by frog
Check out these links:
China Challenging the United States for World Wind Leadership
Can We Redefine Prosperity? – Herman Daly – Towards a Steady State Economy
Published in THE GAME by frog on Wed, December 23rd, 2009
Tags: general debate
General debate, 23 December, 2009
Published: December 23, 2009
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
“Ag
December 22, 2009 at 11:32 pm
You don’t get it, MS.
They don’t have to address any matter in the summary or anything else that climate scientists come up with. To assume so is to assume that they are playing the same game as the AGW side, which is the game of reasoned arguments backed up with evidence.
The deniers are not playing that game. They do not care about the evidence, but only in preventing any form of enforced action to reduce carbon emissions. That means nothing you say matters to them. Nothing at all.
The pro-AGW people are essentially stupid in thinking that this is a debate they can “win” in the normal way that debates are “won”.
It is not a debate. It is a political struggle over whether carbon emissions are to be subject to international regulation. You cannot win on “the facts”. The issue will only be won when the deniers are cast out of the political process.
Remember why the Americans lost in Vietnam? It was because they assumed that they were fighting the war the way that wars were supposed to be fought. But the North Vietnamese weren’t fighting that war. They were fighting to win.
By attempting to win on the science alone, the pro AGW side are making exactly the same mistake as the Americans did in Vietnam. How stupid do you have to be not to understand that?
If you want to beat the deniers, you have to show them that there will be consequences for their actions. If you don’t, they’ll just keep denying.
Do you have the guts to do that?
Reply
Like or Dislike:
5 
2 (+3)
@frog – would it not be better to have more than one thread for discussing largely unrelated ideas? Starting a thread with several ideas seems to me to be a recipe for a very disjointed result.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
That is the trouble with the whole gamut.
Carbon trading is not designed to reduce carbon emmisions, it is designed as a wealth transfer system run by the UN.
So while I acknowledge that 6 billion people will always have an impact on the environment, I remain a SKEPTIC that an ETS will actually work in reducing carbon emmisions.
Nor i’m a certain that once the UN has a world controlling influence on the wealth and distribution, that carbon trading will cease once the temperature range remains within the -2/+2 range.
I think that the big four (China, India, USA and Russia – add Brasil, Indonesia if you like) really give a bean in regards the UN.
So the socialist ideal of a world conrtrolling body is out the window.
Not helped by having at the heart of the matter (Chairman of the IPCC) a person with huge conflict of interest liabilities.
http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?id=5062&batch=16&lists=newslog
Worth a read. Makes Al Gore look like a rank amateur (though an exceedingly rich one).
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
Gerrit – you have no trouble accepting that humans are impacting on the environment (is that your veiled acknowledgement of global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions?) and you are skeptical that an ETS will actually work in reducing carbon emissions?
Sounds as though you are in the same camp as most green contributers here.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
If the world leaders who flew to Copenhagen had managed to achieve just
one worthwhile thing, it would have been to have said ‘no’ to plans to
build hundreds and hundreds of coal-fired powerstations around the world,
but they didn’t.
The one worthwhile thing our Prime Minister could have done, would have
been to have said ‘no’ to digging more coal out of the ground here in New
Zealand, but he didn’t.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
So now we have established the fact that politicians can not be trusted.
Who would have thought?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Like or Dislike:
6 
3 (+3)
Our ETS does not reduce emissions, because they leak like the UK emissions do. For it to work requires a global ETS, which won’t happen. The developing countries rejected a global ETS at Copenhagen and will continue to reject one for the forseeable future. An ETS is essentially a flat tax, like all flat taxes it is unfair on poor people.
Subsequent to Copenhagen the chief whatsit of the UK has come out and blamed China & Venezuela & Sudan for derailing the talks. Since the mechanism the UK (& the EU and the “Greenwash” movement) propose is totally unfair and unworkable and exploitative and doomed to fail it is important that they blame someone else. The only thing that surpises me in the aftermath is that they chose to ignore the USA and actually had the gall to blame the worlds poor for objecting to an exploitative flat tax system.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
greenfly
Still a skeptic on that score, but yes there are environmental concerns out there that need to be addressed (it is why I visit and comment here).
