Friday
Sep252015
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Quote of the day, goofy edition
This moment requires we the people to rethink democracy as a global mechanism for enacting policy for and by the planet.
Environmentalist Daphne Muller goes all Che Guevara
Reader Comments (58)
How about we rethink democracy to include the murder of people, because self interested people don't like their views?
Why is it Greens don't like being described as Eco-Fascists with all its negative connatations?
Farnish writes
"The only way to prevent global ecological collapse and thus ensure the survival of humanity is to rid the world of Industrial Civilization"
Review
Keith Farnish has it right: time has practically run out, and the 'system' is the
problem. Governments are under the thumb of fossil fuel special
interests - they will not look after our and the planet's
well-being until we force them to do so, and that is going to
require enormous effort. -
-Professor James Hansen, GISS, NASA
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Times-Up-Uncivilized-Solution-Global/dp/190032248X
Leading climate scientist: 'democratic process isn't working'
Protest and direct action could be the only way to tackle soaring carbon emissions, a leading climate scientist has said.
James Hansen, a climate modeller with Nasa, told the Guardian today that corporate lobbying has undermined democratic attempts to curb carbon pollution. "The democratic process doesn't quite seem to be working," he said.
Speaking on the eve of joining a protest against the headquarters of power firm E.ON in Coventry, Hansen said: "The first action that people should take is to use the democratic process. What is frustrating people, me included, is that democratic action affects elections but what we get then from political leaders is greenwash.
"The democratic process is supposed to be one person one vote, but it turns out that money is talking louder than the votes. So, I'm not surprised that people are getting frustrated. I think that peaceful demonstration is not out of order, because we're running out of time."
Hansen said he was taking part in the Coventry demonstration tomorrow because he wants a worldwide moratorium on new coal power stations. E.ON wants to build such a station at Kingsnorth in Kent, an application that energy and the climate change minister Ed Miliband recently delayed. "I think that peaceful actions that attempt to draw society's attention to the issue are not inappropriate," Hansen said.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/mar/18/nasa-climate-change-james-hansen
There's a discussion of this issue at Klimazwiebel,
http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.de/2015/09/democracy-and-climate-policy-comment-in.html
linking to a recent Nature article by Nico Stehr, "Climate policy: Democracy is not an inconvenience".
In a way, perhaps Hansen is right that democracy isn't working - the opinions of people like him get far more attention than they deserve.
I wonder what Hansen's Carbon footprint is?
PW
Hansen is responsible for this entire mess. He managed to persuade Al Gore and George Soros he was an honest scientist. That upshot of that was that NASA couldn't muzzle him.
"Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist, Dr. John S. Theon, the former supervisor of James Hansen, NASA’s vocal man-made global warming fear soothsayer, has now publicly declared himself a skeptic and declared that Hansen “embarrassed NASA” with his alarming climate claims and said Hansen was “was never muzzled.” Theon joins the rapidly growing ranks of international scientists abandoning the promotion of man-made global warming fears."
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/27/james-hansens-former-nasa-supervisor-declares-himself-a-skeptic-says-hansen-embarrassed-nasa-was-never-muzzled/
when she says 'we the people'... she just her and her mates... doesn't she.
nothing ever changes.
Hansen is on record as saying that he/we need to lie to people in order to grab their attention, then he wonders why people do not take notice of what he says, the word moron comes to mind.
There has, never been a moments doubt for me, that, all eco wing nuts, pscientists, eco SJW's and politicians alike are at heart Fascistic lunatics who crave power for powers sake.........aka green megalomania. To which, there is only one solution or, should I name it, the antidote; of localism and therein true democracy - conservatism with its core ethics, libertarian values and only very, very limited and small government.
Naomi Klein has got very rich saying that capitalism must be destroyed in order to enable the survival of the planet.
Maybe Ms Muller is hoping to sip from the same cup.
The "Big Think" looks like "The Small Circle-Jerk" from here
Pope Francis, Gina McCarthy and Barry O'Blimey all duly wheeled out.
Another crock alarmist idjit vanity vehicle - if Big Think has traction stateside - it's no wonder The Guardian is pushing itself into the USofA....
tomo
The Guardian now has more American that British online readers.
http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com
esmiff
yep - I saw that and have followed the push into the USA - the IP address related content arrangement being something that I was quite curious about (and something I get to check out travelling).
Your ads change based on assorted browser identifiers - not many people appreciate how content also gets dicked with depending on your location .... BBC also does a fair bit of this - sometimes overtly but more usually it's by omission....
Goal. not goofy.
Would Madame like some wine to go with her foot or will you just gnaw on the toes for a bit until you feel sick?
You’ve got to have a sneaking admiration for that level of stupid. The very lack of success equals a lack of controlling authority. She might as well sing 'When I rule the World, every day will be the first day of spring'.
'This moment requires we the people to rethink democracy as a global mechanism for enacting policy for and by the planet.'
Democracy is fine, as long as you vote the way we want you to. If you don't, then it doesn't work and has to go.
