80

Above Us the Waves UPDATED: May 8, 12:38 BST

W Stephen Gilbert

The salient point about Cassandra the mythological princess, and Dr Stockmann in Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People, and Chief Brody in Peter Benchley’s Jaws is not that they predicted calamity or that they were proved right after several individuals (thousands in Cassandra’s case) had unnecessarily died. It was that they were ignored and even reviled. So it is with the most significant issue of the age, indeed the most significant event in the history of the world: climate change.

Predictably enough, the coverage of the on-going worldwide action by the groups acting under the umbrella Extinction Rebellion and the school strikes inspired by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg has concentrated on their conduct rather than their aims. Sitting down, skipping school, sleeping over and supergluing are of more interest to the mainstream media than the survival of the planet. Politicians and media commentators prate about irresponsibility, civil disobedience, disruption and cost, unmindful that these are but a drop in the rising ocean.

Peter Harper, the pioneering prophet of alternative technologies, was telling our local Labour party the other week that the expert consensus now is that we have, at best, fifteen years before the whole of eastern England including London, along with Toronto, New York, Florida and the eastern seaboard of the United States, and the low countries and much else of western Europe, disappears under permanent flood water.**

The window of opportunity for pre-emptive action that will limit, let alone prevent, this outcome is fast closing. Some time in the next decade, the tipping point will come, the damage will be irreparable, irrevocable, irreversible.

My partner and I have no issue. We fear for the children and even more the grandchildren of our friends, but for ourselves we need not wonder what fate we bestowed on anyone we have brought into a doomed world. We have always assumed that our deaths would precede Armageddon. And long ago, we moved to the west country. But if we were ever tempted to feel smug about our relative age and our choice of base, we can no longer comfort ourselves. While the end of the world appeared to be a far-off fantasy, we could enjoy its fictional representations in the scenarios of disaster literature and movies. But gradually, alongside the possibility of nuclear catastrophe returning to consideration, especially in the hands of death-cult groups, the spread of uncontrollable bacteria or global epidemic became credible.

And now climate change has overtaken all other threats, not as something far off and largely imaginary but as terrifyingly imminent. My partner and I, hitherto immune to the danger because of human life expectancy, may well still be around in fifteen years, by which time the vulnerability of old age will be rather more apparent to us.

The prospect of huge numbers of English refugees fleeing west – by then perhaps as many as 30 million of them – fills one with dread. Look how unsympathetically the European nations have handled the comparatively small numbers of refugees seeking help from them over the last few years. So the breakdown of order is a given. What proportion of desperate people, many exhibiting the Londoner’s characteristic sense of entitlement, would be content to wait patiently for the provisions that the authorities have made for them? Indeed, in the nightmare scenario that Theresa May is still the prime minister in 2035, scant provision will have been made because parliament will have been wholly engaged in dispute about the precise depth to which the floodwater is predicted to rise, with the grande dame determined to push through her policy based on a flooding projection merely to the depth of a couple of centimeters.

Politicians, particularly in Britain, like to sit back and congratulate themselves on the pitiful restrictions they have enacted and the puny long-term goals they have set, promising to reduce vehicular emissions just a tad when what they face is the impossibility of travel by any means save boat and raft. We are all fetishising small, targeted causes and ignoring the scale of the overarching disaster. What is the good of saving the tiger or the honey bee, the rain forest or the coral reef when, in a foreseeable future, flora and fauna will be globally decimated, surviving only in random pockets until they too are hunted to extinction for food? As half of England disappears under water, how many creatures, save those that can fly distances, will perish as we struggle to save ourselves?

It’s not as if these warnings are new. In her seminal book Silent Spring, Rachel Carson identified the extensive use of pesticides as having a profoundly deleterious effect on the environment. That was in 1962, 57 years ago. Who listened?

The UN’s recent report on climate change anticipates a million extinctions of plants and animals unless action is taken, and taken now. Who can doubt that the extinction of the human race will follow, and sooner rather than later? We are the authors of our own fate. In his recent BBC programme on the subject, Climate Change – The Facts (still available on iPlayer), David Attenborough limned “our greatest threat in thousands of years”. Among the experts consulted, the Chief Executive of the Committee on Climate Change, Chris Stark, drily noted: “The costs of action are dwarfed by the costs of inaction”. Stark enough for you?