What Copenhagen showed was that the environmental concern was hijacked by on one side the capitalist to make money from trading carbon and on the other the UN wanting the enforceable right to govern carbon trading and distribute the wealth where they saw fit.
Neither of those answers is any good for the humans well being.
I think this was the UN’s last throw of the dice to be relevant, however they blew that out of the water with personnel choices made for the IPCC.
Waht made it worse was the pandering of the UN to African and Central American dictatorships. What Chavez spoke about set the trend for other countries to ignore the UN proposals.
So while we have the ironic situation where the UN was setting itself up, to be the worlds imperial dictatorship, we had a strong proponent denoucing imeprial dictatorship by the USA and western sociaties.
No wonder the big four said thanks but no bananas.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
‘no bananas’?
Your assessment may well be correct. I’m struggling to remain interested in that process. I’m looking for signs of action outside of that matrix.
” Yes there are environmental concerns out there that need to be addressed (it is why I visit and comment here).”
There’s a touch of the Shunda about you then!
My prediction Gerrit, is that you will see marked and disturbing evidence of climate disruption in 2010 and will become a vocal promoter of action to prevent global harm from climatic changes.
Same for Shunda.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
Apropos of nothing, here’s a potential anthem for the Greens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgbWwa-E1WA&fmt=18
Not the best version, but the best I could find on Youtube…
Merry Christmas!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Back again to the Dom Post.
Business section again in the lying and deceitful mode.
I doubt they’ll print it. However, someone needs to start taking their measure.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
According to Greenfly many green contributers here are skeptical that an ETS will actually work in reducing carbon emissions. Me too.
Greenfly said “I trust Jeanette Fitzsimons on the issue of AGW?.
Did Jeanette Fitzsimons not support ETS?
Shunda said “now we have established the fact that politicians can not be trusted.” I could have told you that ages ago, oh actually I did come here and tell you that – quite some time ago I said that those concerned by AGW are wasting their time pursuing solutions via governments.
Greenfly: “My prediction Gerrit, is that you will see marked and disturbing evidence of climate disruption in 2010 and will become a vocal promoter of action to prevent global harm from climatic changes.
Same for Shunda.”
We are told that the stable temperatures of the last decade are just part of normal variations and do not mean that warming had stopped permanently.
So what would it mean if there is an increase in climate disruption in the single year of 2010?
In any case let’s consider the scenario that many of us AGW sceptics become convinced that the AGW theory and consequences are right after all and that something should be done. What should we do about it given that lobbying for politicians and bureaucrats to do something useful has proven to be a waste of time for decades (and a waste of carbon emitting energy which is a sin)? Oh and by the way we need to do something about it that doesn’t have just as severe consequences in causing human poverty and suffering.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
sally – you seem to have some time on your hands at present. I suggest you spend some of it looking back over the appropriate threads on Frogblog and seeing if you can formulate a more accurate opinion on what has been said about the ETS the National party has saddled us with, in particular the comments Jeanette Fitzsimons has made about it.It would help your argument immensely.
I still say, ““I trust Jeanette Fitzsimons on the issue of AGW”.
You ask, “So what would it mean if there is an increase in climate disruption in the single year of 2010″
2010 is next year. Climate disruption will be a constant source of concern for those affected badly by it and a constant reminder to onlookers of how things could be, should ‘climate disruption’ become the norm, as I believe it will. I expect the effect of a disrupted 2010 climate to be significant in public awareness of global warming.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Sallydeb
You DO realize that we have very little trust in government. We merely have less trust in industry, and for the wealthy there is none at all. That has always been true. However the problem with THIS problem is that the only entities large enough to address it are governments. Democracies absolutely suck at taking the needful actions in a timely way… but we want to keep our democratic forms of government. Copenhagen is the result.
What this means is that when it becomes obvious who has been lying about the science and lying about the motivations of scientists, there will be governments changing hands all over the place. It will be too late then. The only way to stop the warming will be from orbit.
I suspect that in the USA it will include public and messy executions of some bankers and businessmen.
This government will (one hopes) be one of the first to go (peacefully, one hopes).
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
1) There must be a price on carbon.
