"Look into my eyes. Count backwards from ten... very sleepy... there was no leak... nothing has changed... the naughty hackers must be punished..."
Sunday, 29 November 2009
Later that day...
"I am not saying that Tom's results are wrong. And, I am certainly not saying that Broecker is right. I merely described the results of a new analysis of a somewhat new set of long tree-ring records from the extra-tropics. My statement that the MWP appeared to be comparable to the 20th century does not imply, nor was it meant to imply, that somehow the 20th century temperature is not truly anomalous and being driven by greenhouse gases. To quote from my email, "I would not claim (and nor would Jan) that it exceeded the warmth of the late 20th century. We simply do not have the precision or the proxy replication to say that yet." Note the use of the word "precision". This clearly relates to the issue of error variance and confidence intervals, a point that you clearly emphasize in describing your series. Also note the emphasis on "late 20th century". I think that most researchers in global change research would agree that the emergence of a clear greenhouse forcing signal has really only occurred since after 1970. I am not debating this point, although I do think that there still exists a signficant uncertainty as to the relative contributions of natural and greenhouse forcing to warming during the past 20-30 years at least. "
Dr. Edward R. Cook, Doherty Senior Scholar, Tree-Ring Laboratory, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, from 2nd May, 2001
"NAKED Lunch - a frozen moment when everyone sees what is on the end of every fork."
Climategate is such a moment. Now we can see amongst the corporate media which ones see their job as informing the public, so that we can make up our own minds, and those which follow the party line, pushing a PR message, giving us a 'narrative'.
ET AINSI, J'ACCUSE: Le BBC
The BBC is one of the most influential corporate media entities in the world. It poses as the dispassionate, high-minded, liberal voice. But the BBC is no watchdog for truth. Rather it plays the part of a crooked gatekeeper. To this crooked gatekeeper many messengers come, but only some of them can gain entrance.
Of this matter in question - Climategate (a term, I dare say, from which the Beeb's hacks would recoil in horror) - it is true that the BBC has reported the story - but what have they reported?
Exhibit A: The house 'Environment Analyst' uses an 'inside sources at CRU' line and shills to the mighty heavens in their favour.
Exhibit B: An enquiry into the circumstances of the leak is announced. Apparently:
"BBC News understands that senior individuals at UEA have acknowledged the potential damage to the university's reputation from the CRU affair and are anxious to clear the institution's name."
So, this is what they've reported:
the existence of a news story, but not the news story itself.
A newsworthy event has taken place, and the BBC acknowledges this, by reporting some of the reaction to this event; specifically the reaction of insiders at the CRU - those most implicated in the event, and the reaction of the CRU's higher authorities - also implicated.
But it won't cover the story. It won't sift through the thousands of pages, and it won't report what others have found whilst sifting, and the reason is clear why it doesn't:
Because it doesn't fit with the PR narrative the BBC is selling. It thinks its got all the middle classes worrying about recycling and wittering over their carbon footprint - WHY THROW THAT ALL AWAY by telling the people anything that could induce thought thereby shattering the pretty picture?
Saturday, 28 November 2009
See the rest here.
Check Monckton's website, the Science and Public Policy Institute.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Firstly, there is the question of whether the royal succession laws are 'outdated'.
OF COURSE THEY'RE OUTDATED!
It's an hereditary monarchy. What the fuck do you expect? You want an hereditary monarchy that's fit for the 21st Century? That's what I'd call an oxymoron.
Back in January 1066, Harold Godwinson became King of England: elected by the Witenagemot. Not exactly direct democracy, but a damned sight better than hereditary succession. Almost a thousand years has passed and we're still in a state of regression.
But as I read on I discover that this little matter is not something we, in this country, can do anything about. Apparently we would need approval from the Commonwealth, before any such change could be made. What a cheek! Our Head of State, and it's nothing that we can change without others' approval. What a great system, eh?
If only Robert Blake had lived a little longer...
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Boy, I'd love to read these guys emails...
"The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken by them.
Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request.
Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed."
Wow. Have the scales fallen from his eyes? Not quite. He then goes into a bizarre, laboured parody of the Protocols of Zion, to bolster up his faith, on the basis that, as he has seen no evidence of a conspiracy along such lines, all is well. Climate Gate only damages "the credibility of three or four scientists," he spins. But George, these are the very highest of priests in your cult! The CRU is your Vatican, and Phil Jones is your Pope!
Monday, 23 November 2009
"The lay public, when presented with confusing data and competing arguments about climate change, deploy the mental shortcut of believing the people they most trust. Trust in the communicator is therefore crucial."
'The lay public'? For a moment that raised my hackles, 'arrogant twit' I thought, then I realised he means it literally! The Church of Climatology is a religion now, so we really are the lay public.
(BTW, I've never seen so many comments deleted by the moderator. I wonder what we're missing?)