For the mainstream media, the UN report was a big story but played second to the obviously much more significant news of a royal birth. One wonders whether the Sussexes have pondered where they will flee to once the London palaces are flooded. Of the 25 current royal residences, only four may be expected to be untouched by the imminent inundation: Highgrove, Gatcombe, Llwynywermod in Carmarthenshire and possibly Barnwell Manor in Northants. The rest, even those in Scotland, are vulnerable because of successive royals favouring eastern counties. Perhaps the Duke of Cambridge could be persuaded to speak up louder about what we face. As monarch, he may be presiding over an unimaginable crisis.

Labour has urged the government to declare a climate emergency, a gesture that will be no more than that if not followed up. As Jeremy Corbyn put it, in proposing a number of large but unspecified measures, “it’s a chance that won’t be available to succeeding generations”. But we have to ensure that the ‘could’ in his hope that “we could set off a wave of action from parliaments and governments around the world” is in practice a ‘will’. The world is swinging hard to the right and governments of the hard right are not exercised by the global emergency; indeed, they doubt its very existence. Trump calls it a hoax. Brazil now has a president whose policy is to clear the Amazon basin for short-term profit, with no thought for the global implications. Why has not the International Court of Justice already sought pre-emptive measures to prevent his carrying through this policy? Why is Trump being permitted to reactive the American fossil fuel companies, purely to obtain the workers’ votes in 2020?

Despite Trump, New York City is enacting a $20 billion programme to combat the local effects of climate change, addressing such issues as coastal protection and drainage capacity. The coastline around Lower Manhattan is being raised twenty feet above the current sea level. Millions of additional trees have been planted across the city to help to control rising summer temperatures. All new builds have to meet stringent green requirements. New protections have been created to prevent the flooding of the subway system. “Managed retreat” plans have been enacted as a result of Hurricane Sandy more than six years ago. Congestion pricing will be introduced in the next two years and vehicle emissions are intended to be halved by 2025. Will that be sufficient? And how much is London investing in something similar?

Late last year, London mayor Sadiq Khan and civic leaders in other cities also declared “a climate emergency”. Khan’s plan is to make his city carbon neutral by 2050, but he does not explain how you achieve such a target in a metropolis that has by then been under water for fifteen years. The London Assembly wisely passed a motion to bring forward Khan’s target by twenty years. But is it realistic?

What seems clear is that politicians generally, ever mindful of this week’s measure of popularity, have no will to do more than nibble at the edges. They may have calculated that they’ll be dead by 2050 and so they won’t care. But if they are out by as many years as the scientists now fear, some at least of them will live to see their names reviled and perhaps find themselves hunted down by starving and vengeful refugees, many of those refugees being people who thought they were immune to tomorrow’s disaster. Then the politicians might learn too late something about irresponsibility, disruption and cost.

**UPDATE 12/05/19: Peter Harper points out that the timeframe sketched by him and mentioned in the article refers to the opportunity to put measures in place to prevent the seas rising by more than three feet by century’s end, rather than the time shortly after which a large landmass will be inundated. He says: “In my view the best avenue for the Labour Party would be a major infrastructural renewal programme that would bring millions of new jobs. They could forge rational alliances with appropriate businesses and redirect the universities to provide the necessary research and training. They should reorganise the tax system to be revenue-neutral but make carbon visible in prices”.

W Stephen Gilbert has been a writer, journalist and sometime television producer since 1971, when his first play appeared in the first season of Play for Today on BBC1. His books include first biographies of Dennis Potter and Jeremy Corbyn. He mostly passes his twilight years indexing other writers’ books.

Filed under: climate change, environment, latest

by

W Stephen Gilbert has been a writer, journalist and sometime television producer since 1971, when his first play appeared in the first season of Play for Today on BBC1. His books include first biographies of Dennis Potter and Jeremy Corbyn. He mostly passes his twilight years indexing other writers’ books.

