The Age of Stupid

It certainly is an apt description of our current Government’s attitude towards climate change, but this is about the movie, and the joint fundraiser/event with 350.org.nz last night.

The Age of Stupid is a 90-minute film about climate change, set in the future. Oscar-nominated Pete Postlethwaite stars as a man living alone in the devasted world of 2055, looking back at “archive” footage from 2007 and asking: why didn’t we stop climate change when we had the chance?

While I wouldn’t go so far as to call the evening uplifting, the Paramount theatre was packed to the rafters, with a real buzz in the crowd. The story is based on the IPCC’s business as usual assessment, and much of the footage used for the film is real. It weaves the story of six different people, (real people, from today) in the same way the movie Traffic does, telling a compelling story about the time we live in.

It was produced by new Zealand Green Party candidate Lizzie Gillett. There is an extended  interview with Lizzie and TV3 talking about the premier, the making of the film and getting Pete onboard. Director Franny Armstrong brought us McLibel and other documentary hits, and has an interesting RadioNZ interview of her own.

The Listener waxed poetic about the film:

It’s been made cheaply, the subject matter is bleak but a Kiwi-produced documentary is taking the world by storm.

Sure, darlings of the fashion world are a must at any movie premiere, but this is probably the only one where Vivienne Westwood has arrived on her bike, skirt tucked into her knickers.

And probably the only one where a national treasure has threatened to renounce his title. At the March London premiere of new environmental doco The Age of Stupid, Pete Postlethwaite vowed to hand back his OBE if plans for a new coal-fired power station in Kent went ahead.

I recommend that anyone who simply cannot conceive of how imminent a problem climate change is, goes to see Age of Stupid.

68 thoughts on “The Age of Stupid

  1. Call to Action: ‘Climate Justice Action’ network to storm COPenhagen climate summit

    Reclaim Power!
    Pushing for Climate Justice – a Call to Action

    From the 7th to 18th of December 2009, the largest ‘climate summit’ ever to be held will take place in Copenhagen, Denmark. This summit has been billed as our ‘last, best hope’ to do something about climate change. But the UN talks will not solve the climate crisis.

    We are no closer to reducing greenhouse gas emissions than we were when negotiations began fifteen years ago: emissions continue to rise at ever faster rates, while carbon trading allows climate criminals to pollute and profit. It is time to say enough! No more business as usual, no more false solutions!

    Full Call to Action:
    http://nz.indymedia.org/article/77592/call-action-climate-justice-action-netwo#comment-211976

    Climate Justice Action website:
    http://www.climate-justice-action.org/

    list of participating organisations:
    http://www.climate-justice-action.org/about/organizations/

  2. Good to see NZ taking action on climate change, Australia needs to take a leaf out of your book.

  3. The Age of Stupid
    Friday August 21st, 2009. 2:11 pm by frog
    Even though people care passionately about the issue, just over half (67%) of eligible voters cast votes. When you add the yes vote and the spoilt vote to the number of voters who didn’t vote at all the figures are about even.”
    [so spoilt voting papers and non votes = yes?]

    That’s a good win for the Greens isn’t it!
    http://infonews.co.nz/news.cfm?l=1&t=0&id=41185

  4. Whenever Christians start to flounder trying to defend their belief system, they wheel out Psalm 14:1 – “The fool says in his heart `there is no God`.”
    It means they’ve lost the argument, but gives them a license to carry on believing their dogma; because they’re not “fools”, you see.

    So it is with climate alarmists. Unable to provide a rational defence of their creed, they fall back on calling people stupid.

    – “I recommend that anyone who simply cannot conceive of how imminent a problem climate change is, goes to see Age of Stupid.”

