian friends have got it into their heads that Assange is all that stands between the internet as last bastion of freedom of speech and a vicious clampdown by the world’s tyrannical governments. If that’s what Assange actually stood for I’d be backing him all the way. But the impression I get is that he’s much more malevolent and puckishly irresponsible than that. I see nothing big or clever or noble about releasing information which results in, say, Afghans who have been helping US forces being executed or which makes it harder for Western diplomats to perform their roles with tact and discretion. The only reason you could think it was is if you believed that the West was morally inferior to countries like Iraq, China, Iran or Russia and therefore deserved to be betrayed from within in order to make the world more fair and balanced.

Foreman heard for himself Assange’s warped perspective at a conference he gave in Oslo earlier this year.

Assange then reminded “those of you in the audience familiar with World War II” of “the statement that the Nazis put on the front of concentration camps that ‘work brings freedom’—an idea that Himmler had when he himself was in prison.” After a dramatic pause he continued: “But in my investigations, exposing documents which include many abuses by the United States military, which include main manuals of prison camps like Abu Ghraib, Baghdad, and Guantanamo, I have seen pictures on the front of their camps of their slogans. So guess which camp has ‘honor bound to defend freedom’ on the front of it?”

Assange paused again: “The defense of freedom as a value is on the front of Guantanamo Bay! And I say that, as a perversion of the truth, that that slogan is worse than ‘work brings freedom.’?”

Only days after his triumphant revelation of “Collateral Murder,” and only seven months before Assange would release 250,000 secret American diplomatic cables and thereby force American foreign policy into uncharted waters, Assange calmly equated Guantanamo, a prison facility with 600 inmates, to Auschwitz—a Nazi death camp in which over a million people were murdered.

Assange, in other words, is not so much an outspoken defender of freedom and democracy as he is yet another West-hating Quisling in the fine traditions of Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and George Soros. (It’s no coincidence that he has received financial help from the last two. Anyone with Moore and Soros – and leftie filmmaker Ken Loach – on his side is, almost by definition, a bad thing. As for the Jemima Goldsmith thing, no, I don’t understand that one either, except that – cf also PETA, Baader Meinhof – pretty rich girls do love a crap cause).

But there’s one mistake in Foreman’s second article I would like to correct. He says:

One of the most important WikiLeaks postings was the release of the Climategate e-mails that revealed how British academics at the heart of the global-warming consensus had conspired to withhold awkward statistics.

This just isn’t true. At least not in the sense that Assange or WikiLeaks deserve any credit whatsoever for breaking the story. It’s a lie – put about, naturally, by the fork-tongued Assange – which has been very effectively rebutted by Steve McIntyre. (H/T Charles The Moderator at WUWT)

Jeff Id links to a YouTube video of WikiLeaks’ Assange making a variety of untrue or inflated claims about Climategate and WikiLeaks’ role.

Assange falsely claimed that the Climategate emails were broken by WikiLeaks. This is obviously untrue as CA readers know. I can date WikiLeaks’ entry by contemporary comments. The first notice of the emails at WikiLeaks was 2009/11/21 at 2.50 AM Eastern (12:50 AM blog time). The emails had been downloaded by many people (including me) from a Russian server on Nov 19 and had been downloaded by WUWT moderators on Nov 17. A contemporary comment in a CA thread says that WikiLeaks was down and refers people to megauploads. WikiLeaks has not even been a major reference for Climategate – that belongs to eastangliaemails.com (originally anelegantchaos.org) which was up on Nov 20 and provided a searchable database.

This may seem like nitpicking, but it matters. First it denies proper credit to the real people responsible for breaking Climategate: Stephen Mosher, Lucia, Anthony Watts, Jeff Id, Steve McIntyre et al. Second, it gives the false impression that Assange is more heroic, decent and politically even-handed than he truly is.

Related posts:

  1. Alfred S: Australian schoolboy; climate hero
  2. Steven Mosher: the real hero of Climategate?
  3. Childhood hero
  4. Climategate: Mad Sunday

3 thoughts on “Julian Assange is not a Climategate hero”

  1. K Gallowglaich says:25th December 2010 at 7:28 amMr. Delingpole,

    A Merry Christmas to you and all your readers! We had hoped that your continuing reference to “Climategate” was on the wane, in view of the nature of what that Russian leak represented and who was behind it. The “evidence” of course amounted to little more than internecine squabbling between warring academics and did not represent any proof whatsoever that “Climate Change” was not occurring – surely now seen as a ludicrous proposition. Those of us who are working quite hard at developing solutions to what is now being observed do wish you might consider the possibility of being a little more responsible. However we do understand your need to continue to posture in a right-wing position in your line of work and at your time of life. Hopefully your September angst at your chosen profession has abated and all is well on the education front.

    Best Wishes,

    K. Gallowglaich

  2. Velocity says:29th December 2010 at 9:29 amAssange has been ‘Climateaudited’ or ‘Steve McIntyred’ if you like. I don’t know of many that can be so scrutinised and not be sceptic’d down to the absolute truth (McIntyre is a diamond – hard drill bit – of our era).

    Climateaudits article on Wikis Climategate claims was the first prick in the bubble for me too, followed a couple of weeks later by a ZeroHedge article that surmised Assanges leaks were about as damaging as tittle-tattle and served the purpose of Big Bro to further erode freedsoms, specifically on the net where Gov’t to date has lost control.

    When that insidious self-serving ponce, Andy Warhol, said everyone in the future would have their 15 minutes of fame he knew nothing of the internet. Heros and anti-heros are made today in 15 minutes and the webs multi-brained multi analysis strips it bare down to truth in 15 minutes too (if you’re able to distinguish between signal and noise, some skill that takes!).

    So here’s respect for the www

    It’ll bring down the corrupt self-serving scum of the Gov’t and corporate monopolists and also hopefully level the rising anti-heros too (aka Stalin, Hitler and Castro) who promise salvation but in truth will deliver more of the same.

