Do you still believe our governments, military, media and scientists never lied to us during WWII?
If so, you probably still have a simple sturdy faith in all the old certitudes, in particular the one where the Triumph of the human Will over the wind (and other climate inconveniences) is inevitable.
You are a harmful climate change denier , a NAIF BOOMER, like prime ministers Stephen Harper and Tony Abbott.
Because beneath Harper & Co's cast-hardened steel-like exterior, there resides a soft child-like interior, where there really still is a Santa Claus, a Tooth Fairy and Tinkerbell.
Yes, Peter Pan and Pollyanna are both climate deniers.
But none of the anti-heroes of the old Film Noir films would ever ever believe that their government ,media and industry could be trusted to prevent harmful climate change.
These doomed protagonists might be all heading straight for a hot date with a chair and a electric wire, but they were an early warning system for the REALIST BOOMER's coming postmodern world, where nothing was ever quite as simple as it seemed on the surface ...
Showing posts with label stephen harper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stephen harper. Show all posts
Sunday, January 18, 2015
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Today's Conflicted Boomers : typical of any Transitional Generation
The main reason why the long dead Adorno and Horkheimer still get the big bucks in intellectual currency, while you and I pal pick about for chicken feed, all comes down to a mimeographed collection of turgid speculative essays the pair circulated among a few friends at the end of WWII.
At the time, all the rest of the world was beaming in self-satisfaction about Modern Science's obvious success (here insert A-Bomb) at beating back 'Barbaric Age' Axis science.
But Adorno and Horkheimer alone suggested that Janus Year 1945 really meant that the world was now in a 'transitional era' between a fading Modern Science (aka 'modernity') and a rising postmodern world.
But as the humble mimeographed nature of their book (The Dialectic of the Enlightenment) suggests, the pair were completely ignored at the time.
So what was first noted about all the kids being born between the early mid-1940s to the early mid-1960s was simply that : their extraordinary large numbers : hence 'Boomers'.
But would their highly unusual behavior during their plastic formative years been any different if their birth numbers had been considered 'normal' or low ?
I argue not.
The coincident fact that the peak of the transitional era's passing turbulence coincided with the Boomers' crucial formative years would have produced 'The Sixties' irregardless.
At the time, 'The Sixties' social conflict was neatly explained away by simply pointing to the Boomers' extra large numbers as sufficient explanation.
So the transitional nature of The Sixties was never recognized.
In particular no one looked at who all was retiring at the world's High Schools and Universities, instead of looking simply at who was newly coming in as students -- and then promptly protesting.
For in all times of transition, tides go out just as much as they come in.
Unlike their parents raised in unconflictedly modern schools - or their children raised in unconflictededly postmodern schools - the boomers got it from both barrels.
Early on : taught by moderns; later on : taught by post moderns : who now to believe ?
Before 1989, those Boomers who took the postmodern science way of viewing physical reality dominated their peers and the news pages.
But I argue that since "The End of The Cold War", those Boomers who went on to rule the world after 1990 - and who still do rule our world - held more to the older 'modern science' way of viewing physical reality.
I argue their rise to power was itself transitional .
Mostly due to others abruptly retiring, due partly to old age but mostly because of satisfaction at completing their life work : defeating Communism.
The new bosses, like the old bosses, were a hard,mean,uncharitable lot but their target and hence its solution, had greatly changed.
Their target was now environmentalists, not communists .
No longer was conflict over direct questions of ideology, basically 'trickle down' theories versus claims of 'human equality of access to basic life necessities'.
Now the conflict had become modern production science confronting postmodern impact science (over climate change in particular) to use Allan Schnailberg's highly influential formulation.
The dying-off Old Guard (the Modernist cum Greatest Generation) could find almost none among the Gen X and Millennials to carry on their battle against their true mortal enemy, the postmodern majority among the Boomers.
But not all Boomers resolved the conflict between modern and postmodern schooling in 100% favouring postmodernity.