    Okay, let’s pick a sceptic entirely at random. Say…this guy: “Dr. Madhav L. Khandekar is a former Research Scientist from Environment Canada where he worked for about 25 years. Khandekar holds M.Sc degree in Statistics from India and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Meteorology from USA. Khandekar has been in the fields of atmosphere/ ocean/climate for over 50 years and has published over 125 papers, reports, book reviews, scientific commentaries etc. He has published over 40 peer-reviewed papers in various international Journals and authored a book on ocean surface wave analysis and modeling, published by Springer-Verlag in 1989. Khandekar is presently on the editorial board of the Journal Natural Hazards (Netherlands) and is a former editor of the journal Climate Research (Germany). He was an expert reviewer for the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Climate Change Documents (AR4) published in 2007.”

    Read what he has to say, and then ask yourself if a smug, self-congratulatory bit of celluloid propaganda really quite the clincher you seem to think:

    http://www.fcpp.org/main/publication_detail.php?PubID=2894

  5. Im off to see Inglorious Basterds where Brad Pitt and co shoot and scalp socialists….oh happy times.

    :-)

  6. “Im off to see Inglorious Basterds where Brad Pitt and co shoot and scalp socialists….oh happy times.”

    The Nazis were no more socialists than Ronald Reagan was or the New Labor parties are. They were and are fascists, a completely different animal.

    “None of the contemporary economic analyses of privatization takes into account an earlier and important experience: the privatization policy applied by the Germany’s National Socialist Party (Nazi Party).”
    http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/09/nazi_privatizat.html

  7. Trevor29,

    – “from the list of climate change sceptics funded by ExxonMobil”

    Please explain exactly what we’re supposed to infer from this. It simply seems like a mechanism for you to avoid facing the issue.
    And are you suggesting that everyone who supports the theory is doing their work for free and has no interest in whether the alarmism continues or whithers away? No interest in keeping the, what is it now, $70 billion gravy-train rolling?

    Why can’t you address the scientific case he expounds?

    bjchip,

    – “Khandekar is stating opinions. He isn’t doing any science at all. ”

    I’m sorry, you must have missed this small paragraph:

    Khandekar has been in the fields of atmosphere/ ocean/climate for over 50 years and has published over 125 papers, reports, book reviews, scientific commentaries etc. He has published over 40 peer-reviewed papers in various international Journals and authored a book on ocean surface wave analysis and modeling, published by Springer-Verlag in 1989. Khandekar is presently on the editorial board of the Journal Natural Hazards (Netherlands) and is a former editor of the journal Climate Research (Germany). He was an expert reviewer for the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Climate Change Documents (AR4) published in 2007.””

    Sleepy,

    – “They were and are fascists, a completely different animal.”

    Yes, they were fascist, but no, fascism is not a “completely different animal” to socialism. They are almost entirely the same thing: left-wing ideologies which impose collectivism by force. The only slight difference is their economic model.

    As we have discussed before, the Greens are a fascist party since they ostensibly leave the means of production in private hands but use state force to control them and effectively deprive the owners of their property rights.
    Hence, for example, Russel advocates state violence so he can dicate the terms of business in New Zealand.

  8. wat

    The point is that you have NOT picked a climate change sceptic entirely at random. You have picked an expert on weather forecasting to give an opinion on climate forecasting, which is actually a very different field. He is funded by ExxonMobil whose trillion dollar business is affected if people start believing in peak oil or AGW.

    Trevor.

  9. Trevor29,

    – “The point is that you have NOT picked a climate change sceptic entirely at random. You have picked an expert on weather forecasting to give an opinion on climate forecasting, which is actually a very different field.”

    The point in this thread, though, is whether climate sceptics are stupid.

    Does he sound stupid to you?

    – “He is funded by ExxonMobil whose trillion dollar business is affected if people start believing in peak oil or AGW.”

    Again, do you think professional supporters of the AGW theory – those who share in the billions of dollars of money thrown at them because they manage to generate lurid headlines – are any different? We both know that your Exxon reference is nothing but a lazy smear that can equally be laid at the door of AGW advocates.

    I submit that we should look at what is being said, not who is saying it.

    Since you choose to smear him rather than address what he’s actually saying, I’m guessing you don’t have a case to present.