    How are you coming along with your Republican saviour and the Tea Party James?

    Has the penny dropped you’re carrying an alien in your chest!!

  3. Mohammed Ismail says:8th January 2011 at 9:45 pmI agree Jamie, Julian is not a hero!

    Here is a great article (extensive) analysing what wikileaks “leaked” and who it benefitted:

    http://qwmagazine.co.uk/politics/wikileaks-the-definitive-analysis-of-the-latest-leak-and-who-stands-to-benefit

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

‘Climate Change’: there just aren’t enough bullets | James Delingpole

December 22nd, 2010

Right now I’m thinking positive thoughts about all the suffering, expense, disruption, misery, hardship, illness and death brought about by this godawful winter, because what I’m thinking is this: never before will there have been quite such an intense and widespread outburst of public fury at what is being done to our economy, our country, our public services and our freedoms in the name of “combatting global warming.”
As Kenneth Minogue argues rather more elegantly in The Servile Mind, (H/T Phaesi) it’s bloody amazing how much rubbish people will put up with without complaint, let alone revolt. Let us pray God that this winter – the third shocker in a row – will finally jerk those who have hitherto remained compliant out of their bovine complacency. And I don’t mean just in Britain. I mean every free country whose citizens’ liberty has been trampled underfoot as the result of the lies and distortions of the eco-fascist movement.
England Expects offered an amusing example of this yesterday, in his story about the fury of European Commission Vice-President Siim Kallas – the man responsible for EU transport – who was one of several Eurocrats unable to get home for the holidays because Brussels airport was closed. Yet just a month earlier, England Expects gleefully noted, had presented Brussels airport with a special commendation for its ‘commitment to reducing future carbon emissions.’
At a ceremony held in the departure hall of the airport, Vice-President Kallas presented Mr Arnaud Feist, CEO of Brussels Airport, with a certificate marking its progress under an industry-led carbon accreditation scheme.
Kallas went on to say:
“Sustainability is not an ‘optional extra’ in transport policy. It has to come as standard.” He congratulated ACI Europe on the success of its Airport Carbon Accreditation Scheme, and welcomed the progress made by Brussels Airport in reducing on a voluntary basis to reduce its carbon emissions over time.
This isn’t a new thing. It has been going on for years, since at least the 1992 Rio Earth Summit when Maurice Strong laid down the ground rulesfor the eco-fascist takeover of the world. It’s bit like that classic 2000AD “Future Shocks” story where the aliens that have invaded our planet unbeknownst to us turn out to be those innocuous-looking wire coat hangers we have in our cupboards. The battle for our freedom is already all but lost – and the stupid thing is, most of us didn’t even know we were fighting one.
So now – not in some imagined, paranoid fantasist’s future, but NOW – we live in a world where an airport is encouraged to place a higher priority on reducing its notional production of a harmless trace gas than it does in making provision for aeroplanes to be able to take off and land in inclement weather.
And NOW, not in the future, we live in a world where our government’s winter transport policy is based not on hard science and rationalism but on the heavily politicised, embarrassingly unreliable forecasts of a once-proud organisation – the Met Office – which now behaves more like a propaganda outlet for the man-made global warming movement. No wonder the Global Warming Policy Foundation is calling for a full independent inquiry.
The Met’s blunder follows similar cockups last year and the year before. In February, Met Office scientist Peter Stott declared that 2009 was an anomaly, and that milder and wetter winters were now — for sure — to be expected. He suggested that exceptionally cold British winters such as the one that occurred in 1962-63 were now expected to occur “about once every 1,000 years or more, compared with approximately every 100 to 200 years before 1850.” Now, the Met Office is admitting that the current December may be the coldest in Britain in the past 100 years.
No doubt the warmist crowd will be quick to express outrage at this blatant confusion of global climate with local weather, but that won’t wash. The Met makes its short-term forecasts on the basis of the same brand of massive computer power and Rube Goldberg modelling used to project the global climate. The suggestion that forecasting the climate is easier than forecasting the weather comes into the same category as acknowledging that governments couldn’t run a lemonade stand, but then believing that they can “manage” an economy.
The Bishop has more detailed thoughts on this, focussing on the advice the Met Office gave to David Quarmby’s “winter resilience review”, as commissioned by Transport Minister Philip Hammond.
Here are the killer paragraphs:
12.14 For the purpose of this report, the following summarises what we understand:
  • The probability of the next winter being severe is virtually unrelated to the fact of just having experienced two severe winters, and is still about 1 in 20.
  • The effect of climate change is to gradually but steadily reduce the probability of severe winters in the UK.
  • However, when severe winters come, they could still be extreme – in terms of snowfall, wind and storms, though not necessarily in relation to temperature.
12.17 But we need to understand and accept that the chance of a severe winter is still relatively small and that there will be many years when some will question the degree of resources committed to winter resilience.
12.15 An important consequence of the declining occurrence of severe winters is the loss of knowledge and experience among planning and technical staff in local highway authorities and their contractors, especially if the severe winters which do occur have more extreme snow events.
12.16 All this, in our view, reinforces the need for comprehensive resilience planning, and for ensuring that the salt supply chain is resilient.
In other words, the Met Office remains so ideologically wedded to Man Made Global Warming that it refuses to be dissuaded even in the face of three consecutive severe winters which, by its own calculations, ought to have been almost impossible (8,000 to 1 against: H/T scientistfortruth).
Heads are going to roll for this, they’ll have to. But however many heads do roll it won’t be enough. Always remember this: the Warmist faith so fervently held and promulgated by the Met Office is exactly the same faith so passionately, unswervingly followed by David Cameron, Chris Huhne, Greg Barker, the Coalition’s energy spokesman in the Lords Lord Marland, and all but five members of the last parliament. And also by the BBC, the Prince of Wales, almost every national newspaper, the European Union, the Royal Society, the New York Times, CNBC, the Obama administration, the Australian and New Zealand governments, your children’s schools, our major universities, our minor universities, the University of East Anglia, your local council….
Truly there just aren’t enough bullets!