This minority, the Rogue Boomers, (Stephen Harper and Tony Abbott come to mind) swallowed their internal doubts (that as conflicted Boomers they must have had) and made a big career advance - nailing their Boomer colours 100% to the fading modernist cause.
For these relatively young leaders have always found most of their votes among those much older than themselves - rather than among their peers.
But the older voter is always a constantly wasting resource.
Soon Boomers, more and more, will become the true older voter (because voting falls off sharply after age 75 - and all of the Greatest Generation will be over 75 in 2016's presidential election year.)
Because of their higher - age-related - turnout, Boomers will be the key voter up until the climate crisis's tipping point.
The fate of our world will thus turn not on a conflict between nations, ethnicities, religions, classes, genders or even generations - Fox and CNN to the contrary.
It will turn on a conflict within a highly conflicted transitional generation : the Boomers ....
At the time, all the rest of the world was beaming in self-satisfaction about Modern Science's obvious success (here insert A-Bomb) at beating back 'Barbaric Age' Axis science.
But Adorno and Horkheimer alone suggested that Janus Year 1945 really meant that the world was now in a 'transitional era' between a fading Modern Science (aka 'modernity') and a rising postmodern world.
But as the humble mimeographed nature of their book (The Dialectic of the Enlightenment) suggests, the pair were completely ignored at the time.
So what was first noted about all the kids being born between the early mid-1940s to the early mid-1960s was simply that : their extraordinary large numbers : hence 'Boomers'.
But would their highly unusual behavior during their plastic formative years been any different if their birth numbers had been considered 'normal' or low ?
I argue not.
The coincident fact that the peak of the transitional era's passing turbulence coincided with the Boomers' crucial formative years would have produced 'The Sixties' irregardless.
At the time, 'The Sixties' social conflict was neatly explained away by simply pointing to the Boomers' extra large numbers as sufficient explanation.
So the transitional nature of The Sixties was never recognized.
In particular no one looked at who all was retiring at the world's High Schools and Universities, instead of looking simply at who was newly coming in as students -- and then promptly protesting.
For in all times of transition, tides go out just as much as they come in.
Unlike their parents raised in unconflictedly modern schools - or their children raised in unconflictededly postmodern schools - the boomers got it from both barrels.
Early on : taught by moderns; later on : taught by post moderns : who now to believe ?
Before 1989, those Boomers who took the postmodern science way of viewing physical reality dominated their peers and the news pages.
But I argue that since "The End of The Cold War", those Boomers who went on to rule the world after 1990 - and who still do rule our world - held more to the older 'modern science' way of viewing physical reality.
I argue their rise to power was itself transitional .
Mostly due to others abruptly retiring, due partly to old age but mostly because of satisfaction at completing their life work : defeating Communism.
The new bosses, like the old bosses, were a hard,mean,uncharitable lot but their target and hence its solution, had greatly changed.
Their target was now environmentalists, not communists .
No longer was conflict over direct questions of ideology, basically 'trickle down' theories versus claims of 'human equality of access to basic life necessities'.
Now the conflict had become modern production science confronting postmodern impact science (over climate change in particular) to use Allan Schnailberg's highly influential formulation.
The dying-off Old Guard (the Modernist cum Greatest Generation) could find almost none among the Gen X and Millennials to carry on their battle against their true mortal enemy, the postmodern majority among the Boomers.
But not all Boomers resolved the conflict between modern and postmodern schooling in 100% favouring postmodernity.
This minority, the Rogue Boomers, (Stephen Harper and Tony Abbott come to mind) swallowed their internal doubts (that as conflicted Boomers they must have had) and made a big career advance - nailing their Boomer colours 100% to the fading modernist cause.
For these relatively young leaders have always found most of their votes among those much older than themselves - rather than among their peers.
But the older voter is always a constantly wasting resource.
Soon Boomers, more and more, will become the true older voter (because voting falls off sharply after age 75 - and all of the Greatest Generation will be over 75 in 2016's presidential election year.)
Because of their higher - age-related - turnout, Boomers will be the key voter up until the climate crisis's tipping point.