People like policy for and by the people. Policy for and by the planet, a dirt and water covered iron/nickel ball flying around the sun, is surreal. What does policy "by the planet" even mean?
Our Democracy and our freedom are under attack and it's all the more reason we should launch a Climate Change Skeptic political party.
Otherwise we are no better than Russell Brand and eventually destined to obscurity and irrelevance.
First on the Manifesto is the repeal of the Climate Change Act.
People who enjoy telling others how to lead their lives will always find an excuse. Global warming alarm is the best excuse of recent years.
It is no surprise that such people think democracy isn't up to the job, because democracy is usually taken to imply that it might involve actually asking others how they wish to lead their own lives.
I agree with TinyCO2. The daft bint is an egomaniac who wants to rule the world. This could be a plot from a future James Bond film: dangerous lunatic attempts to impose her will on humanity, Bond comes along, beds her and saves the free world. Way to go, James.
Ms Muller could do worse than take her own advice (from another article):
>No matter how you open up, as Freud once advised, "being entirely honest with oneself is a good exercise."
How does the planet enact a policy - indeed, how does it know what a policy is?
cheshirered, Moonraker. Kill the human race, and repopulate with perfection, saved by Jaws. But no evil bint in bed with 007.
Why all the fuss about Daphne Muller's comments? All she wants is true democracy. As Abraham Lincoln said in his Gettysburg Address:
"Government of the planet, by the planet, for the planet, shall not perish from the planet," or words to that effect.
Give the franchise to rocks.
'I wonder what Hansen's Carbon footprint is?'
He never used a drop of oil nor used industrial civilization for anything, so it'd be five-toed. /sarc
Come the revolution (against Green fascism) I would like to think that Ms Muller would be amongst the first up against the wall.
"Democracy isn't working."
She overlooks the elephant in the room. Climate models aren't working. The science is wrong..
jamspid
A climate skeptic party would not work but why not a party that is just sceptical of everything.
We believe nothing until it is proven.
Bitter&twisted
You can not trust a firing squad; I would prefer a small room and a large grenade ^.^
"Its the only way to be sure"
GolfCharlie, if you haven't seen it,Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow with Jude law is another light hearted example of saving the world from an evil genius who thinks it necessary to remove humans and start again.
The somewhat dippy but scheming heroine was played by Gwyneth Paltrow (I didn't realise she was such an enviro-dip at the time, but now I understand why the role seemed to suit her so well). The more military female role was enjoyably played by Angelina Jolie, while Bai Ling was an excellent robot. All that and Laurence Olivier too (how?, I hear you ask).
There is no totalitarian ideal that the left will not embrace in the name of socialism.
It shows the paucity of their very being, their very idea of freedom of speech is corrupted and foul
Your country and mine fought wars to make sure people like this did not come to power.
Now it seems we are breeding these people within our own society.
This article by Daphne Muller shows that all those who admire and respect those that fought for freedom may well have to step up to the mark themselves.
Another challenge to freedom is forming it seems.
Global Warming/Climate Change/Whatever is simply a convenient cover for the fascists - eco or otherwise.
Already well underway folks, over at the UN. Anyone troubled to browse their way through the euphemistically described 'Agenda' ? Read it and perspire. http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/69/L.85&Lang=E
Entitled, 'Draft outcome document of the United Nations summit for the adoption of the post-2015 development agenda'
'Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development'. Here you'll see everything from the requirement to register all births to the requirement for everyone to hold an ID card....by 2030. You'll read that 'they' require all countries to aim at a 50% reduction in road traffic accidents by 2020.....all the draft policies one might anticipate, emerging from the central foci of the UN. /sarc
The UN has obviously morphed from a global security forum into a government-in-waiting. The implementation goal appears to be 2030, with the patronage of the current Pope welcomed as the moral figurehead of the eco-marxist totalitarian bureaucracy.
UN defined 'climate change' is as we all know is a Trojan Horse. The 4000+ UN consultative NGO's are the occupants.
This is David Runciman, writing in the 24 September issue of the London Review of Books.
Yes, there is a genuine view abroad in influential circles that authoritarianism and the suspension of democracy may be necessary. Because the problem is that the voters are simply not buying into this something that must be done. The warmists are not the only ones of course - Islamists want to be governed by God not by democratically elected men....others have felt that the Aryan race could only be saved if we went to rule by decree, and yet others have wanted a dictatorship of the proletariat that turned out to be less proletarian than some might have hoped.
Some things never change, they just acquire new names and justifications.
Che Guavara? Oh I know, that middle-class well educated, priviledged, cold blooded ruthless killer! Nice guy! And students around the world have his poster stuck on their bedroom walls......very disturbing that the yoof, for the last 40 years+ have decided to worship the bastard!
Alan the Brit, you are forgetting Che's amazing contribution to poster sales. Few other images have ever caused so much of other peoples money, to be paid to shopkeepers, so that misguided idiots, can hero worship a murderous thug, without any clue as to who he really was.
I can't think why Pol Pot and Idi Amin don't have a similar fan base.