Boris sticks his thumb in the wind | James Delingpole

December 21, 2010

Olive (Anna Karen) ponders another slight from Stan (Reg Varney)

Olive (Anna Karen) ponders another slight from Stan (Reg Varney)

Big excitement over Boris Johnson’s column today in which the sceptic-turned-warmist turns just a shade more sceptical again by wondering why Piers Corbyn does a better job of forecasting the weather than the Met Office.

I’m not accusing Boris of plagiarism, but this was essentially a watered down, politician’s version of a blog I posted nearly a fortnight ago called – The Met Office: Lousier Than A Dead Octopus. (And for an even fuller account of the Met Office’s warm bias, read this from the Global Warming Policy Foundation.)

As the good Dr North reminds us,as recently as late October the Met Office was predicting  that we should expect an “unusually dry and mild winter”. This was news to every independent weather forecaster in the world from Joe Bastardi to Piers Corbyn who have been predicting a harsh winter for months.

But the Met Office of course knew better thanks to its spiffy new £33 million IBM supercomputer (90 per cent funded, of course, by the taxpayer) whose precognitive powers are so great, it is said that on a good day with a fair wind behind it and can very nearly match the track record of the dead celebrity Paul the Octopus. And of course, it’s this very same computer which is responsible for so many of the “projections” – not even “predictions”, note, but “projections” – of Anthropogenic Climate Doom so lovingly detailed on its taxpayer-funded website.

But the important question is: how much significance should we read into Boris’s apparent, semi-renunciation of his Warmist views?

Really this is a job for a Kremlinographer. For example, you could read a sentence like this and be really disheartened:

Nothing he says, to my mind, disproves the view of the overwhelming majority of scientists, that our species is putting so much extra CO₂ into the atmosphere that we must expect global warming.

Alternatively, you could read it as a bravura politician’s exercise in arse-covering. What it says is essentially true: there are few scientists, even on the sceptical side of the argument, who would suggest that Anthropogenic CO2 has no effect whatsoever on global climate. So what sounds like a fervent declaration of faith in the Warmist creed may on closer examination be a perfectly innocuous statement of the bleeding obvious cunningly calculated to appease all Boris’s rentseeking chums in the City who stand to make a fortune from the Great Carbon Scam and would be most displeased if the Mayor of London were to show signs of wobbling.

Yet wobbling is, of course, exactly what Boris is doing. Or rather – remember, this is the man so ambitious he makes Alexander The Great look like Olive from On The Buses – he is slyly repositioning himself to take advantage of the inevitable collapse of public faith in the Great Anthropogenic Global Warming Ponzi Scheme.

All those thousands of people who’ve had their Christmas ruined as a result of Heathrow airport’s pathetic inability to operate in the snow; all those thousands who have been stranded shivering for eight hours at a stretch on our motorways; all those thousands who can’t use their local municipal sports club because the staff – as is the wont of public sector workers – can’t be bothered to allow themselves to be inconvenienced by the inclement conditions; all those people who are going to look at their electricity and gas bills come the end of next quarter and be appalled beyond measure by how increasingly unaffordable they are; all those businesses big and small whose profits are going to be seriously dented by our political class’s ongoing failure to address our transport infrastructure (and no I don’t mean the irrelevant high-speed rail link to Birmingham; I mean the much bigger problem of our shortage of runways at the airports serving London).

All these thousands of people add up to a lot of disgruntled voters ready to ask hard questions about everything from the size of the state (so patently NOT being shrunk to any significant degree by Cameron’s useless Coalition of the Unwilling) to the three main parties’ position on “Global Warming”.

This scepticism and anger will most likely intensify after next winter. And the one after that. And the one after that too. This is not Nostradamus speaking here. Just someone who reads enough to know that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation moves in 30-year cycles (and we’re entering a cold one) and that low sun spot activity tends to coincide with miserable winters and dull summers. And cold is the thing we should – and shall – most fear, not warmth.

Related posts:

  1. Boris Johnson for Prime Minister
  2. The Met Office – defending the indefensible, as per usual
  3. How the doomed Met Office tried to spin its way out of trouble
  4. I’m famous at last — thanks to the internet (and this column)

One thought on “Boris sticks his thumb in the wind”

  1. Velocity says:24th December 2010 at 12:10 pmBoris is typical of the lower order politicians that populate Government, a bumbling idiot.

    If you mix him with a criminally hardened Marxist you actually get Gordon Brown.

    That explains much.

    The answer for society is not to suffer any of them. It’s called a free self-regulating society, no gov’t required. How are your Libertarian values coming along James, have you thought through and expunged the baby Alien in your chest called “small Gov’t” yet?

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

Panic and fear close their icy tentacles round the doomed Met Office

No long range forecasts

Robert Napier: would you trust this man with your future?

Robert Napier: would you trust this man with your future?

Well at least that’s one heartening interpretation of this press release which the Met Office has just sent to the Global Warming Policy Foundation. It comes from their Chief Press Officer, no less, Dave Britton.

The Met Office has not issued a seasonal forecast to the public and categorically denies forecasting a ‘mild winter’ as suggested by Boris Johnson <http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/> in his column in the Daily Telegraph.

Following public research, the Met Office no longer issues long-range forecasts for the general public; instead we provide a monthly outlook on our website, which have consistent and clearly sign-posted the very cold conditions.

Our day-to-day forecasts have been widely recognised as providing excellent advice to government, businesses and the public with the Daily Telegraph commenting only today that ‘the weekends heavy snow was forecast with something approaching pin-point accuracy by the Met Office’.

The public trust and take heed of our warnings and it is misleading to imply that the Met Office did not see this cold weather coming.