The fate of our world will thus turn not on a conflict between nations, ethnicities, religions, classes, genders or even generations - Fox and CNN to the contrary.
It will turn on a conflict within a highly conflicted transitional generation : the Boomers ....
Tuesday, January 6, 2015
Boomers : the 'Greater Generation' or the generation that precipitates the ending of the entire human experiment ?
Come on Boomers, we can do so much better !
We were supposed to be the generation from whom great things were expected.
Instead (somebody, somewhere, certainly not humanity itself) will remember us merely as the pathetic little generation that ended the entire human experiment for all time in a great big global meltdown.
Some of us Boomers will do so actively (big shout out to PMs Stephen Harper and Tony Abbott !)
But most of us will merely passively help end the human experiment : apparently we Boomers are not ones for much passion --- or commitment.
We'll just be inert Netflix Potatoes, as the equivalent of our parents' war against Nazi values grinds on outside our comfortable living rooms.
What we do - or don't do - on harmful human climate change, not Elvis, Rock 'n' Roll or Civil Rights Marches, will end up being what defines us Boomers.
Yes, we're all a little older, a little slower : the youngest of us are almost fifty and the oldest are in their early seventies - but we're not dead yet, not yet in the nursing home.
We still have time to do that One Great Thing that we all promised the world way back when....
We were supposed to be the generation from whom great things were expected.
Instead (somebody, somewhere, certainly not humanity itself) will remember us merely as the pathetic little generation that ended the entire human experiment for all time in a great big global meltdown.
Some of us Boomers will do so actively (big shout out to PMs Stephen Harper and Tony Abbott !)
But most of us will merely passively help end the human experiment : apparently we Boomers are not ones for much passion --- or commitment.
We'll just be inert Netflix Potatoes, as the equivalent of our parents' war against Nazi values grinds on outside our comfortable living rooms.
What we do - or don't do - on harmful human climate change, not Elvis, Rock 'n' Roll or Civil Rights Marches, will end up being what defines us Boomers.
Yes, we're all a little older, a little slower : the youngest of us are almost fifty and the oldest are in their early seventies - but we're not dead yet, not yet in the nursing home.
We still have time to do that One Great Thing that we all promised the world way back when....
I have here in my hand a list of names : rogue Boomers who deny climate change
I don't - yet - have 205 or 81 or 57 names or whatever alcohol-induced fantasy number Senator Joe came up with in the end.
But I'm working on it.
First, definitions.
The Baby Boom wasn't really a boom in babies conceived , taking the long view.
Rather it was a 25 year long interregnum (a blip upwards) in the one hundred and fifty year long slow slide downwards in the number of live births among families in the westernized world.
Starting generally around 1941 and continuing generally till 1966, the number of live births in the West edged upwards from its nadir of the Great Depression decade, before settling down once again to Great Depression levels or less.
In social science terms, harmful human climate change deniers/skeptics/hubrists aren't exactly hard to define (or to find) : they come right out and freely admit to their disbelief.
Traditionally, we denier watchers have tended to focus on the most strident ones and I now believe this to be wrong.
They are the most strident because (a) they are either very old, know they are dying and out of office or (b) they are very young and not yet in office.
But the ones with all the actual power to do things and not just to complain about things are the Boomer deniers.
They will be running our world - in terms of both formal politics and informal wealth and cultural influence - right up to the global melt down tipping point.
Just for example : Mitt Romney and prime ministers Harper, Abbott, Key and Cameron.
All leaders of the Anglo Saxon cum free world, all Boomers and all very weak on stopping harmful climate change.
I'm making a list of powerful Boomers, checking it twice trying to find out ,on the issue of the climate, who has been naughty and who has been nice.
And I will post the names of naughty little boomer kids permanently on the side column of this blog ....
But I'm working on it.
First, definitions.
The Baby Boom wasn't really a boom in babies conceived , taking the long view.
Rather it was a 25 year long interregnum (a blip upwards) in the one hundred and fifty year long slow slide downwards in the number of live births among families in the westernized world.