Starch a green and find a red , of course when you are 'saving the planet ' anything is justifiable , but it is worth remember that it is not lucky chance freedom of speech for them means , freedom of selected people to speak on selected subjects in a selected way. And those doing the selection? well that would be the 'right type of people ' of course .
The bottom line to this , is that they are aware that the people will reject them and their ideology if they ever given a chance , therefore they do not want them to have such chances in the first place .
*checks in*
Hmm, I wonder how the howling nutjobs are doing?
Oh look, a poster called Manfred is raving about how the UN is secretly a one world government trying to take over the World. Exactly like the kind of paranoid conspiracy theorist you all foamed at the mouth about, when a study found you were much more likely to be exactly that.
As ever, you're all still batshit crazy and, as then name suggests, in complete denial of that.
It's the theme of the moment:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/latenightlive/meet-john-schellnhuber-climatologist-to-pope-francis/6799686
As the Pope stakes out a firm position on the issue of climate change, one of his key scientific advisors meets Late Night Live, opening up about climate scepticism, how many people can fit on the planet, and whether democracy can solve this kind of environmental crisis.
As camera crews and crowds of devotees followed the pontiff around New York and Washington, John Schellnhuber—a distinguished scientist who advised the Catholic leader on the encyclical—held some much lower-profile meetings in Australia with business leaders, who, he says, are starting to shift in their views on climate action.
'In the United States the climate change debate was more or less dead, and then Hurricane Katrina struck. Then you had a surge of public interest, then George Clooney and Julia Roberts were portrayed on the cover of Vanity Fair, I gave an interview over the issue, and all of a sudden there was a surge in interest.'
In a short essay called Expanding the Democracy Universe, written in 2013, he advocated for a 'global democratic society' to be organised within the framework of the United Nations. He outlined a 'daydream' of world government including an Earth Constitution, a Global Council and a Planetary Court, where national sovereignty is given up in order to avoid catastrophic climate change.
'While the borders of nation states have become almost irrelevant to global economic players (for instance) after the end of the Cold War, human and natural rights are still confined and dominated by thousands of frontiers,' he wrote. 'This situation can only be overcome by giving up a good deal of national sovereignty and establishing a true regime of global governance.'
I wonder if Daphne Muller and John Schellnhuber were listening to Pope Francis' speech to the UN, and will be agreeing with him?
" Consequently, the defence of the environment and the fight against exclusion demand that we recognize a moral law written into human nature itself, one which includes the natural difference between man and woman (cf. Laudato Si’, 155), and absolute respect for life in all its stages and dimensions (cf. ibid., 123, 136)."
dennisa, when science fails, call in the Pope, and then claim you have God's support and blessing. What could possibly go wrong?
Committing vile acts against humanity, claiming it to be the Will of God, does not have a good track record through history.
Even worse is climate activists claiming global warming warming refugee status, for Syrian refugees, fleeing greed fueled war, incited by religious extremists. The desperate shortage of evidence based global warming science, calls for ever more desperate claims.
During the excavation of the 'Mary Rose' a goblet was recovered with the the latin inscription "With God on our side, how can we lose?" I expect the French opposition in 1545 had similar goblets.
Joe Ronan, I wonder whether the global warmists have had the chance to discuss Malthusian theory with the Pope? I am sure they could persuade him about the benefits of contraception, if they continued to put their minds to control his. Poor catholics would thank him. The better off seem to be able to get around the issue, without divine intervention.
re.
Sep 25, 2015 at 12:39 PM | Unregistered Commenter golf charlie
Murder is such a nasty expression only used by nasty elderly white racist homophobic islamophobic and alternative gender-hating males. Better to use the terminology late post-parturition abortion.
"nasty elderly white racist homophobic islamophobic and alternative gender-hating males."
You need to think twice before you decide to call us nasty!
Dung, Richard of NZ, could be near Wizard of OZ. Quite similar to type too.
Or maybe I fell onto my broomstick the wrong way round this morning.
These extremists are not "goofy". They are dangerous.
And they are in charge.
Things will not end well.
Dung/Golf C - I think Richard of NZ was referring to the climatastrophist tendency to avoid truth by disguising it with phrases superficially acceptable to those of tender sensibilities, and to use abusive language of those with whom they disagree.
Golf Charlie @ 12:25pm
I'm sure they've tried, but Francis has quite clearly stated his position in support of the core document, which as it approaches its 50th anniversary is starting to look prophetic.
http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html
Joe Ronan and Richard of NZ, apologies if I mistook the angle.
When news of the Pope's encyclical first appeared here, I was not impressed, but then realised it was not quite being reported accurately. I am not sure now, whether the Vatican or Hockey Team have been banging a few heads together, and whether the right heads were concussed.
Oh Daphne, you don't need to get rid of democracy, you just need to present a convincing argument that global warming, sorry, I mean climate change, is a serious problem. The climate alarmists have so far failed to do this, which is why the electorates of the free world are unconvinced. The most obvious problem that you have is the simple fact that warmer climates are much more benign than cold ones.
It is only natural for global warmists to rewrite science, history, geography, religion, archaeology etc, so why not democracy aswell, if it is only way they can be proved right about anything.