So let’s get this right. We paid for 90 per cent of the Met office’s £30 million computer; we also fund a hefty chunk of its annual £170 million running costs. And now the Met office tells us that it is incapable of providing the effective long range forecasts we could get for a fraction of the price from Piers Corbyn or Joe Bastardi?

If this government were seriously minded to have its bonfire of the quangos, I think I know which useless outfit I’d be tossing onto the pyre next.

Oh and in case you wondered why the Met Office has been getting it so badly wrong, here’s Bishop Hill on its chairman Robert Napier.

Interesting fact: the Chairman of the Met Office board, Robert Napier, is or has been:

  • Chairman of the Green Fiscal Trust*
  • Chairman of the trustees of the World Centre of Monitoring of Conservation
  • a director of the Carbon Disclosure Project
  • a director of the Carbon Group
  • Chief executive of the World Wildlife Fund UK

Source

He is also a member of the Green Alliance.

If we are supposed to reject the views of scientists, like Richard Lindzen, on the grounds that they have given speeches at thinktanks that have accepted money from oil interests, then I think its fair to say that we can safely discount anything said by the Met Office forthwith.

UPDATE:

Autonomous Mind offers more Met Office related hilarity. Seems that a mild winter was very much what the Met Office was predicting as recently as October:

The latest data comes in the form of a December to February temperature map on the Met Office’s website.

The eastern half of England, Cornwall, Scotland and Northern Ireland is in for temperatures above the 3.7C (38.6F) average, more than 2C warmer than last winter.

The map also shows a 40 per cent to 60 per cent probability that western England and Wales will be warmer than 3.7C (38.6F), with a much smaller chance of average or below-average temperatures.

This surprised several independent forecasters at the time, including one from Positive Weather Solutions:

But other experts maintain we are in for another big freeze. Positive Weather Solutions senior forecaster Jonathan Powell said: “It baffles me how the Met Office can predict a milder-than-average winter when all the indicators show this winter will have parallels to the last one.

“They are standing alone here, as ourselves and other independent forecasters are all predicting a colder-than-average winter.

“It will be interesting to see how predictions by the government-funded Met Office compare with independent forecasters.”

Hmm, yes. I’ll say it will be.

Related posts:

  1. How the doomed Met Office tried to spin its way out of trouble
  2. Warmists overwhelmed by fear, panic and deranged hatred as their ‘science’ collapses
  3. Big, hot, shiny orb in sky caused by ‘climate change’ says UK Met Office
  4. The Met Office – defending the indefensible, as per usual

2 thoughts on “Panic and fear close their icy tentacles round the doomed Met Office”

  1. barbarausa says:22nd December 2010 at 5:15 amperhaps a bit OT, but I’m dropping by to wish you many happy returns of Christmas and New Year, and give you this link for a (cheap) gift:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101222/ap_on_re_us/us_wolf_nation

    Didn’t you warn that the next big panic would be biodiversity?

    Well, the US Center for Biological Diversity has demanded that we reintroduce wolves in their historic range throughout the lower 48 states (of 50, President Obama’s misconception of more notwithstanding), and if you want to see how it plays out, remember we have something called the Second Amendment, as they who practice it often say.

    I wish the very best to you and yours this season, and please keep up the good work.

    When will your Watermelon book be available in the US, so I can present my county Board with copies before we vote them out of office?

  2. Velocity says:24th December 2010 at 12:21 pmHaving just driven from Rome to Geneva to Salsburg to Budapest I can tell you my fears of a frozen European winter have relaxed. It seems Britain with -2 to -8 Temps is suffering much more contrary to the UK Mets warmist weather forecasts.

    Gatwick has people suffering 5 days delay to flights while here in middle and eastern Europe all roads are entirely driveable, flights are running on time (save the bleating spoilt babies/arse-wipes of public sector strikes) and all is well (-12 last week has turned to +8 today in Hungary).

    How much longer does the UK has to suffer the hot air and loonacy of the Westminster Socialist Boys Club?

Comments are closed.

Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide now! | James Delingpole

December 9th, 2010

Dihydrogen Monoxide is the most deadly and widespread pollutant on the planet, contributing hundreds of times more to global warming than all the greenhouse gases combined.

Evil, maneating sharks thrive in it, including Oceanic Whitetips. It is the breeding ground for all manner of noxious species from malarial mosquitos, to bilharzia to the terrifying Candiru fish which swims up a fellow’s urine stream while he’s weeing and can only be removed by radical penidectomy. In winter it causes cars to slip off the road and crash and ice skaters to fall through cracks and die horribly just like in that scene in the Omen, or is it Omen II? In summer, just an inch of it is enough to drown you. It’s a major constituent of acid rain. It erodes everything from soil to steel. It conceals crocodiles, alligators and piranhas. (H/T R Campbell)

So it’s no wonder that when campaigners from CFACT asked delegates at Cancun to sign a petition calling for a ban on this evil substance they found plenty of willing takers. I wonder if the senior executives at British Sky Broadcasting, John Lewis partnership, Johnson Matthey, Kingfisher, Lloyds Banking, Tesco, Shell UK and Unilever would care to join them? Certainly, going by the joint letter they wrote to the Daily Telegraph this morning, they’re in easily the same league of gullibility and stupidity.

Sir, We welcome the Committee on Climate Change’s analysis on how to meet the 2050 emissions target as quickly and cost-effectively as possible and its argument that Britain should not allow slow progress toward [sic] an international framework on climate change to restrict government action to reduce emissions.

As members of the Prince of Wales’s Corporate Leaders Group on Climate Change, we have long argued that action on climate change is both imperative for preventing dangerous impacts and an opportunity to expand our economy and develop leadership in the new, low-carbon industries.

The case for bold action is stronger than ever….In the meantime Britain should show leadership and demonstrate that a low-carbon future is not only possible, but beneficial.