Starting generally around 1941 and continuing generally till 1966, the number of live births in the West edged upwards from its nadir of the Great Depression decade, before settling down once again to Great Depression levels or less.
In social science terms, harmful human climate change deniers/skeptics/hubrists aren't exactly hard to define (or to find) : they come right out and freely admit to their disbelief.
Traditionally, we denier watchers have tended to focus on the most strident ones and I now believe this to be wrong.
They are the most strident because (a) they are either very old, know they are dying and out of office or (b) they are very young and not yet in office.
But the ones with all the actual power to do things and not just to complain about things are the Boomer deniers.
They will be running our world - in terms of both formal politics and informal wealth and cultural influence - right up to the global melt down tipping point.
Just for example : Mitt Romney and prime ministers Harper, Abbott, Key and Cameron.
All leaders of the Anglo Saxon cum free world, all Boomers and all very weak on stopping harmful climate change.
I'm making a list of powerful Boomers, checking it twice trying to find out ,on the issue of the climate, who has been naughty and who has been nice.
And I will post the names of naughty little boomer kids permanently on the side column of this blog ....
Saturday, January 3, 2015
dear Children of Janus Manhattan '45 : "If CO2 not at 350ppm by 2040, you'll tip us into a runaway disaster"
An Open Letter to my fellow members of the Boomer Generation:
(By 'boomer', I mean roughly all of us born after the initial start of what was to be the Manhattan Project and before the final implementation of the first Test Ban Treaty.)
Some of us, like myself, probably won't be alive when 2040 rolls around - we will never suffer the most severe consequences of our folly.
But we boomers currently rule the world and have done so since news of the 'hockey stick crisis' first hit the public media.
We are the boss in government and in the military, in finance, in intellectual and cultural circles.
We have heard the news, we are intelligent, highly educated people, we rule the world : we have no excuse, no barrier lay before us.
Only our selfish wills.
We are the children of Janus Manhattan '45 .
That janus year in the eternally janus city.
The New York City physicists of the Manhattan nuclear Project claimed that they had successfully bent even the most recalcitrant atoms to do Man's will: the signal triumph of 500 years of the Enlightenment Project.
By contrast, the New York City chemists of the Manhattan penicillin Project had admitted defeat : they had been unable to bend some very recalcitrant atoms into commercially viable synthetic penicillin.
Instead New York City biologists had shown how by working with Nature and not against her, humanity could produce abundant cheap natural penicillin-for-all : postmodern penicillin, Adorno's penicillin.
We boomers were given a choice : on one hand look backwards to the Manhattan nuclear Project with all its top down, anti-democratic secrecy and violence as a model of our relationship with the world and each other.
On the other hand, the Manhattan penicillin Project had involved tiny teams, even single individuals working on kitchen counters, using freely exchanged samples of penicillium spores.
With almost no government monies - often only hostility - they had proven to the rest of a doubting scientific world the clinical and economic value of freely-cooperating humanity and Nature working together around the commensal table.
We boomers had a choice : and some us became the classic boomer image of back to the land environmentalists - we got the message of natural penicillin.
But many others - like Prime Ministers Stephen Harper and Tony Abbott - spurned that trend among boomers, became instead rogue Boomers and drank deep from the tainted Kool-Aid of the myth of the Manhattan nuclear Project.
Now they are driving this planet , like a car with its emission controls removed, off a climatic cliff.
As long as we boomers control most of the world's governments, its wealth and its biggest media outlets, only us can stop them.
My part in this effort - as I see it - is to urge all of us to take a hard look again at the legacy we were left with from Janus Manhattan's twin - warring - Projects in the Fall of 1945 ...
Saturday, December 20, 2014
Elizabeth May - unlike Stephen Harper - is NOT a 'Rogue Boomer'
It is interesting to speculate why Elizabeth May, so similar in age to Stephen Harper, is so different in her attitude.
While Elizabeth is only 4 years older than Harper, I think she benefited from having an activist mom who introduced her children to adult issues at least a dozen years before many others first seriously think about them.