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
John Doran
Reader
John Doran

http://www.drtimball.ca/2019/it-is-time-to-expose-the-sanctimonious-ben-santer-to-the-new-generation-of-skeptics/

Dr. Tim exposes the 1995 fraud committed in the UN IPCC report to fabricate “a discernable human influence”

John Doran.

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

If the link does not go directly to the article, scroll down a few articles on the right hand side
JD.

Jack Black
Reader
Jack Black

Toronto flooded by the rising sea ? Surely you jest. And while Toronto, as one the largest cities in North America encompasses a large area, it is nowhere near the sea, and in fact has a lowest altitude of 76.5 m. You must be thinking of Toyota, the largest city in Japan, which is right on the ocean.

And no need to rush out and thank me. We all make mistakes. Heck even I’ve made one once in a while.

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

A scientific look at sea level rise over the last 20,000 years, since the depths of the last glacial period.

Bullet Points:
Sea level rise: 1.3mm/yr to 1.8mm/yr.
Coral grows ~ 2mm/yr. No coral islands lost.
No major sea rise ~6,000 yrs.
Good, easy to understand graphs. Clear easy to understand text.

[single para edited for content-free ad hom]

http://www.notrickszone.com/2011/02/16/a-level-look-at-sea-levels/

JD.

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

A sober scientific proof CO2 (plant food Carbon Dioxide) not Carbon pollution as lazy liars say, cannot control temperatures. An 11,000 year graph of our Holocene Warm Period.
For about the last 1,000,000 years our climate has run in cycles of about 100,000 years: about 10,000 years warm & about 90,000 years cold.
This present interglacial is no different:
http://www.wattsupwiththat.com/2017/11/22/core-of-climate-science-is-in-the-real-world-data/

JD.

bevin
Reader
bevin

They must be rubbing their hands in glee at CiF these days. This site set up by those who had been pre-moderated, for talking unpalatable sense to the ruling class, now runs a serious, perfectly sensible article on Climate Change and the great majority of comments are variations of the message being promoted by the capitalists: ‘it is all a hoax’; those protesting against it are corrupted agents of the corporations and idiots who cannot see that to protest against the status quo is to help sustain it. But then, Stephen Gilbert has ‘form’ : he confesses immediately that he… Read more »

crank
Reader
crank

I find, and have consistently found, the general level of discussion of this topic on OffG depressing (both above and below the line). Take this recent article (below) by Clive Splash for example. An environmental economist who has studied what the elite financiers of the world plan to do about the fossil fuel problem(s), he also can see the XR, Greta phenomena for what they are : signal generators in a public relations drive to capitalise nature. Wholesale. Medialens don’t get this because they’re smoked out on hopium. Corbynistas don’t get this because they are planning their Green New Deal… Read more »

BigB
Reader
BigB

The sequence of XR Extinction Rebellion; Greta Thunberg and her Climate Strikers; Attenborough’s BBC climate change propagandic piece to camera Greta’s meeting with JC; JC’s ‘climate emergency’; the CCC report the very next day (outlining the ‘net zero’ neoliberal psyop); the IPBES landmark 15 year report the next week; today, the setting up of a geo-engineering feasibility project (to cool the poles) …is anything but an authentic grassroots protest. I do not believe in cornucopias of coincidence. Not when you consider that Greta went off message in Katowice; and started blaming the 1% – which Avaaz censored. She has not… Read more »

Admin
Moderator
Admin

The Guardian is squarely behind the reality of manmade climate change, as is the BBC, and most liberal outlets. Unlike us, though, they would censor the ‘deniers.’

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

Admin, that really should be “reality” of manmade climate change, or fantasy?
JD.
But, three cheers to you for allowing opposing perspectives.

mark
Reader
mark

So much of this Global Warming BS is counter productive and a complete waste of time and resources that could be devoted to real problems. In places like Norway, electric cars are heavily subsidised to the tune of about 850 million euros a year. No car tax, no import duty, no 25% VAT, no road tolls. Free parking and free electric charging, and you can use the bus lanes. Sounds great! But where does all this largesse come from? From the 6 billion euros in revenue from the oil/ gas industry. So a lot of Norwegians get an additional electric… Read more »