Presumably none of them lives in Scotland then, where according to some reports, wintry conditions are so bad that stranded motorists are only managing to stay alive by deep frying one another in sump oil.

(to read more, click here)

Share

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • email

7 Responses to “Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide now!”

  1. Velocity says:December 10, 2010 at 10:43 amTaking the crap out of the greens (and politicians) very obvious weakness, these shrill retards never know what they’re talking about ….. brilliant :)
  2. Alec Y says:December 10, 2010 at 7:46 pmJames, I have just heard you on The Alex Jones Show, brilliant. Have you met up with Lord Monckton in Cancun?
  3. Paul B says:December 11, 2010 at 4:09 pmThe fact that you appear on the Alex Jones show says it all – paranoid wingnut.
  4. delia says:December 13, 2010 at 8:01 pmsimpler just to ban CO2… Incidentally only ignorant americans say ”retard’ it is the height of crassness to use the word in uk…
  5. hctroubador says:December 14, 2010 at 1:25 amJames,I also have just heard you on Alex Jones, well done. It seems to me that you are starting to sound dangerously like a Libertarian. It really is the natural progression when you see how the creeping state will take freedoms you like as well as dislike. Welcome aboard, even if it is only one step.
  6. orkneylad says:December 14, 2010 at 12:20 pmThe Great CO2 Non-Problem
    http://www.glebedigital.co.uk/blog/?p=1008
  7. GENE HAUBER says:December 23, 2010 at 12:19 amhow about all of the deaths directly caused by this dreaded DIHYDROGEN MONOXIDE.
    WHERE’S THE PROTESTORS WHEN YOU REALLY NEED THEM?

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Campaign Against Climate Change: a Christmas appeal | James Delingpole

December 6, 2010

No iPads for these poor folk for Christmas. Not even a Kindle.

No iPads for these poor folk for Christmas. Not even a Kindle.

This is the time of year when our thoughts naturally turn to those less fortunate than ourselves. We think of the mentally ill and the tragically deluded; we think of those so poor their home is a rusting, broken down 60s VW Combi with an Atomkraft Nein Danke sticker on the back, so crippled by their crazed notions of what constitutes “good” and “bad” transport that they can only travel anywhere by foot, bicycle or coracle; we think of those whose womenfolk plait the hair under their armpits in solidarity with the world’s oppressed, whose men don’t wash for months on end for fear of polluting Mother Gaia’s precious clear lifeblood with soap suds; we think of people who can’t eat meat, not even a turkey at Christmas, because their strange, backwards religion confines them to bean shoots, mung beans or organic tofu roast.

And that’s why I urge you, all of you, to donate generously to the Campaign Against Climate Change (Honorary Patron: G Monbiot), which according to a heartbreaking article in the Guardian is in serious financial trouble. (H/T Barry Woods)

After 10 years of campaigning on climate change, and bang in the middle of preparations for tomorrow’s Campaign Against Climate Change march, Phil Thornhill is, as usual, in a fairly Eeyore-ish frame of mind.

He’s worried, naturally, about climate change, the backlash after the Copehagen climate talks, and the fact that the movement is in “a bit of a downturn, just like after 9/11″. He’s worried about the fact that “the NGOs have just given up on popular demos around climate change and decided that they’re just going to lobby on the subject. They think they can do what they need to do through lobbying government, but one of the major problems with this issue is what’s going on in people’s psyches.”

And he’s worried about his organisation, Campaign Against Climate Change, which is, he says frankly, “running out of money massively. I’m exhausted, we’ve been running on risible funds for years now, and to be honest I don’t know what we’re going to do.”

This is awful. So sad it makes the death of Little Nell look like the Hallelujah chorus sung on incredibly pure MDMA by the Gay Men’s Chorus of Los Angeles all dressed as fairies with wands and everything. Which is why I have no hesitation in urging all my readers to open their hearts and their pockets for this unimpeachably worthy cause.

50p buys them a few biscuits for the mangy dog they keep on ropes as part of their day jobs

£1 buys them a handful of Fair Trade coffee beans. Twice as expensive as normal coffee beans and not as nice. But they’ve got “Fair Trade” on them so they must be good.

£5 buys a personal guided tour round the Science Museum’s new Climate Change exhibition with top expert George Monbiot, a former cheerleader for the “AGW” movement who will wax lyrical about the good old days, a bit like the ex-coal miners who do a similar job at the Big Pit museum not far from George’s home in Wales but where he couldn’t get a job unfortunately because he failed the bit at the interview where they ask “And how do you feel about coal?”

£10 buys the services of a scriptwriter, to improve the attack-copy at the Hall of Shame on its website. It seems to be the site’s intention to pour scorn on evil sceptics like Lord Lawson, Lord Monckton, Christopher Booker and somebody I’ve never heard of called James Delingpole. But actually, I think they come out of it rather well. The website needs to shape up its act. Maybe, for an extra tenner, they could get celebrity warmist attack dog Bob Ward on the case.

£50 pays a week’s wages for a full-time Troll Wrangler. As regular readers will be aware, the majority of the more vexatious commenters below blogs such as this one are Billy No Mates activists who have signed up for the Campaign Against Climate Change’s “Sceptic Alerts” Whenever a “sceptical” blogger posts up a new article containing facts they don’t like, the activists are sent an alert directing them to the offending page so that they can prove how wrong it is by posting links to RealClimate and by making angry troll noises.

£100 buys half an hour from a copywriter to think up a better name than Campaign Against Climate Change. After all, isn’t campaigning against Climate Change a bit like campaigning against gravity or oxygen or reality.

£500 sounds like you’re one of those dangerous, selfish, resource-plundering capitalists that the Campaign Against Climate Change believes is largely responsible for the Earth’s plight. Perhaps it would be better if you just killed yourself.

5 Responses to “Campaign Against Climate Change: a Christmas appeal”

  1. Velocity says:December 6, 2010 at 1:47 pmLike every fraud, the AGW time’s up, like that ponzi scheme from the start, the State pension.