(Ie as young adults, after their upbringing in their formative years have hardened into dogma --- and when it is thus too late !)
I think I was a relatively ordinary child until I was ten, when a sudden change of circumstance separated me from a neighbourhood of kids playing outside and left me with only adult aged books and adult aged news magazines for boon companions.
Almost instantly, kids even a fair bit older than me seemed immature and boring and I much preferred to hang about with educated adults.
Ten - and an intellectual snob !
But as a result, my recollections of the Fifties (coincidentally my years before I was ten) is almost 100% childlike sunshine - while the early Sixties (my true formative years) are cast in the darkest direst most adult-like Noir.
I suspect that Harper had a perfectly ordinary childhood and that he never even suspected he'd just played tag and keep away during some of the most exciting years of the century - until he was in university.
Then regret-filled nostalgia kicked in - and he's been trying to relive the glory days of Fifties Big Fin Cars, Scientism and Golly Gee Modernity ever since...
While Elizabeth is only 4 years older than Harper, I think she benefited from having an activist mom who introduced her children to adult issues at least a dozen years before many others first seriously think about them.
(Ie as young adults, after their upbringing in their formative years have hardened into dogma --- and when it is thus too late !)
I think I was a relatively ordinary child until I was ten, when a sudden change of circumstance separated me from a neighbourhood of kids playing outside and left me with only adult aged books and adult aged news magazines for boon companions.
Almost instantly, kids even a fair bit older than me seemed immature and boring and I much preferred to hang about with educated adults.
Ten - and an intellectual snob !
But as a result, my recollections of the Fifties (coincidentally my years before I was ten) is almost 100% childlike sunshine - while the early Sixties (my true formative years) are cast in the darkest direst most adult-like Noir.
I suspect that Harper had a perfectly ordinary childhood and that he never even suspected he'd just played tag and keep away during some of the most exciting years of the century - until he was in university.
Then regret-filled nostalgia kicked in - and he's been trying to relive the glory days of Fifties Big Fin Cars, Scientism and Golly Gee Modernity ever since...
First Wave Boomers must help transition Second Wave Boomers into the new world
My history professor, Judith Fingard (born in 1943) , myself (born in 1951) and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper (born in 1959) are all considered to fit the definition of Baby Boomer by most authorities on that vexed subject.
But Fingard and myself actually knew Modernity at first hand, before easing ourselves into PostModernity - while Harper only read about Modernity in a book.
Even I, going through school eight years after Fingard , had plenty of teachers whose key formative years were during Edwardian times before the calamity of WWI - the age cohort that I consider the most ardently pro-Modernity of that entire era.
We both got Modernity's values both barrels in our schooling - and Modernity was still mostly in the driver's seat in the outside world, in areas like human rights and social values, until late in the 1960s.
But by then Judy and I had both left our High School in Dartmouth Nova Scotia - but Harper was not yet even in Middle School.
And in a growing prosperous Toronto suburb such as Harper lived in, I suspect that even his Middle School teachers were mostly a generation younger than the equivalent ones had been for me or Fingard.
(Because just a couple of years after I left High School, the high school teacher population in Dartmouth seemed to undergo an abrupt generational change --- a change that seemed to lag by a few years the situation in more rapidly growing and prosperous areas of North America.)
What Rogue Boomers like Harper mostly peddle is nostalgia for a super hero-like Modernity they never personally know.
And as usual in such circumstances, their very best customers are themselves.
So we First Wavers have a moral duty to our Second Wave fellow Boomers .
Because we are truly unique : once almost fully comfortable as modernists, we are now also almost fully comfortable as postmodernists.
To adapt George Orwell's (& Henry Miller's) famous phrase, we have been comfortable inside two whales.
We have successfully made the transition from the old way of thinking into the new - while knowing both.
Stephen Harper and his climate destruction denying buddies, 1930s hubris combined with 21st century high tech tools , will rampage across the entire planet and destroy it for all future generations - unless we other Boomers can help them make the needed transit into the new ways of regarding the world...