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

I really enjoyed this exercise in emotional anti-scientific incontinence: not a single reference to back up the longest list of scare-porn drivel I’ve seen in a long time. I bust out laughing. Sea levels are rising globally at about 1.8mm per year. Satellite data show this. That’s about 40 years to overflow a single course of bricks, at 3 inches, 75mm. Dr. Nils Axel Morner is a world authority: any youtube, essay or paper by him is worth reading. In some areas, coastland is falling, in others, raising still after the retreat of the last Ice Sheets, 20,000 to 15,000… Read more »

BigB
Reader
BigB

Talking of “emotional anti-scientific incontinence” – as linked to the other day – is that creationist Tim-nice-but-dim Ball who has less than zero credibility as a clown ‘climatologist’. The retired geographer who admitted in court that he invented his climatology credentials: and abandoned a libel case against because he did not have a credible career or reputation that could be libeled. Similarly, the Weaver case he ‘won’ was on the basis that his attack on Weaver was such “emotional anti-scientific incontinence” that it could not be taken as anything other than satirical comedy. The judge said it lacked “a sufficient… Read more »

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

http://www.principia-scientific.org/breaking-climatologist-dr-tim-ball-wins-epic-libel-court-battle/ Weaver sat in court for three weeks, silent. He offered not a word of evidence. His & his attack dog lawyer’s sole intent was to bankrupt Dr. Ball. They failed. They failed. Friends & crowdfunding ensured that free speech & truth had their day in court. Dr. Tim’s next court case is 75% won. The outrageous fraud Michael Mann tried to wipe out 900 years of history: The Medieval Warm Period & The Little Ice Age, in order to make the 20th century warming look exceptional. He failed. He failed. He failed to provide agreed documents to the court… Read more »

Admin
Moderator
Admin

Can we suggest both sides here discuss the evidence and leave aside the alleged credibility of this or that person. It’s just not helpful, or interesting, and can easily seem like mere ad hom.

BigB
Reader
BigB

Tim Ball’s lack of credibility is legend, and extremely pertinent …especially when someone is trying to pass him off as an ‘authority’. The fact that he has been laughed out of court more than once, citing that his amateurish ‘evidence’ was childish drivel, not worthy of being credibly defamatory, which no one could take as a serious libel …again, becomes extremely pertinent when someone claims he ‘won’ the case. Which, technically he did – but that is being misrepresented here to make it look as the retired geographer has any credibility whatsoever. Which he does not. So there is no… Read more »

Admin
Moderator
Admin

I’m sure you’re well aware that generalised personal attacks such as “he’s an idiot”, “he was laughed out of court”, “he has no credibility” are routinely used as a means of diverting the argument away from the data and toward the person presenting it. For this reason they should never be used by those who have real valid fact-based arguments to deploy. No, they are NOT pertinent, because they are subjective and impossible to verify. “No credibility”, with whom? According to what source? How much “credibility” does the person claiming “no credibility” have? It’s the kind of foggy, fact-free nonsense… Read more »

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

Admin, I appreciate your desire to keep this “debate” above the ad hom level. I really do. However, the whole CAGW (Catastrophic Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming ) fraud is built upon the destruction of persons because it does not stand forensic examination of facts in court cases or factual debates. For example, the fraud was rebranded from global warming after 1998 to climate change because Earth has seen no statistically significant warming since 1998. That’s 21 full years. All of a sudden man-made CO2 is causing climate change? PUHLEEEASE. The climate’s been changing “for about 4.5 billion years”, as Buzz… Read more »

Admin
Moderator
Admin

If what you say is true then you’re making my point for me. The best rebuttal of ad hom is to ignore it and insist the focus remains on the data, not to resort to ad hom in return.

Maybe BigB can explain what is faulty in Tim Ball’s science, and you can present the counter case. Point by point. That would be interesting and illuminating. This isn’t.

BigB
Reader
BigB

Congratulations, Admin, for getting the wrong end of the stick. And moderating the guy doing empirical, science based research. If you go to the “Send Labour a Message” forum: you will see I posted a lot of factual analysis. As I have been doing for what, two years? You will also see I explained my analysis to Maggie, who had previously ad homed me several times (not moderated though), as I have down at least three times before. Underneath my analysis you will see that it was dismissed/ad homed with “your oil addiction” is a fake boogeyman: fossil fuels are… Read more »

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

@BigB,
ok, what’s this entropy you keep banging on about, endlessly?