  10. Wat,

    Yes, they were fascist, but no, fascism is not a “completely different animal” to socialism. They are almost entirely the same thing: left-wing ideologies which impose collectivism by force. The only slight difference is their economic model.

    As a socialist (mutualist anarchist) I strongly object to that statement. Virtually all of the consistent advocates of liberty in the 19th Century were avowd socialists (William Godwin, Pierre Joseph Godwin, Lysander Spooner, Benjamin Tucker et el), whilst the so-called liberals of the 20th Century Century (Friedrich von Hayek, Ludwing von Mises, Murray Rothbard) appeared to suffer from a great degree of cognitive dissonance or at best a conceptualisation of liberty that left a lot to be desired, although Murray Rothbard, alongside Karl Hess rehabilitated himself in his latter years. In actual fact fascism (the Soviet Union wasn’t communist ( is right wing

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard77.html

    Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were no fascists, as the “workers state” according to them was intended merely as as a means not the end in itself, although as anarchists such as Bakunin presciently pointed out at the First Working Man’s Association, and claims to the contrary arose due to a misrepresentation of their thoughts by the collectivist anarchist Mikhail Bakunin.

    On the contrary the origins of fascism predate Karl Marx, in the form of writings by Henri Saint Simon and his disciple Auguste Comte, who were heavily influential on the founders of the British Fabian Society. This is the ideal world envisioned by those two Frenchmen.

    “Society would be ruled by bankers and technocrats and Europe united into a Western republic. This doctrine, backed by pioneering sociology, won much influence among intellectuals. Comte, like Saint-Simon, tackled the essential questions: how to deploy the power of modern technology for the benefit of all humankind; how to avoid wars between sovereign states; and how to fill the void left by the waning of Christian beliefs.”

    Horrifying how closely to their vision, society has developed over the last 100 or so years, no? Essentially Positivism is, rather than the oppressed working class revolting against their oppressors, it involves the bourgeoisie shaping society according to their whims. What virtually everyone associates with Marxism today (including Marxists), is in actual fact Positivism and a misrepresentation of Marx’s thoughts.

    “What Marx foresaw was that during the revolutionary period of struggle against the bourgeoisie, the proletariat would use the state apparatus to crush the bourgeoisie: “to achieve its liberation it employs means which will be discarded after the liberation”. (Marx, Conspectus of Bakunin’s State and Anarchy, 1874-75). After the vanquishing of the bourgeoisie, the state has outlived its usefulness.”
    http://www.connexions.org/RedMenace/Docs/RM3-BakuninvsMarx.htm

    http://tinyurl.com/lm73o6
    http://tinyurl.com/mkwn7

    Socialism is a broad church and there are even many currents within anarchism often in implicit conflict with each other, broadly defined by Murray Bookchin as “social anarchism” and “lifestyle” anarchism. As for myself am in the latter camp, though for myself how the two can be considered to be fundamentally at odds is beyond me. For me the basis of a free (and sustainable) society is on free and uncoercd association and capitalism fails to meet that criteria as long as the capitalists (virtually everyone in the modern era to varying degrees) use the their capture of the state to extract economic rent from those of us who don’t have a choice.

    http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bookchin/soclife.html

  11. Wat

    Sorry, I missed that this was about calling people stupid. I was addressing his qualifications as a working scientist and the interview you linked WAS an opinion piece in which he didn’t provide a criticism in the scientific sense, merely an opinion. Entirely beside the point.

    If you picked at RANDOM from the mob of skeptics you would find an ideologue with delusions of grandeur in your hands Skilled in confusion and obfuscation, not science. Khandekar is not a random selection. Protest that if you wish. We all know the truth.

    This line I think, is the point.

    So it is with climate alarmists. Unable to provide a rational defence of their creed, they fall back on calling people stupid.

    “Unable to provide a rational defence of their creed”

    – is your perception of the stomping we’ve given every objection broached on this blog?