Stephen Harper, Rogue Boomer
But Fingard and myself actually knew Modernity at first hand, before easing ourselves into PostModernity - while Harper only read about Modernity in a book.
Even I, going through school eight years after Fingard , had plenty of teachers whose key formative years were during Edwardian times before the calamity of WWI - the age cohort that I consider the most ardently pro-Modernity of that entire era.
We both got Modernity's values both barrels in our schooling - and Modernity was still mostly in the driver's seat in the outside world, in areas like human rights and social values, until late in the 1960s.
But by then Judy and I had both left our High School in Dartmouth Nova Scotia - but Harper was not yet even in Middle School.
And in a growing prosperous Toronto suburb such as Harper lived in, I suspect that even his Middle School teachers were mostly a generation younger than the equivalent ones had been for me or Fingard.
(Because just a couple of years after I left High School, the high school teacher population in Dartmouth seemed to undergo an abrupt generational change --- a change that seemed to lag by a few years the situation in more rapidly growing and prosperous areas of North America.)
"Super Hero Modernity"
What Rogue Boomers like Harper mostly peddle is nostalgia for a super hero-like Modernity they never personally know.
And as usual in such circumstances, their very best customers are themselves.
So we First Wavers have a moral duty to our Second Wave fellow Boomers .
Because we are truly unique : once almost fully comfortable as modernists, we are now also almost fully comfortable as postmodernists.
To adapt George Orwell's (& Henry Miller's) famous phrase, we have been comfortable inside two whales.
We have successfully made the transition from the old way of thinking into the new - while knowing both.
Stephen Harper and his climate destruction denying buddies, 1930s hubris combined with 21st century high tech tools , will rampage across the entire planet and destroy it for all future generations - unless we other Boomers can help them make the needed transit into the new ways of regarding the world...
'Rogue Boomers' : Running our world ; ruining our planet
When one thinks of Rogue Boomers, one immediately thinks of people like prime ministers Stephen Harper (born 1959) and Tony Abbott (born 1957) --- and not just because they are currently leading the charge (from the rear) against doing anything substantial about man-made climate disaster.
Rather it is something so unexpected about the vivid contrast between their still-baby faces and their totally Old School ways of thinking that humans can control the natural world - thinking we'd might expect more from their grandfathers, let alone their fathers.
Yes, those I call Noir's Children , the most vocal (and regrettably the smallest) segment of the Boomer kids got it, successfully absorbed the dire lessons (on all sides) from WWII , and adjusted their thinking.
But the Rogue Boomers ( the silent majority of my Boomer generation) carried right on as if nothing had changed, still believing in the simplistic old pre-war ways , despite Science (reluctantly) revealing an ever more complicated world.
It was as if they were to be frozen in aspic, forever locked into a time warp with the first generation of comic book super heroes.
Entombed forever within WWII's golden age of superheroes, superpowers, super-weapons and super-easy solutions to controlling unpleasant reality....
Rather it is something so unexpected about the vivid contrast between their still-baby faces and their totally Old School ways of thinking that humans can control the natural world - thinking we'd might expect more from their grandfathers, let alone their fathers.
Yes, those I call Noir's Children , the most vocal (and regrettably the smallest) segment of the Boomer kids got it, successfully absorbed the dire lessons (on all sides) from WWII , and adjusted their thinking.
But the Rogue Boomers ( the silent majority of my Boomer generation) carried right on as if nothing had changed, still believing in the simplistic old pre-war ways , despite Science (reluctantly) revealing an ever more complicated world.
It was as if they were to be frozen in aspic, forever locked into a time warp with the first generation of comic book super heroes.
Entombed forever within WWII's golden age of superheroes, superpowers, super-weapons and super-easy solutions to controlling unpleasant reality....
Thursday, August 16, 2012
Stephen said he'd pull out, Tony stayed in , Kyoto2 had a baby : that's hardly a sin
 |
| Greg Hunt "Warmist"? |
First his fellow conservative Angela Merkel went all "warmist" on him by daring to dis him on his own home turf and visit a Dalhousie University climate change project.