Is that when the Sun burns out in about 7 billion years?

John Doran.

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

I’m game.
Funny enough I just posted above 10.02 am a sober scientific article, proof
CO2 does not control temperatures or therefore climate.

Let’s see how the BigB does sticking to science.
I’m game.

Robbobbobin
Reader
Robbobbobin

But gradually, alongside the possibility of nuclear catastrophe returning to consideration, especially in the hands of death-cult groups, the spread of uncontrollable bacteria or global epidemic became credible.

And now climate change has overtaken all other threat…

Stick around. Plenty more left in Pandora’s box yet.

Seamus Padraig
Reader
Seamus Padraig

Ten years ago, this is precisely what I believed too. But I have to admit that, more and more, I consider myself a global-warming skeptic. Why did I refuse to question the media consensus (not scientific consensus!) on this issue for so long? Well, for openers, I have no real background in climatology, so how was I supposed to make any sense out of a bunch of footnoted white-papers on the subject? But more to the point: I have always considered myself an environmentalist, so I thought it was my duty to ‘stick up for the planet,’ as it were.… Read more »

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

I think you’re spot on right here Seamus Padraig.

Valentina Zharkova is doing fascinating work with the heartbeat of the Sun.
Her prediction of a mini ice age 2020 to 2050 ish with 97% claims of accuracy is phenomenal.
And will very soon be proven or disproven. That’s science.

I got an invite to this GWPF presentation, but couldn’t attend.
Her work, plus Svensmark’s work on clouds are probably the best advances in climate science in the last 40 years.

John Doran.

Robbobbobin
Reader
Robbobbobin

“In fact–as far as I’m aware–we still haven’t lost so much as one single Pacific atoll!”

Colour you ‘thick’?

Five Pacific islands lost to rising seas as climate change hits
Six more islands have large swaths of land, and villages, washed into sea as coastline of Solomon Islands eroded and overwhelmed
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/10/five-pacific-islands-lost-rising-seas-climate-change

I have a friend who’d like to meet you. His monocle is so powerful that whenevet he strains on the khazi his other eye is looking right up his passed-due date.

Admin
Moderator
Admin

The scare headline is, as per usual with the Graun, not fully borne out by the text. There’s ambiguity – to say the least – whether the loss of land is due to rising sea levels or land erosion. Is there anything to clarify this?

Savorywill
Reader
Savorywill

I feel the same. I also took it for granted that the global warming narrative was right, having dutifully watched Al Gore’s movie on that when it came out. What gave me pause in my acceptance of this idea actually came from an unlikely source: Alexander Cockburn from my my favorite news site, at the time (no longer!!!), Counterpunch. He got in a lot of trouble with his co-editor, St. Claire, for his heresy, actually. He had a fascinating run-in with George Monbiot over this issue which was hilarious to read. You may be able to find his posts on… Read more »

Arby
Reader

“Predictably enough, the coverage of the on-going worldwide action by the groups acting under the umbrella Extinction Rebellion and the school strikes inspired by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg has concentrated on their conduct rather than their aims. Sitting down, skipping school, sleeping over and supergluing are of more interest to the mainstream media than the survival of the planet. Politicians and media commentators prate about irresponsibility, civil disobedience, disruption and cost, unmindful that these are but a drop in the rising ocean.” Intentionally or otherwise, our friend is making a “Look! Over there!” move. Greta Thunberg, it really does… Read more »

Some Random Passer-b
Reader
Some Random Passer-b

There’s this little nugget waiting to resurface when the coast is clear too…

https://xrbusiness.org/

Arby
Reader

“This website is unavailable at present” And on and on…

Arby
Reader

Stephen Glibert: May I introduce you to Ralph Nader?: “An Open Letter to the Environmental Community” – https://nader.org/2019/05/03/an-open-letter-to-the-environmental-community/ An excerpt from Nader’s very welcome article follows: “Today, in the midst of increasingly alarming scientific studies and giant storms, the necessary response has been diminished by this widely-accepted softening of the words we use to describe the dangerous reality that stands before us. Language matters! “I recently reached out to two leading and widely respected ecologists, Paul Hawken and Bill McKibben, to get their input on the mainstream usage of the benign phrase “climate change.” McKibben now uses the far more… Read more »