    We’ve answered those objections in depth, provided massive amounts of evidence, defended the theory and provided further predictions that stem from that theory. Most of those made in 88-91 are already showing up as realistic. The theory isn’t doing badly at all.

    Some people don’t agree. In spite of WUWT being repeatedly shown to be wrong. In spite of their EVERY argument having been buried in reality. They block action to avert the problems.

    To call this the “Age of Stupid” is not to say what we think of people who are unable to accept the answers of science and the risks to the future of our civilization as real.

    It isn’t a matter of running out of arguments. We’ve recognized that science, logic and risk-analysis mean nothing to a denialist. We’ve worked out that theirs is a WILLful blindness, and I will be honest. I think that such an attitude IS stupid. I do not use the word, preferring to insult people in ways that make them think.

    However, that isn’t how the title works.

    It isn’t directed at individuals, no matter how deserving.

    My reading of human nature tells me that we aren’t going to get meaningful numbers going into 2020, nothing much out of Copenhagen formally, and it is likely that some/most signatories will cheat besides.

    Which means that we very likely WILL do our children’s children an extravagant amount of harm. We will as a species do nothing meaningful to prevent our greed from killing our children… and THAT is most assuredly “Stupid” in the sense that the movie describes. It is how our children will think of us.

    All of us.

    Stupid as a species. This is an evolutionary IQ test.

    I think we’re gonna fail.

    respectfully
    BJ

  12. and speaking of ‘the age of stupid’..

    why are so many of you greens still eating animals..?

    ..and trashing the planet by doing so..?

    http://whoar.co.nz/2009/sea-shepherd-vegan-recipes-to-nourish-your-inner-whale-war/

    paul watson:

    “People think we’re some wacky animal-rights group,” he adds.

    “We’re not.

    We’re a conservation organization but what we’re saying is, look..

    .. we’ve got to be very aware of what we eat..

    .. if you’re going to call yourself an environmentalist or a conservationist.”

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  13. Sleepy,

    – “socialist (mutualist anarchist)…”

    Well that’s a contradiction in terms right away.

    You seem to think that it is seeking to impose equality through force that makes you a socialist. It isn’t. You can equally be a fascist or a communist. It all depends on the economic model you favour.

    – “virtually all of the consistent advocates of liberty in the 19th Century were avowd socialists ”

    What people choose to call themselves, and the positions they actually advocate, are often two entirely different things. If you support the forcible redistribution of people’s earnings you are no “advocate of liberty”, you are a thug committed to violence.

    All the left-wing (i.e. collectivist) ideologies – e.g. socialism, fascism, communism – necessarily share a great deal in common. Their differences are technical. For example, when Tony Blair got the British Labour Party to ditch the essential clause 4 – the commitment to common ownership of the means of production – it ceased to be a socialist party, although it continued to call itself one. What it has become is acually a little harder to define. It seems to be a party in power for its own sake: simply an opportunistic vehicle for amoral politicians to gain the power over others that they crave.

    Socialism is dead all round the world. The Greens are not socialists – they are not lobbying for the common ownership of the means of production. Rather, theirs is the fascist model of negating all the rights of property ownership (and any other rights – such as free speech) which get in their way. To be sure, this is soft, democratic fascism, not totalitarianism. But fascism it is.

    Naturally this is not something they will admit, even to themselves. They are going to go on referring to themselves as socialists because the term “fascism” is tainted, not because they disagree with its essentials. And what are the chances of the Greens actually admitting that their activist policies are all underpinned by a committment to violence against those who resist? Can you imagine media-friendly Russel coming out with such an honest statement?

    By contrast I, on the right wing, reject the violence and coercion inherent in collectivism. Capitalism is the only societal model in all of human history which rejects violence. Unfortunately, many people – including the Greens – realise that they can’t get what they want through peaceful mutual cooperation and resort instead to a willingness to violence.

    bjchip,

    – “We’ve recognized that science, logic and risk-analysis mean nothing to a denialist. ”

    That’s strange. If you reword that slightly, you get “we’ve recognized that science, logic and risk-analysis mean nothing to an alarmist.”