Sunday, 22 November 2009
Watson and the friendly Guardian hack go through the obfuscation playbook. He blames the sceptics (you know the real scientists, not those lying frauds Watson cites), he blames the oil companies (like BP, I suppose, whose boss helped design the 'cap and trade' system) and they drag in GW Bush for a bit of guilt by association. But you know what? It ain't working, buddy. We know you're a bunch of liars because we have your own documents now, so fuck you, Watson.
These lessons led me to the conclusion that the UK is only superficially governed by MPs and the voters who elect them. Parliamentary democracy is, in truth, little more than a means of securing a periodical change in the management team, which is then allowed to preside over a system that remains in essence intact. If the British people were ever to ask themselves what power they truly enjoyed under our political system they would be amazed to discover how little it is, and some new Chartist agitation might be born and might quickly gather momentum."
Tony Benn; 'Out of the Wilderness: Diaries 1963-7', Introduction
Sherri Tenpenny, MD
'Free Trade' is a utopian fantasy, based on the premise that when there is perfect free trade, everyone will be happy and have enough. This ain't gonna happen, because as soon as the 'benefits of free trade' trickle down to the mass of the people, the 'free trade' will o' the wisp will depart to where the labour costs and the workers' rights are lower. So jobs move from Canada to the USA, then down to Mexico, then across to China, and if the Chinese ever ask for Sunday off, the factories will move on again.
'Free Trade' (and I use inverted commas, because it is a label, not a description) is the most common error in the minds of libertarian thinkers, grasped for like a glass of gin and tonic at the end of a hard day's work. Unfortunately, it's bullshit. It means, and has meant, the de-industrialisation of the West and the increasing enslavement of the populations to corporate interests. So much as I am happy to join Hannan as he battles the Beast of Brussels, we will be fighting for different objectives; his being to hand over the re-patriated power to another gang of crooked bureaucrats in the WTO, and mine being to keep these powers under democratic superintendance in this country.
Saturday, 21 November 2009
Ho ho ho. From the Guardian:
The computer files were apparently accessed earlier this week from servers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit a world-renowned centre focused on the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.
Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege they provide "smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in manipulating data to support the widely held view that climate change is real, and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind."
As reported in Boing Boing:
"Secretary of State Peter Mandelson is planning to introduce changes to the Digital Economy Bill now under debate in Parliament. These changes will give the Secretary of State (Mandelson -- or his successor in the next government) the power to make "secondary legislation" (legislation that is passed without debate) to amend the provisions of Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (1988).
"Claims from minister Stephen Timms this morning that the Digital Economy Bill has widespread support have been thrown into question, after the Internet Service Providers Association insisted it is strongly opposed to aspects of the legislation. Mandelson's bill gives him power to change copyright laws as he sees fit, using a statutory instrument rather than a pesky old debate in Parliament. The law will force internet service providers to write to customers accused of infringing copyright on peer-to-peer networks by rights holders like the BPI. ISPs must also hand over address information if rights holders wish to take court action. Alongside this, Ofcom will begin using deep packet inspection to see what impact the dark lord's actions are having on file sharing."
Friday, 20 November 2009
Thursday, 19 November 2009
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
In killing the referendum, this government destroyed its legitimacy. Without making a promise to hold a referendum, Labour could well have lost the last election, as the clear choice between Labour and no referendum or Tory and a referendum would have pushed a number of people to vote Tory, quite possibly enough to swing the election. Do not forget Enoch Powell famously voted Labour in 1974 on this same issue.
Things have moved on. The EU has got its treaty ratified and has no intention of letting the people interfere with its plans. Like Ceausescu on the balcony, they will not listen until we force them to listen. Now is the time to make that happen.
Surely the day is rushing towards us, when the EU will sink beneath the weight of its own hypocrisy, greed and hatred of freedom. It has no legitimacy, and no purpose other than to perpetuate itself at the expense of the people.
My contempt knows no bounds.
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
'What is the point of celebrating the Diamond Jubilee of someone who is born into a position of privilege? She is a parasite and milks this country for everything she can. She has more front than Margate asking for extra money from the civil list. Maybe she should sell a couple of her properties. Maybe if she wants Buckingham Palace to maintained from public funds she should open it to the public. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with a public holiday but let's have one that means something, rather than celebrating vermin....'
Therein we learn that:
"The president's critics are not all prejudiced but the crowd is mutating to the extremes"
This dude must be on acid.
Sunday, 15 November 2009
From 'The Last Ditch', who also posts an excellent interview with Patrick McGoohan today.
Longrider, commenting on a recent example of the Fabian hell of scientific dictatorship we are now living in.
Saturday, 14 November 2009
Hat tip: Infowars
"World leaders cannot use the global recession as an excuse to delay action on climate change, according to leading economists."
Leading economists, huh? I wonder who they might be? In fact, the reference is to a report from the 'ESRC Centre for Climate Change and Economic Policy'. No, I've not heard of them either. I wonder who funds them? That's right - WE DO, via a slush fund at the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (sic).