mark
Reader
mark

I don’t know if this utter garbage is intended as a spoof, but I’m assuming it’s not. We have all the usual bald assertions unsupported by a shred of evidence, “In 15/12/11/4 years (pick whatever figure suits you) we’ll all be under water…..London and New York submerged……30 million refugees………” etc.etc.etc. Just make something up. “We have exactly 8 months, 11 days, 14 hours and 12 minutes left to save the planet.” I’m old enough to remember “all the scientists” telling us all in similar hushed, apocalyptic tones that we were facing an imminent new Ice Age, and you’d have to… Read more »

John Doran
Reader
John Doran

Utter garbage is about right, Mark.
John Doran.

Mucho
Reader
Mucho

Quite right. “Planet poisoning” is more accurate than “climate change”. We are poisoning Earth and oursleves with synthetic, toxic, man-made shite and the whole system is based around greed and exploitation regardless of any human or environmental consequences.

For example……”The production of our electronic technologies has fueled war, murder, rape, and child labor in the Congo. Here’s how”……..

https://whatis5g.info/conflict-minerals/

Willem
Reader
Willem

If memory serves me correctly, in Gulliver’s travels the issue of climate change is ridiculed by Swift. And if not, it is a great topic for satire. As regards to the existence of climate change, I am agnostic. It is a topic, to paraphrase Protagoras, that I cannot know either if it does exist or if it does not exist, for there is much to prevent one’s knowing: the obscurity of the subject and the shortness of man’s life. That does not mean that I am pro-fossil fuel industry: one day we may run out of it making winter extremely… Read more »

tonyopmoc
Reader
tonyopmoc

Dear W. Stephen Gilbert, (” As half of England disappears under water”) When, I was a kid 55 years ago, although we were skint, we did spend a couple of weeks on the Norfolk Broads, and managed to get through Potter Heigham Bridge. We have achieved this numerous times since, including quite recently, years since the time of “hide the decline” Coincidentally, though I have never lived in Norfolk, though I love the place, I have known a few people, for an exceedingly long time, who work, professionally at The University of East Anglia in Norwich “Can you still get… Read more »

mark
Reader
mark

I always left Potter Heigham bridge to the pilot. Well worth a couple of quid beer money for him.

tonyopmoc
Reader
tonyopmoc

mark, Us too, but Wroxham Bridge is still dead easy, despite the bend, and you can’t see what’s coming, from the other side.

mark
Reader
mark

I was around there just a while back. Looked just the same as before to me, maybe a bit more built up. Some of the locals say it has gone down a lot over the years in terms of wildlife, but it’s not obvious or noticeable.

mark
Reader
mark

The Roys are still ruling the roost round there, though I think one of them died recently.

BigB
Reader
BigB

The problem with framing the Human Impact crisis on the climate: is that all the climate contrarians come out to play. As if it makes any difference to the overall synopsis. The climate is only part of the overall Earth System: which is not isolatable from the overall human interaction with the environment. The lithosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and atmosphere all interact – probably in ways we do not yet understand – and we are having a major impact – from source to sink – on all of them. Such is the case, you really have to stick your head in… Read more »

BigB
Reader
BigB

Yes, Tony, we probably will. Some of us. I do not know what the outcome will be, no one does. What I lament is we could all survive, comfortably, with a lot less. And a lot more fulfilled, spiritually. Capitalism alienates humanity from humanity. Therein lies the whole problem. A self-alienated humanity cannot envisage what it has lost, once it has become accustomed to its alienation. It is always fashionable to blame someone, and the elite possessing classes do have asymmetrically more vested interest. But those interests are mirrored by the majority, in the OECD developed countries at least. Everyone… Read more »

tonyopmoc
Reader
tonyopmoc

BigB, My wife particularly is an enthusiastic participant, of our local ecolgical community, mainly through active participation, including doing a lot of digging and planting, and distributing the food, and love, entirely for free. I sometimes turn up at larger meetings. Even the pubs are free to get in, but you have to pay for the beer. I have always wanted an electric car, mainly for performance reasons, though I accept, the technology, currently, is grossly inefficient, if you consider the real total cost of ownership. I accept that to continue to burn oil, coal, wood, peat and animal shit,… Read more »