  14. Phil asks:

    why are so many of you greens still eating animals..?

    For the same reasons that so many greens are flushing their dung away with water, into a water-based treatment station and eventually into a river or the ocean.

    How about you Phil? Where does Ure-dung end up? I feel as strongly about this issue as you do about meat-eating, I reckon. Explain to me why you still despoil water with your manure (if you do) and I’ll do my best to explain why I sometimes eat meat.

  15. where i stay in the country has composting toilets..

    in the city i am the same as everyone else..

    but what exactly does that have to with the (totally valid) question i asked..?

    and does that i use a flush toilet in the city mean i am unable to ask the vegan questions..?

    whoar..!

    don’t think so..eh..?

    and c’mon fly..!

    defend in rational argument..

    your continued eating of sentient beings..

    and surely you are intelligent enough to realise you ..and others..get so engaged when i raise this topic..

    because you know what you do is wrong..

    on just so many levels..

    i mean..point me out a ‘right’ level..

    ..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  16. Phil says:

    in the city i am the same as everyone else..

    Practicalities force you to act in a way that you don’t condone Phil?

    and does that i use a flush toilet in the city mean i am unable to ask the vegan questions..?

    Nope, but by your reckoning it would exclude you from claiming to be ‘Green’.

  17. bj says;

    My reading of human nature tells me that we aren’t going to get meaningful numbers going into 2020, nothing much out of Copenhagen formally, and it is likely that some/most signatories will cheat besides.

    I second bj’s proposal. Whadayagonnadonow bj?

  18. fly..

    are you serious..?

    you know what eating meat does..

    and how it trashes the planet..

    and no..i am not living a sustainable lifestyle in many ways..

    ..btw..i am in the city ‘cos of boys’ education…

    stopping eating meat/dairy is about the ‘greenest’ thing you can do..

    ..and it is so easy..

    (and it dosen’t need/require any re-plumbing..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  19. Phil – I agree with you re: stopping eating dairy and meat. You do write about the pouring of sewerage into water and I applaud and support you for that. It’s difficult to be entirely living up to ones ideals. It’s doubly difficult when someone is deriding you for being only part-way down that track. I’ll not call you a ‘clean water despoiler’ because I know that you know and are doing all you can, or at least moving in that direction. I spend a surprising amount of time talking to groups and organisations about improving our sewerage disposal/utilisation practices and have seen a radical change in the willingness of people of all ages to review their long-held beliefs and practices and to learn of other ways. Compost toilets are top of the pops and surprisingly easy to promote. I’ve found that demanding the immediate adoption of my recommendations isn’t effective and like to instead, leave something on simmer on the back element of their minds, till the next time, or til they see something on television, or on the tv or whatever.

  20. btw – ham, sausage – pimped-up meats are definately historical experiences for me – too nasty for words! Tripe, ox tongue and tail, gibblets and offal are long gone as well, so I’m heading your way. I was once a sheep-brain eater (as an impressionable child) and don’t mention
    tripe!

  21. “..and like to instead, leave something on simmer on the back element of their minds, till the next time, or til they see something on television, or on the tv or whatever..”

    which is precisely what i do here..at whoar..at kiwiblog..

    sewing the seeds of ideas…

    emphasising the message..

    ..pointing out the irrefutable facts..

    ..as i have noted before..

    there is nobody else pushing this message…

    here..or at kiwiblog..

    ..and when there is a burst of hand-wringing over w.h.y..

    ..by green carnivores..

    ..it kinda stirs me to action..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  22. So phil you really believe eating meat disqualifies someone from being green?
    I can respect the fact that you have chosen to be vegetarian but not the fact that you are so pious about it.

  23. - “socialist (mutualist anarchist)…”

    Well that’s a contradiction in terms right away.

    Almost as good as “democratic fascism”. Talk about your oxymoron. And while this term is usually used to describe the US, it hardly describes the Green Party.