    Time me thinks to focus on 2 very interesting new developments. Story 1 ;

    Gov’t (the dumbest organisation on the planet) is taking on the internet (the most diverse multi-brained uber-intelligent organism on the planet). Who’s going to be the winner in cyber-space, the retards of the public sector or hackers?

    No contest.

    Getting the hackers back up, who are all anti-Gov, trying to destroy the freedom of the internet is possibly the biggest Gov’t mistake in history. One genius individual can take down any mob of dysfunctional idiots. I wouldn’t be surprised now the US Gov’t has banned Wiki sites to see hackers install a few hundred Wiki sites inside the milatarys own ’secure’ computers and Amazons and Pay-Pal who’s banned them just for kicks.

    99% of all knowledge is in the private (people and companies) domain. Gov’t knows jack. You want to take on hackers on the web, it’s like picking a fight with 1,000 snakes, death by 1,000 cuts, this is going to be the biggest drubbing of the US Gov’t in history, the public sector are retarded.

    The hackers are already putting up mirror Wiki sites up on any WiFi points. The US Gov-dumb-ment will try to swap a fly and stir up a hornets nest. It won’t work, the webs designed to be indestructible, as the US military designed (who are now trying to destroy it, Doh!). And so being stupid comes full circle, the Gov’t have placed their own heads up their own arses for all the world to see.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/orwellian-governments-around-globe-censoring-fortifying-censored

  2. Velocity says:December 6, 2010 at 2:48 pmStory 2.

    When the people do not get a response from Gov’t (over 60% of Yanks were against bailouts) because the Gov’t is an elite scum in bed with big corporate monopolists (the banking, military industrial complex) the people have to take matters into their own hands (see French revolution, if their ears won’t listen, let’s take their heads off).

    French karate expert and one time footballer Eric Cantona has done just that with a very bright idea of public imancipation, having a run on French banks:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/man-u-player-century-eric-cantona-appeals-peaceful-revolution-against-banks-calls-europeans-

    And the US who’ve taken many good ideas off Europeans have nicked the idea too, have a run on JP Morgan and even better than that, with the cash buy silver to drive up the price which JPM is trying to short big time with a massive new position (see copper too):

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/silvergoldsilvercom-runs-out-all-precious-metals-hours

    (Zerohedge is a very good site for you to keep up with things financial James, so you don’t make the same error of siding with politicians on the Pension ponzi scheme. The bloggers comments below articles are usually works of modern art too).

    We live in an historic time at an historic moment, a month or two from a huge stock market crash that’ll bring in the greatest Depression in 300yrs, since the English South Sea bubble burst.

    What has made it so bad is the absolute corruption of that monopoly power structure, that most liberal ponzi scheme and cancer on society (as all authoritiy structures have been throughout history – if you know your history not what the State junks down your throat), government.

    98% of MP’s believe in AGW, over 60% of Joe Public don’t.
    95% of MP’s believe in Keynsian bailouts, over 60% of Joe Public don’t.

    See the disjoint? See the dysfunction of Gov’t?

    Somethings gotta give… or ’snap’ …getting your cash outta the banks is a VERY good idea anyway

  3. Velocity says:December 7, 2010 at 7:38 pmLatest development:

    The Totalitarian State (the US one, not the UK’s or Europes) campaign to shut down Wikileaks doesn’t appear to be going too well. Taking on the diverse, fast and flexible multi-brained Hackers of the web with the States usual two club left feet co-ordinated by a retarded centrally controlled brain is, like the ‘War on Drugs’ turning out to be another absolute slaughter of the idiotic State structure.

    Hackers have disrupted the Swiss Banks computers systems who closed Wikis account (hehe;)

    Meanwhile here in Italy all i can get is Crony Network News (CNN) and Bent Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). They’ve been pumping out (no doubt State fabricated) accusations about Assange but have gone silent on the States doomed-from-the-start slaughter in their attempts to close the Wikileaks site.

    The BBC interviewed a crone with the loaded question, “Do you think Assange has bitten off more than he could chew?”

    Once again the corrupt scum of the BBC have got the question the wrong way round and their pitifully bent programming is whitewashing the absolute slaughter of the pig ignorant creeps of the US Gov’t

    When will they be showing the cowboys of the US army cowboys murdering innocent civilians in Afghanistan?

    Why Assange on false rape charges is just so much more tittle tattle. Total scum

  4. Velocity says:December 8, 2010 at 10:48 pmPaypal and Visa under attack, Mastercards servers down… about time the global duopolies Visa and Master’ got brought down to earth!!

    a Wiki-whipping of the global elites monopoly structures… very refreshing.

    Rule 1. You can win a War (with overwhelming force)
    Rule 2. You will always lose the Occupation

    Rule 2 also applies to Totalitarian Gov’ts on their own people

  5. Velocity says:December 9, 2010 at 2:22 pm“Rape, Rape, Rape” as the mouthpieces of the scum dutifully trumpet turns out to be little more than a burst condom between 2 consenting adults.

    Yep, the Totalitarian Socialist State of Sweden, mico-manages rubbish. The socialists there tell Swedes how to seperate your waste and even which bins to put them in. Their bin drops have security cameras and you can be fined and imprisoned as a criminal for not following their wagging fingers. Bit ‘rich’ but Swedish rubbish is the most expensive as well.

    And the Swedish State also micro-manages human inter-relationships. Shag your girlfriend when she’s asleep or drunk and if she wakes up in a bad mood she can sue you for rape, charming!

    So in the Assange case, even with a consenting female, according to the Totalitarian Swedish State he is guilty.