BigB
Reader
BigB

No, but I did logic and systems theory. Everything is interactive with everything else. If we have a repleting hydrocarbons source (which we don’t) we deplete other resources even faster and precipitate either a resources collapse or a metabolic collapse. And precipitate the further loss of biodiversity in a rapidly changing world. Probably not too much we can do, given the advanced state of our depletion and pollution. Let’s be honest: no one really wants the change – especially the real change it would require to actually mitigate our impact on life. Let’s just say my eyes have been opened… Read more »

tonyopmoc
Reader
tonyopmoc

BigB, I am not denying that the climate is changing. It always as has, and it always will. I lived through the winter of 1963, in Oldham. I was 10 years old, and built an igloo in my back garden with my older brother Patrick. We got an oblong box, and used pure ice for windows. The coalman, used to turn up on a horse and cart, and deliver these enormous bags of coal that went into our coalshed. When I got home from school, I was too cold to pee. So I used to get the coal fire going,… Read more »

BigB
Reader
BigB

my reply came out above.

tonyopmoc
Reader
tonyopmoc

http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2019/05/america-you-are-fired.html Extract “Dmitry Orlov said… Bridgeofsighs – Three Mile Island was sabotaged (and boy did it take some work!) in order to justify a massive federal power grab over the nuclear industry. Nobody was hurt. It was, in a sense, necessary, because in the US tight government control of anything is hard to justify, but in the case of nuclear it is absolutely necessary. Chernobyl was blown up on purpose (hurting thousands of people) in order to bankrupt the USSR. The cost of the damage and the clean-up was on the scale of the GDP of the entire country. The… Read more »

Kathy
Reader
Kathy

mark
Reader
mark

Thanks for that. This is the very antithesis of a grass roots movement, supported by all the usual suspects, Soros, Monsanto, Silicon Valley, Big Telecoms, Big Finance, Government, the bogus NGOs. It is reminiscent of the Colour Revolutions, the White Helmets, and much else in a similar vein. Astro Turfing writ large. Manufacturing Consent a la Bernays.

The tragedy of it is that most of the kids and foot soldiers genuinely believe in what they’re doing and don’t realise they’re being used and manipulated to serve the corporate interests who are pulling their strings.

tonyopmoc
Reader
tonyopmoc

Kathy, Thanks for posting this. It is Brilliant. Within the last few weeks, I have become well aware of the dangers of 5G, almost nothing of which is published in the mainstream media. I have been retired for 15 years, and am not up to speed with the latest technology. However, I did use to work in the industry, at such a level, that I insisted, we got positive acknowledgements, at the lowest machine code level, and the higher level, before we considered, the message had been received. The last thing I want is 5G to be deployed, except maybe… Read more »

Kathy
Reader
Kathy

tonyopmoc.
Thanks for the feed back.
I think this is quite an interesting film about 5g

Mucho
Reader
Mucho

Here is another must watch 5G vid, only short at 10 mins but he lays it out brilliantly and looks at the exact effects of this type of radiation on our bodies.

MLS
Reader
MLS

The science behind AGW remains ambiguous. The claims of ‘scientific consensus’, ‘97%’, etc are simply propaganda.

More important is the failure of large sections of the Left, an even the alt media to recognize this propaganda and to question why it’s being imposed.

Why are outlets such as Media Lens content to go along with known liars such as the BBC and the Guardian on this one issue?

(I don’t include OffG here, since they very commendably present both sides of this debate and resist the demands for censorship of opinion)

Loverat
Reader
Loverat

I have observed many online climate change debates and you can tell a sizeable number on both sides are not approaching the subject objectively and a lot of vested interested tied up in this. Those who are trying to understand the arguments by asking either side to back up their claims or even explain their viewpoint are attacked. I have experienced this many times and the conclusion I reach is, those for can’t properly explain the science and the complex data they use to justify their claims. And those on the other side, seem to simply say, the onus is… Read more »