So, in summary, the government hands our money to their academic chums, who then call upon the government to take action that the government wanted to do all along, and their media pals can spin it as if the pressure is coming from independent experts.
Bercow is the embodiment of all that is hateful in the lower ranks of the political world: bereft of conviction, aware that he will never rise to a position of importance, he is content to fill his boots and feather his bed, laughing in the face of the common people who are made to pay for his venal greed.
"Paris - A young woman was diagnosed with a crippling illness possibly linked to the vaccine being used protect the French public against swine flu, the health ministry said late Thursday.
The woman, who was only identified as a health worker, came down with Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) six days after receiving her swine flu vaccination."
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
If I let a crocodile or a polar bear loose and it attacked somebody, could I say "I had no idea. The crocodile didn't attack anyone when he was in the cage. I did a risk assessment and everything..."? Naturally, I would be held responsible, on the grounds that such creatures are known to be dangerous, so releasing one would be utterly reckless. Yet our judges do the equivalent every day and are never held to account. A young child was kidnapped and raped because Judge Adrian Smith considered his primary duty to endulge a dangerous predatory child-rapist, rather than to protect the public or give justice to the victim. If he had a shred of decency, he'd have resigned. But he hasn't. He's a judge.
Sometimes I write more on other people's blogs than on my own. Below is my final contribution at one of the pro-EU blogs that I have kept a periodic eye on, but since the theft of our referendum, there's very little to say to Europhiles. It seems futile to argue over the game, now they've picked up the ball and gone off home. But as I don't deign to continue the dispute, I will reproduce my parting shot, for the pleasure of my readers (yes, both of you!):
As for the case in point, I don’t care what the media says either way. It’s inaccurate in both directions, but without any democratic process, what difference does it make? Public opinion may be swayed one way or the other, but so what? The public doesn’t get a chance to express its opinion. The EU is going to have a President representing millions of people and not one of them will have voted for him.
I’m a libertarian and a nationalist, and I’m under no illusion of speaking for a majority of anyone. If I wanted a political party that endorsed my views, I’d have to start it myself. I am only one man, but in a democratic country at least I have a chance to argue the case one way or another, to call for the repeal a law I oppose, or the institution of a law I support, for more taxes or less taxes, for nationalisation or privatisation, to vote for the people I think will represent my views the best. Now, even this modicum of participation is being removed, replaced by something no more accountable than the Byzantine Empire."
To this, comes a response:
"I always find it intriguing that those who are pushing for referenda on the EU always make excuses when it’s suggested referenda are used more in UK politics for other matters, such as the UK becoming a republic, the voting system, our membership of NATO, greater devolution of power to local authorities, directly elected prime ministers, etc.
Hat tip: Fausty
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
As usual, the police defend their actions. They seem to have totally lost sight of what they exist for.
"The negotiations surround the Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement (ACTA). This is a trade treaty being negotiated outside of the usual channels such as the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) and World Trade Organisation (WTO). Countries including the US, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Canada and New Zealand, as well as the European Union, have got together to hammer out a plan.
That the proposal is not a part of an existing structure means that the usual rules of transparency and reporting don't apply. Up to a point that is the right of those doing the negotiating, but it does make people suspicious, and it does allow speculation to grow unchecked."
The Register's take is that the secrecy has allowed speculation to grow to a feverish level. But what really ought to be the issue is that there are these secret negotiations in the first place. Still, I guess I'm one of those old-fashioned democrats, not yet adapted to the tyrannical New World Order of the near future.
Monday, 9 November 2009
Saturday, 7 November 2009
Don't be a flu shot lemming like some of these people, especially the prick at the end who thinks the journalist shouldn't ask questions.
Thursday, 5 November 2009
Anything that attempts to remove the treacherous, rotten politicians and parties that currently dominate us should be considered. It's obviously something of a mountain to climb, but, politically speaking at least, have we got any choice? Have we got anything better to do?
My suggested method would be to put forth a reassertion of national sovereignty and a clear programme of constitutional and legal reform to limit the power of government, reaffirm our individual rights, and return our justice system to repute. This in the form of a Grand Petition, which we demand parliamentary candidates support.
The soft underbelly of the political system is its need to hold General Elections, and for one day everything is up for grabs, not just in theory, but actually in reality. The chance is tiny, but exists no less.
What does it matter who we elect to a Parliament which has given away its right to change the laws which govern us?
Did they think, these politicians, that we would not notice? Do they also think they are so far above us in judgement, that they need pay no heed to our wishes or views? Which do they claim, that matters like sovereignty and justice are of such importance, the common people’s voice must be excluded, or that these are trifling matters we should leave in their good care? In either case we must protest. What evidence can they produce to justify their superiority in brain power? What examples can they offer of their good stewardship? Can we not assert the contrary with many examples of our own?
This can go on no longer. We don't need them and we gain nothing from having them prance and pontificate on the political stage. We must use this coming General Election to demand of all those seeking our votes that the necessary changes, detailed below, will be made...
To be continued.