    To be sure, this is soft, democratic fascism, not totalitarianism.

    Of course, have to applaud wat here really. He has moved on, however slightly, from simply calling greens nakedly fascist and the subtlety is appreciated.

    By contrast I, on the right wing, reject the violence and coercion inherent in collectivism. Capitalism is the only societal model in all of human history which rejects violence.

    Just curious, do you think any countries have come close to your nirvana? Which ones?

    That’s strange. If you reword that slightly, you get “we’ve recognized that science, logic and risk-analysis mean nothing to an alarmist.”

    Last month I asked sallydeb:

    What I want to know and never can get a Lib to talk about, is how you deal with a global disaster. Take as given that AGW is true, incredibly urgent, incredibly bad for everyone if we don’t reduce emissions by 80% by 2050, and that the worst consequences are avoidable if we act very quickly. What would you do, how, and why?

    What’s your answer wat?

  24. i’m all for Animal Rights Phil – and we should leave them (and children) alone
    However the Menu is gonna feature some assorted Afghans, Pakistani’s
    Pushtans, The Odd Lightly Kiiled Kurd – can’t we stop killing people – there a bloody long way from here are’nt they?
    ay?

  25. Mark!
    How could you! You know that killing people is one of my few joys in life! I will never stand for this! Never!
    Giving animals humane treatment is one thing, but not killing humans? Your insane! Next you will be saying that we should actually try to encourage a society where people have the opportunity to acheive their goals in life and where the hatred of those different to ones self is not the centre of our cultural identity! You might even be so insane as to call for the end of race-based politics, ideological foolery, political correctness, and the blaming other people for your own failures!

    By god man, you belong in an institution; Maybe even parliment!

  26. “Well that’s a contradiction in terms right away.”

    Hardly, mutually agreed to cooperative endeavour is the essence of all human society, or do you think that the private corporation is in some way the pinnance of individualist self-expression and organisation (now thats a contradiction in terms)?

    “You seem to think that it is seeking to impose equality through force that makes you a socialist. It isn’t. You can equally be a fascist or a communist. It all depends on the economic model you favour.”

    How does the advocation of a society free of both State AND capitalists who use the machinery of the State constitute to enforce discipline on the working classes constitute imposed equality through force?

    “If you support the forcible redistribution of people’s earnings you are no “advocate of liberty”, you are a thug committed to violence.”

    This applies more consistently to capitalists than it does to socialists.
    Enclosures and Highland Clearances, suppression of Paris Commune 1871, Expropriation of communal lands in European colonies, the list goes on.

    “Capitalism is the only societal model in all of human history which rejects violence.”

    Bulls&%t. There is no societal model in human history that consistently rejects violence. How does a economic system that relies on the historical theft and redistribution of formerly commenly held land to wealthy or well connected individuals by the capitalist State and a reliance of current landowners on the threat of State violence to exclude people from making
    rivalrous claims to the natural resource?

    Capitalism with its association with the extraction of rent, profit, and interest wouldn’t even be possible without the aid of an activist State. Why would a worker allow a landlord to claim a portion of the fruits of his labour when when he could create his own homestead or community, his own means of production, and his own currency as he wishes? Maybe this would explain why 30 percent of New Zealand’s land is publicly held.

    “In colonies, labourers for hire are scarce. The scarcity of labourers for hire is the universal complaint of colonies. It is the one cause, both of the high wages which put the colonial labourer at his ease, and of the exorbitant wages which sometimes harass the capitalist.55

    “Where land is cheap and all men are free, where every one who so pleases can obtain a piece of land for himself, not only is labour very dear, as respects the labourers’ share of the product, but the difficulty is to obtain combined labour at any price.”
    E.G. Wakefield, Director New Zealand Company

  27. Damn,

    I left out ….rivalrous claims to the natural resource, constitute rejecting violence?