    As this stink turns to total farce, from US State to British State to Swedish State, from British arrest warrants to Interpol, all trumpeted on the clearing houses for propaganda, the corrupt to the core crones of Western media for all to see

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Prof Brian Cox: Prettier than Brigstocke but Just as Wrong

Another Grungy Green

Prof Brian Cox: even bronzed, honey-tonsilled dreamboats can be wrong, sometimes

Martin Durkin is a hero of mine, not just for his courage in making the first mainstream British TV programme seriously to challenge the idea of Man Made Global Warming – The Great Global Warming Swindle – but also for the equally brilliant programme he made on our eye-wateringly vast national debt, Britain’s Trillion Pound Horror Story.

So I’m delighted to be able to put up a guest post of his on the subject of a recent drubbing he had from top celebrity particle-physicist Brian Cox. Cox (not to be confused with the scary man who played the original Hannibal Lecter) has become one of TV’s favourite science pin-ups because not only does he look a bit like a pop star but he actually was one once in D:Ream (unofficial court composers to New Labour thanks to their party anthem “Things Can Only Get Better”). Unfortunately, it seems, there are one or two things that our Brian doesn’t quite get about Climategate and peer review: as Durkin will now explain. (In bold, I’m afraid because I can’t be bothered to strip out all the “strongs” from html)

This year’s BBC Huw Wheldon lecture was delivered by pop star and celebrity-physicist Brian Cox, who was telling us how science should be reported on television.

Brian looks like a rebel.  One of the kids.  He has long hair and wears a T-shirt under his jacket.  But appearances can deceive.  I’ve met countless grungy greens who are every bit as censorious and freedom-hating as the most well-ironed Nazi.

And, as it turns out, Brian is about as rebellious as Captain Mainwaring.  He says it’s the job of documentary makers to relay to the public science which has been approved by the scientific establishment.

He described a film of mine – The Great Global Warming Swindle – which naughtily did not toe the line, as ‘polemical cack’.   Like many censors, he starts by waving the flag for free speech.  Far be it from him to stifle views which are outside the mainstream.  But …   There were many buts.

The logic of his descent into censorship went like this (it so often does):  Science is really important – just look at the need to combat global warming.  Government funding is therefore vital.  And television ‘has a big responsibility to get the science right’.  This means television must ‘report and explain the peer-reviewed consensus accurately’ and (here it gets interesting) broadcasters must ‘avoid the maverick and eccentric at all costs.’  After all, ‘we’re dealing with the lives of our children and the future of the climate’.

He admits that his argument ‘does sound rather authoritarian’ and asks himself blithely towards the end, ‘Have I been led to an Orwellian conclusion? … I don’t know.’

I do.   All the way through, there’s a sinister Orwellian ring to Cox’s style.   In weasel words, he warns of ‘occasional incompatibilities between science and television’.  Like Uriah Heep, says he wants to explore ‘how these might be avoided’.

His special worry is global warming.  The problem appears to be this.  Lots of people don’t believe it.  Despite the fact that there is almost total acceptance of this ridiculous theory in the media, many ordinary people just don’t buy it.   So if some scoundrel (like me) pops up and says the science behind this garbage is bunkum, the scientific establishment – Cox & Co – become furious.  And I know to my cost what it’s like when they turn on you.

Cox equates scientific truth with the consensus view of the scientific establishment.  His justification for doing so is the revered practice known as ‘peer review’.  Cox tells us, ‘a peer-reviewed consensus is by definition impartial’.  Now this is an extraordinarily stupid thing for anyone to say, let alone someone like Cox who likes to pretend he’s clever.

Peer review happens when an article is submitted for publication to a science journal.  The editor doesn’t know whether the author is talking out of his hat or not, so he sends it out to other scientists working in the same field to (anonymously) pick holes in it.  If the others say it’s fine he’ll print it.  If not, he doesn’t.

Peer review is at best imperfect.  At worst it’s a rather nasty form of censorship within the scientific community.  Good papers are frequently rejected.  Rubbish is often printed.  The main problem is that scientists who do the reviewing are extremely partial to their own views.  Their reputations have been built on certain theories (like global warming).  Their grant funding depends on the wide acceptance of these theories.  They don’t like it when folk rock the boat.  So there is a tendency for the consensus to prevail against those who would shake things up.

Take the notorious ‘Hockey Stick’ scandal.  A big problem for global warming theory is that, compared to temperature change over the past thousand years, today’s temperatures look perfectly normal.  So a bunch of jokers came up with the ‘Hockey Stick’ graph, which suggested that temperatures were flat until the industrial revolution and then shot upwards.  It’s now clear that the research was, to borrow a phrase from Cox, utter drivel (see the Wegman report and others).  Nevertheless it sailed through peer-review with flying colours and was published in Nature and by the IPCC and by a thousand others.  James Lovelock had it up on his wall to remind himself about fragile Gaia.  Al Gore waved it about till he was red-faced.   Or how about all that peer-reviewed dodgy data from East Anglia, or the countless, laughably alarmist peer-reviewed papers published since the Ice Age scare 50 years ago.  Yet woe betide anyone in the media with the brass neck to point out that this peer-reviewed guff has proved to be nonsense.

Cox and his chums in the scientific establishment love to portray themselves as simple well-meaning scientific folk. But as anyone who has experienced the wrath of the scientific establishment will attest, it’s a significant political force, bullying politicians and beating up critics. The pious self-image of scientists, especially the global warmers, as guardians of the truth, is nauseating and dangerous.

Sanctimonious Cox says he himself is ‘absolutely true to science’.  He says that, unlike media people, scientists are above politics.

But science is incredibly political.  Whole careers are built on, and the funding of entire institutions depend on certain ‘scientific truths’, or as they should be called, ‘funding excuses’.  The global warmers embrace freedom of speech and critical views like turkeys welcome Christmas.

What’s more, the political views of scientists are inevitably, profoundly coloured by their almost complete reliance on big state funding.  Predictably, most of them have the trite anti-capitalist worldview that almost always go with it.