Next, Eric Loughead, the co-founder of The Friends of Science, from his own home town of Calgary, for God's Sake ! - again mocked De Capo's authority by calling people who deny climate change stupid ,while responding to a poll that says only 2% ( yep - 2 percent!) of Canadians deny climate change.
I mean that is a fair description of Harper - but should we really mock him that brazenly in public ?
Aussie Liberal Party, like Merkel and Loughead going "WARMIST" ?
Now Harper's equivalent party Down Under, the Australian
It seems as if Harper's allies, his erstwhile partners in global mass destruction , like ships abandoning a sinking rat, are deserting him...
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
When Merkel visits Dalhousie climate change project, Harper gets diplomatic "flu"
 |
| Harper sees a WARMIST ! |
But in private ? In private, Harper is furious that warmist Merkel has chosen to 'dis' his well known hostility to climate change by actually visiting a Dalhousie University climate change project being done with researchers from Germany 's Helmholtz Institute.
Promoting climate change !!! On his own turf !!! A fellow conservative !!!
Stabbed in the back !!! WARMIST traitor !!!
As Evergreen Nova Scotia says, I bet his nurses had to be instructed to keep him away from sharp knives until Angela was safely beyond Canadian airspace ......
Saturday, August 11, 2012
ASTRO-TURF is our business (and business is good) : Ethical Oil
 |
| astroturfin' fools ! |
Lots and lots of bloggers and newspaper journalists have asked why conceal the highly obvious fact that the key figure behind this poor 'n' green oily effort was actually a top lobbyist for the never-short-for-change tar sands industry.
And oh yes, Stephen Harper, media manipulator extraordinaire , looms like The Wicked Merlin of the West at Dorothy's coming out party, far off in the background.
I kinda prefer my deniers to be evil and smart : not dumber and dumber
The legal paper trail is always, always, always, always how the astroturfers slip up : very surprising in this case because the original three involved in this group were all with law degrees, so you'd think they know better.
I don't mind debating deniers with some brains but when they are as stupid and as arrogant as a-bag-of-nails-with-an-attitude, it really depresses me.
How can I emotionally engage with their science arguments when I can't get my head around a scheme so transparent that even a first day law clerk won't be dumb enough to fall for it..........
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Area 51 Alert : 97% of ice MELTING ; 97% of scientists VOTE agreement
the 97 % solution ....
Or A. "nasty" Abbott's worst nightmare.
An unlikely but true coincidence ----- or is it, boys and girls ?
Space photos showing 97 % of Greenland's ice cap melting at the same time that 97 % of the world's climate scientists have voted that the whole Earth is getting hot.
97 Percent - wow !
Like that is three times the vote that Stephen Harper got when he was elected absolute - majority government - dictator of Canada for 5 years to life, with time off to Canadians for good behavior.
But is just 97% of the votes of the climate scientist electorate enough to push ahead on bold new changes on how we run our national governments ?
The 37% solution
No, of course not, for that you need a, er, much lower vote - like 37%.
Like the sort of vote that Nasty Abbott or Harper or Cameron get when they are given majority government to make bold new decisions.
97% is much too , er, high for politicians.
But for scientists ? Politicians - the lying, denying politicians anyway - say that 97 % is way, way too low.
Politicians simply point out that on this, as in so many things, citizens must simply learn to suck it up ; it is "do as I say --- never, do as I do" .
the 100.00000000% solution of the think tankers
Libertarian denier think tankers have made this point very clear - and as long as Tobacco or Oil or Asbestos keeps feeding them money, they're the experts.
They say we shouldn't act on the gravest crisis facing us since Adam ate the apple until every last one of us, that is all 6.7 billion of us , becomes part of the consensus: 100.00000000% agreement, or nothing.
'Cause I mean, after all, saving our great grandchildrens' lives isn't anything like voting is it ?
For something like saving our own kiddies, it is a case of every last one of us on Earth must be on board or none of us is.......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)