  28. thanks Sapient – all of the changes you speak of can be catered for with a less self-centred attitude – it’s really not a lot of work.
    You can still kill for sport – in your own special way (not at all, ya can’t fool me too easy)…
    The Country is already running – which is why I could care for it – I understand aviodance behaviour.
    Facing up to a few things nationally would probably be a relief for all – I’m waiting up for the Ashes – few Aussies I’d like to phone – listen to John Howard cry.
    Wednesday afternoons would suit me – AND I’m qualified….I am after all, unemployed.
    Couldn’t be another millionaire servant you know.
    But I reckon you Could Be Prime Minister – or War Minister if you want – most of it is blackmail…since we are at War with Afghanistan – is it all right to call them Rag- Heads and such now?
    Still another Army has grabbed all the Oil and Dope already – I can’t get comment on why we hate them – especially when everyone else has packed up and gone home – still them Taleban get some bad press hey – but then you can’t trust the press…

    “To preserve the freedom of the human mind… and freedom of the press, every spirit should be ready to devote itself to martyrdom; for as long as we may think as we will and speak as we think, the condition of man will proceed in
    improvement.” Thomas Jefferson to William Green Munford, 1799.

    Wow the Ashes have caught fire – have to attend my TV.
    Killing people is one thing – but in NZ it’s customary to eat them as well – hope you wont get squeamish on me….cheers Mark

  29. Greenfly

    The first thing I do is not throw-up (my hands, my lunch… ) and go build more coal plants or advocate lower goals. It is premature, BP wants to give up before trying. National did exactly that.

    What to do after Copenhagen fails its mission?

    THEN

    Do the mimimum that keeps us from suffering sanctions.

    Do get ourselves out of the fossil fuel dependency trap. Renewable energy and energy efficiency, not aimed at CO2 reduction so much as at completely removing our dependencies on non-renewables.

    Do build infrastructure high above the high-water marks.

    Do organize farming WITHOUT importing palm-kernel (or anything else for that matter).

    Do prepare for isolation from the world, not because we are going to be leaving but most of the world is leaving.

    Do organize our defence forces and our thoughts around the real likelihood of environmental refugees from points north.

    Do examine our manufacturing, farming and industrial base so that the knowledge and resources needed to remain independent and civilized is entirely in our hands. e.g. Establish “research” plants to be certain we retain the ability to grow coffee, extract sugar from sugar beets (or grow sugar), manufacture batteries, lcd screens, disk drives, ball bearings, electric motors and everything else.

    Worry about Australia.

    Nothing easy to be sure, not MUCH different to what we are doing now.

    BJ

  30. bj – Southland’s going full steam and billowing black smoke ahead with digging up the lignite for from beneath our deep and fertile farmland – watch us lead the way to a brighter future. Every other week there’s a softening-up article in our rag on the Wonders of Coal and the Prosperity it Brings. Nothing new under our pale and watery southern sun.

    Worry about Australia? Why, whaddatheygonnado – assume governance over us?

    Wait a minute…

  31. Phil – your decimation of the Kblog rank (and they are!) and file continues apace! What a parade! This was good:

    # philu (5450) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 9 Says:
    August 23rd, 2009 at 8:41 pm

    is that the bit where he doth smote the sole-parents..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    btw – what is your rationale for not eating eggs? (free range organic that is).

  32. “..btw – what is your rationale for not eating eggs? (free range organic that is)..”

    um..!..i see them as chooks’ periods/foetuses..

    so..y’know..!

    (you did ask..eh..?..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  33. th ozzies have always been a worry Bj; they’re wild and unreasonable people and should die off soon (NB Sapient!)
    If it gets any hotter there….well hold on to your good ol’ Kiwi real estate that’s all.
    But yes – eventually we’ll get subsumed into the greater Commonwealth – everything will be easier, including dozing off at the wheel.
    Eat watchya like Phil, everyone else is…commendable stance though.
    Ministry of Animal Welfare – Sapient wants to look after the ‘umans.