A carbon tax was the Greens preference, but when the Nats scuttled that for political point scoring and Labour buckled for political damage control, we were left with an ETS. Jeanette said she’d support one only if it would deliver reductions. Labour’s ETS barely did so, but was at least a positive step in the right direction, so it was supported. National’s will probably cause emissions to increase with the bill sent to the taxpayer – the worst of all worlds. But Jeanette has also pointed out that a carbon tax can also be corrupted. In fact it is easier to do so with govts playing with the price for political gains. There is no silver bullet here.
2) Complementary measures are essential.
No ETS on its own would be enough. It is one big part if done well, but domestic reductions programmes that have the goal of decreasing energy demand are actually more important. The current govt is doing NOTHING in this area. Some of their programmes will help, like the housing insulation scheme, but the Nat’s reasons for investing in this has incredibly little to do with reductions, rather it’s about job creation and health benefits. Both of these are great reasons, of course, but nothing to do with reducing emissions.
And while I’m ranting, Copenhagen was about setting meaningful reductions targets, not the ETS or other mechanisms, as some seem to be confused about. How a country meets its targets is up to that country. The Nats have decided to encourage NZ emissions to grow with little or no demand management, with the increase paid for by the taxpayer via offsets in third world countries. That’s why our response is among the worst in the world.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0 (+6)
Stupid Nats!
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
Talking about emissions – why do so many major retailers think it’s ok to switch from paper gift vouchers to plastic gift cards? And then to justify it by saying that’s what the consumer wants. Foodstuffs has just joined the list. Millions of plastic gift cards into landfill each year.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
From all the above posts it seems as though we are buggered no matter which way we turn.
I guess all we can do now is settle down to developing sustainable communities instead of pursuing pointless politics.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
I can’t contain my anger any longer!!
There is this dude in my town called Ian Cummings. This dude is on the local district council, he is from a gold mining background and owns a heavy machinery yard right at the entrance to town. I believe his wife is the National party secretary for the region and they are like Nationals “first family” in our district.
This guy is absolutely destroying the entrance to town! he has 3 diggers (one with this huge bloody jack hammer thing on it) chipping away at the limestone hillside above his work shop, the scar is enormous and growing rapidly, it really is a terrible mess.
The stupid regional council gave him a 30year consent to chip away at the hill!! and I believe they snuck it through as non notifiable.
The good councillor Cummings is also at the centre of a beach sand mining (for gold) controversy. There is a heavily used recreational beach near my place, the surf club is adjacent as well as the speedway and a popular walking area. Get this. The regional council gave this guy and his mates (one is another councillor!) a NON NOTIFIABLE CONSENT to mine the beach!! can you believe it? the surfers objected after they found out but eventually ran out of money and we are all now awaiting the start of this “trial” sand mining and the resultant industrialisation of our beach!! Of coarse you can bet if they actually find a lot of gold the “trial” will become a permanent feature.
So one guy and his pathetic attempt at “landscaping” has basically ruined the efforts of the community to beautify the town entrances and now is going to stuff our favourite beach as well!
Arrrrggghhhh!!!!!
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Whaddaya
gonna
do
Shunda?
Ya
gotta
do
somefink!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
There is possibly a fairly strong “old boys” network going on here greenfly, how do you deal with it?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Name and Shame. They’ll fight back x 10, but don’t stop. Advertise your cause, over and over, in creative, inspiring and funny ways. Don’t stop. Be anonymous. Keep your head down, make them put theirs up. Posterize (buy some wallpaper paste and a brush). Call the shots. Keep moving. Keep your own counsel. Email someone who has done it before
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
How many bodies are buried at the back of greenfly’s garden? The underground den with the trophy heads of his past.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You have me intrigued greenfly.
These people are very difficult to deal with but I can see how they have basically got the community here by the “cahonies”.
They have in effect caused a cap on community development, they are defenders of their own agenda, and see the community (and environment)as being there to serve them only.
A whole group of them got elected to both councils, their group is called “change now” they are all from a mining or contracting back ground so you can guess how they feel about community spirit and the like.
I was at a resource management “workshop” and raised some of my concerns, you should have seen the glaring looks coming from a certain table, talk about laser eyes!!
To be honest I felt very intimidated, certainly would require wisdom to combat these people.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda, make a judicial review application to the High Court that the consent should have been notified.