Global warming isn’t just the best funding wheeze they’ve hit upon since the Cold War.  It’s also a repository for all the green, middle class anti-capitalist prejudices which are part and parcel of the Western intellectual worldview.

Cox & Co are no saints.  They are not above the prejudices of the age and their class.  Nor are they unaware of their own economic self-interests.

Far from giving them rights of censorship, we in the media must watch them like hawks.

 

6 thoughts on “Prof Brian Cox: prettier than Brigstocke but just as wrong”

  1. Velocity says:6th December 2010 at 5:15 pmWe should give Mr Durkin a Knighthood and the sanctimonious socialist creep Mr Coz a bullet.Peer review is a suffocating consensus of the scientific establishment precisely as Mr Durkin describes. One of the main foundations of the internet was indeed for scientists to discuss and review each others work and AVOID establishment suffocation.Nothing in the world has EVER progressed by consensus. It is always the individual work of mavericks in all fields that first gains acceptance by fringe groups and early adopters and then permeates the herd changing the old consensus of wider society.And Government has NEVER been the melting pot for new (or great) ideas. It is the private sector, individuals and commercial organisations, that always come up with new knowledge, push the envelope, change society.

    How could it be else? Gov’t is filled to over flowing with empty idealists, criminals and incompetent crones. Gov’t is the dustbin of society, a follower, a catch up kid, never ever a leader in any field.

    99% of all knowledge resides in individuals hands and commercial hands. As the self-serving, useless, ignorant Totalitarian scum of Western Gov’ts attack Wikileaks they will see how totally incompetent and stupid Gov’t is versus the private individual.

    A club of overwhelming force to batter a hornets nest of bright young hackers. Watch Gov’t first be torn to shreds and then capitulate with snake oil to cover their abject ignorant defeat

  2. MarcoB says:7th December 2010 at 11:12 pmHi JamesKeep up the great writing, the only way to get this information into the thick headed masses is through repetition with concrete facts. I think you need to pitch a show to a channel like channel 4 with the title “fact vs fiction”, similar to “It’s only a theory” which is a great concept, but hosted by comedians that utterly fail.Hosted by you, you get a topic per episode, get a respectable professional/professor (or 2) for each side of the argument and let the debate begin. The rule is you are only allowed to debate with facts by stating papers, data sets, historical evidance and No OPIONS, No “I think” ,No “the consensus is”Guests are required to send evidence in advance to the show for authenticity verification, but neither knows the others facts. Might need a rating system, weak for simulation facts, medium for short term trends/data sets, strong for historical/long term trends, other factors might be number of studies showing similar results, variety of peers, ect.

    On the night, facts need to be short and powerful. Points are awarded for facts that cannot be countered or facts that are proven to be false by other facts.

    Quick terrible example…
    Eg. Guest 1 – “Co2 emmisions by man excede natural emmisions, 20 tons vs 10 tons. (Paper by Gene Wool 07)”
    Guest 2 – “Co2 emmisions by the pacific ocean in a year is equivalent to 10 years of man made CO2, 5 tons. (Paper by Will Dawn)”
    Guest 1 – “I have no rebuttle”
    Host- ” Point to Guest 2, Guest 2 shall now head the debate till Guest 1 can either rebut or Guest 1 concedes to the subject, which in this case is: Man produces more CO2 than nature”
    Subject is won by Guest 2, new subect is “CO2’s involvement in the greenhouse effect”

    Several subjects are set to break down the theory, focus the arguments and used in the final score to announce the winner, I think it would be the next QI, those that are not willing to put their facts to the test of an opposing respected peer, are merely spitting fiction instead.

    Other thing I wanted to let you know, found these 2 articles on the earth might be entering a new ice age.

    http://www.helium.com/items/1837151-why-earth-may-be-entering-a-new-ice-age

  3. Jules says:9th December 2010 at 7:36 pmI happened upon your “blog” because I have alerts for Professor Brian Cox. You can whine all you want, but that won’t stop what is happening. In the end, the planet will be fine, but humans (who soil their environment) will die off.Denying a car hurdling at you won’t make it kill you any less. Rather than wasting all your time and energy spewing at anyone you disagee with you, why don’t you learn some actual science and do something useful.Or continue on your silly path and end up with a heart attack or embollism.
  4. Velocity says:10th December 2010 at 11:04 amJules,Here’s a basic (Under 12 schoolboy) science lesson/question for you, see if you can work it out:Atmospheric content of Earth10,000-50,000 parts per million – Water (vapour)

    385 parts per million – Carbon Dioxide (CO2 to you)

    Water vapour is 20x more powerful as a greenhouse gas than CO2 as well as being 25x to well over 100x more common in Earths atmosphere. (This is not a trick question but an Under 12 schoolboy maths one). Which greenhouse gas warms the most?

    Answers on a Postcard to:
    Shrill Green Empties Campaign
    Al Gore Financial Fraud Towers
    Monbiot Scientific Idiots Street
    The School for Retards
    East Anglian
    AGW RIP

  5. Emanuel van den Bemd says:19th December 2010 at 8:11 amCO2 at the present concentration is just adequate to sustain life . Any more pollution from the 70.000 plus manmade chemicals in our environment and we risk being killed by them . How stupid is that?.
  6. Georgia Witt says:24th December 2010 at 1:27 amJules, Here’s a basic (Under 12 schoolboy) science lesson/question for you, see if you can work it out: Atmospheric content of Earth 10,000-50,000 parts per million – Water (vapour) 385 parts per million – Carbon Dioxide (CO2 to you) Water vapour is 20x more powerful as a greenhouse gas than CO2 as well as being 25x to well over 100x more common in Earths atmosphere. (This is not a trick question but an Under 12 schoolboy maths one). Which greenhouse gas warms the most? Answers on a Postcard to: Shrill Green Empties Campaign Al Gore Financial Fraud Towers Monbiot Scientific Idiots Street The School for Retards East Anglian AGW RIP

Comments are closed.