    See – whatever we do, Southland will ruin us….
    Mr Shadbolt, Mr English – step aside – the Fly will fix things up down south -like a good proctologist with two xos corks!
    One for each end.
    Sorry Fly, but Southlanders are well known for molecular stem-cell bonding and will reproduce if not gently Sapiented.
    Meanwhilst, be comforted that there’s a few gonna be reborn as battery hens – we’ll see how they like it then eh?
    The ‘cheep’ shall inherit the earth.

  34. Socialism is the Dark side of enlightenment thinking (If experts can design a better bridge experts can design a better society).

    Fascism is the Dark Side of Romanticism – the assault on reason and emphasis on emotion, and aesthetics and the need for charismatic great leaders. (Unlike socialism is backward looking and not econocentric.)

    Marxist Lenism and Maoist Communism are a combination of the two.
    Instead of the workers revolution being spontaneous it needed to be driven by charismatic leaders. Hence the merger.

    That’s it in a nutshell – with the obvious weakness of nutshells. Nuts are small and hard to fit much in.

  35. Phil – periodical indeed, but why does that stop you from eating them? There is no life lost (none began). Just out of interest…

    Owen! Really! (my hens deliver theirs through a different orifice).

    Mark – ready and willing to asume the mantle. Shadbolt however, has announced that he aims to be there til he’s 93! Who’s lined up to challenge him in the next mayoral election (I hear you breathlessly ask) – Suzanne Prentice, 4’2″ of Country’n’Western twang’n’yodel! Hold onto your hairpiece Tim! Send Sapient down soon! He can ‘interview’ Eric (no tattoes til you’re 18) Roy while he’s here.

  36. Nah – just chase them out of my garden every other day (though there’s a rooster, one farm across, that had better not stray into bow-range!)

  37. Are you a bit of an expert with the old bow and arrow then greenfly?
    A guy was telling me it is possible to take down a deer with a modern hunting bow (though I guess the old ones must have worked :) )

  38. Shunda – a modern hunting bow won’t do anything at all to a deer – it’s the arrow that does the damage.

    Green bowmen of yore felled the king’s deer with longbows (or rather the arrows launched by them – you pedant!). You’d not want to be standing in front of one of those when they went off, wood yew!

    We’ve built a Very Large Crossbow, that can fire an arrow the calibre of a broom-handle a serious distance. It’s built from fibreglass skiis. We’ve a trebuchet too – just about reach the West Coast with it.

  39. Old friends with Suzanne Fly – turn her on to the Greater Green – team up and mow them critters down – Sapient will definitely help – we may put him in chargs of the SIS – get them all new black leather longcoats etc etc.

  40. Reckon there’s a green heart in that dimuitive country-girl frame Mark? Worth a try 4 sure. Nice to see someone coming out from behind the shadders!

  41. “We’ve built a Very Large Crossbow, that can fire an arrow the calibre of a broom-handle a serious distance. It’s built from fibreglass skiis. We’ve a trebuchet too – just about reach the West Coast with it.”

    Sounds like its time to man the battle stations! a bit of inter regional warfare could do wonders for the economy :)

  42. # greenfly Says:
    August 24th, 2009 at 8:37 pm

    > What are you gonna lob Shunda, lumps of coal?

    what are you going to lob back at them? lumps of lignite?

    Fair enough really – I can’t think of anything better to do with it.

  43. # greenfly Says:
    August 24th, 2009 at 9:10 pm

    > I just hope to God Shunda doesn’t drop one into Dipton!

    > Duck Bill!

    he really does live there, does he?

  44. kahikatea asks:

    he really does live there, does he? ?

    As often as an intelligent thought crosses Rodney Hide’s mind.

    Shunda says ‘collateral damage’

    I say ‘bonus point’.

  45. Don’t really know Fly; – a sweet personality for sure – be hard indeed to see her fall into the cynical hands of the Major Beefs – tell her they’re trying to murder the Bluenose Dolphin and see how you go….

Comments are closed.