Expensive, but it’s the only way!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s the same(ish) the world over Shunda. My suggestion is for you to pick the battle, the field and the date(s) of engagement. Do it your way, not theirs. Use methods they can’t control, (for example, they can control a public meeting, but not the mail system). Think before you act. Don’t present them with opportunities to pigeon-hole your actions. Etc.
Jarbury’s suggestion is best if you want to win this particular battle, but I take the long view .. Make sure you have fun. Don’t set yourself up to worry.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Don’t listen to Kevin’s honeyed words Shunda!
That way leads to madness!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I joke.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
is southland the same Greenfly? I’d have thought some of the same dynamics would apply
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hell this sounds like a terrorist cell plotting for the destruction of New Zealand.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well Doug, I don’t remember many examples of terrorist cells fighting for public access to beaches and city beautification but I guess there’s a first for everything.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yea Doug, why can’t the peasants just stay in their place (bent over)?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
I guess all we can do now is settle down to developing sustainable communities instead of pursuing pointless politics.
I can’t contain my anger any longer!!
There is this dude in my town called Ian Cummings. This dude is on the local district council, he is from a gold mining background and owns a heavy machinery yard right at the entrance to town. I believe his wife is the National party secretary for the region and they are like Nationals “first family” in our district.
Shunda discovers he can’t escape “pointless” politics
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“Shunda, maybe we should talk and strategise?”
Yep I think that’s probably a good idea I think our community has stagnated some what in the past few years, it’s time to get things moving again.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
@Shunda
Good luck with your battles. Just remember that knowledge is power. I suggest finding out:
a) which way each of the councillors voted on any relevant issues dating back as far as you can, or when that councillor first became a councillor; and
b) what vested interests each councillor actually has, including those interests that close relatives of those councillors have.
This may provide enough information at the next local body elections to get some of these councillors voted out, although it would help to find someone to stand against them…
If you find a clear case of conflict of interest, you may be able to get some councillors ejected sooner through a legal challenge, although this is well outside my area of expertise.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“I don’t remember many examples of terrorist cells fighting for public access to beaches and city beautification but I guess there’s a first for everything.”
Compulsory reading: Edward Abbey’s “The Monkey Wrench Gang”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kevin – Southland? This enclave of civility and bonhomie?
Yes, but there are more and more flaming torches of enlightenment appearing through the gloom and I’m tremendously encouraged – mind you, it’s Christmas and the cider is flowing.
Merry Christmas every good manned, womanned, frogged, toaded, moused, geeked, chipped, marked, geniused, big brothered, philled, shunded, be-psuedomemed froggyblog contributor – it is fun to be part of the dialogue, whatever it’s hue!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Good luck with the vegetarian feast Fly. Make sure the cider’s Monteiths.
Merry Christmas, one and all.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Speaking of cider, have you tried Monteiths version greenfly? if you haven’t, quick! get down to your bottle store before it’s to late!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You beat me to it Kevin!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Somebody say cider?
Sorry, it is Xmas eve, after all.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This looks interesting:
”
Jeff Speck and Andrés Duany talk about why they wrote their new book The Smart Growth Manual, and why ‘planners aren’t going to like it.’
Jeff Speck says, “It’s ironic now that I sit back and read it, how the community this book describes represents nothing but a utopia. Wouldn’t it be great for these features to be present in every community? And for those of us who live in successful cities—one of the pictures has my bike in it—we live these benefits every day. What Andres is alluding to in avoiding the hair shirt is this: What’s so fantastic about smart growth is that if our planners were to achieve it completely, all of us would have quality-of-life enhancements. Among the things being asked and not being asked of us in the climate/post-oil discussion, smart growth calls on us to change our lifestyle but to change it in a vastly more enjoyable world.”
”
http://www.metropolismag.com/pov/20091218/qa-andres-duany-and-jeff-speck-on-the-smart-growth-manual#more-12091
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Haawea! Haa, haa, haa!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ā
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The wonderful Clive James has a nice take on tolerance here.
Remarkably I heard it on Radio NZ this morning at 6.50.
As always, it’s worth reading just for the wit.
http://www.clivejames.com/point-of-view/series6/hermie
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)