Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

Department of Stupidity

Epstein Thrashes Rubenfeld on Natural Law; Panel on Redistribution of Wealth

I would swear that I saw, for the first time ever, outright anger in Prof. Epstein’s face the first time I watched this clip. Never mind, you can hear it in his voice as he gives Yale Law School’s Prof. Jed Rubenfeld a concise and pithy jolly what-for for a**-hattery.

This is the final 5:48 of a panel discussion described as below. The whole thing is quite interesting. Steve Forbes also seems to have some understanding of what’s what. Andy Stern of the infamous SEIU brings along his flag and his violin. And the odious Prof Rubenfeld is…well, odious. Although his question in Part 11 is one we all get asked a lot, and I’m glad to have Prof. E.’s response.

Best part first. The series begins with Part 1, below Part 11 here. I think you can just click through the segments from there.

–J.

Uploaded on Nov 17, 2009

The Federalist Society presented this panel discussion on Redistribution of Wealth at the 2009 National Lawyers Convention on Thursday, November 12, 2009. Panelists included Prof. Richard A. Epstein of New York University Law School; Mr. Steve Forbes, Chairman and CEO of Forbes Inc. and Editor of Forbes Magazine; Prof. Jed Rubenfeld of Yale Law School; Mr. Andrew L. Stern, President of the Service Employees International Union; and Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit as the moderator. Part 11 of 11

The whole thing is very much worth seeing, highly recommended, and be sure you have your kidney basin at the ready for Prof. Rubenfeld’s first appearance:

Aidgentina

I did not know we gave foreign aid to Argentina. Or Brazil. Seeing as they are not exactly potless God knows why especially we give money as if this is some cockamamie attempt to curry favour we haven’t exactly got very far. Let’s look at the evidence shall we? Brazil has a space program, Brazil is hosting not just this year’s football World Cup but the next Olympics. It’s like crying poverty because you can’t afford to fill the Bentley. As to Argentina. Well, they fucking hate us. They shouldn’t of course because oddly enough we historically have strong links of blood and culture with Argentina but they have a perennial knicker-twist over the Falklands. Oh, and the Argentinian government has just gone on a spree of arms buying. Although God alone knows (and the Pope is an Argentine recall) what the be-buggery they will manage to do with a squadron of knackered Spanish Mirages.

Look, don’t get me wrong… I am not 100% contra international aid (there is a reason I was conceived in Zambia). Zambia had a space program as well. My parents were paid by the FCO to teach out there and I guess fair enough. Up to a point and all that but most of my adult life has seen me living in English inner-city areas: Nottingham, London, Leeds, Manchester and they all have loads of places you can wire money back to the old country from. This genuine charity is larger than the official stuff in scale and is vastly better targeted. That is the future of aid – the little things like getting your uncle a cellphone so he knows where to land the fish he caught etc. Of course that means making life easier for non-EEA citizens to work here and we can imagine the howls over that – UKip et. al. are already doing their ends over Poles and such. I don’t have a problem myself but people seem obsessed with the idea of employment as a zero-sum game. It seems connected to the idea that “creating jobs” is a “good thing” in and of itself. No it isn’t. Imagine trying to explain what you do to a pig-poker from 1725? They’d probs burn you at the stake – “He be consorting with the demons of the HTML”. Destroying jobs is the “good thing”. It of course creates jobs our ancestors would never believe. And who wouldn’t rather design computer games than wallow in shit with the piggies? A woman I spoke to on a train once doing a BSc in games design thought otherwise. Blimey, I envied her! That is like so cool.

She was also very good looking but then life is a series of events.

Ukip MEP Paul Nuttall said the Chancellor should find savings by stopping aid that goes to countries who “don’t need it”.

Mr Nuttall was speaking during a debate on the BBC show [Question Time] about Mr Osborne’s recently announced plans to cut the welfare bill by £12 billion in the two years after the 2015 election.

Mr Nuttall said: “The welfare budget under Labour spiralled out of control, it could not go on and something had to be done.

“However there is another budget which is ringfenced which comes to around £12bn, it is called the foreign aid budget.

“I am not against giving money to countries who are in dire need, people who need to be fed. But what I am against is giving money to countries like Argentina and Brazil.

“I believe the way you should pay for these cuts is by going to the foreign aid budget and taking money off countries who don’t need it because quite frankly that’s your tax and it should be spent on our own people.”

Whilst I appreciate the principle of Nuttall there is a problem. How can I explain this? Here is a start…

It was reported over the weekend that Argentina have [sic] received £2m in aid from Britain since 2012.

Now two million quid sounds a lot to you and me but in the grand scheme it is fuck all. That is money Osborne can lose down the back of the sofa. Yes, the principle of not giving Argentina money (it annoys me) is sound but if anyone believes that is going to impact the deficit then they really need to think a bit deeper. Ukip are either being thick or dishonest.

I dunno. I do know we should not give government aid to Argentina but I also know the quantities involved are not a scratch upon the buttock of the body politrick’s pissing money up a rope. I do though believe in being much more open door (which UKip isn’t) rather than saying ‘eff off but we’ll give you monies.

In 1993 I bought a PC (my first but not my last). It was a second-user Elonex 386-SX16 and was truly abysmal (cheap, mind). I am fine with Bill and Melinda Gates giving a stunning sum to the potless and starving. I did and do through them. Fine.

I believe in charity and though I am not a rich man I do not starve I believe in charity in the sense of money, goods, whatever freely given. Not, absolutely not, cash taken from me by force. Jesus Christ! In the 1980s there was a famine in Ethiopia and I (despite being a primary school kid) organised a “Santa’s Grotto” which meant wearing me ma’s tights because I wound-up dressed-up as “head elf”. We raised a few hundred notes. I did that off my own bat and my mates came in. That is charity.

That is what it should be about.

Educational Item of the Day

Mustaches are racist.

—-Ralph Haddad, Student editor of The McGill [University] Daily

Student Paper Editor Claims Mustaches are Racist
November 29, 2013 by Daniel Greenfield

In case you don’t recognize “Daniel Greenfield,” he also posts good stuff to his weblog, under the nom de guerre of “Sultan Knish.” His piece, linked above, links also to the column “Movember declared ‘sexist, racist, transphobic’ at Canada’s sorry imitation of Harvard” at The Daily Caller.

Where does it all go? (or come from?)

Penis pumps cost U.S. government millions, watchdog cries waste

(Reuters) – Penis pumps cost the U.S. government’s Medicare program $172 million between 2006 and 2011, about twice as much as the consumer would have paid at the retail level, according to a government watchdog’s report released on Monday.

Just a minor point but how much does the “government watchdog” that surveys the price of penis pumps cost? Just a thought.

A minor thought. Two major ones spring to mind. The first is of course to do with economies of scale (oh, err missus!). Surely Medicare could get more bang for buck (so to speak) than an individual due to greater economies of scale? That is the real scandal here but more on that later.

Now, I did a 5s Google and lovehoney.co.uk is knocking them out at from about GBP14.99 (that’s, what, 20 bucks a throw. Does anyone seriously believe the average yank on the sans a wank can’t afford 20 bucks for sex?) So this is the second point – why? Well, I guess it could be argued that sex is a right and Medicare ought to pay. But why pay twice the odds? That’s back to the first point. This is deeply inefficient.

So where does it all go? How much isn’t stealth planes or Obamacare but sheer waste? And buying an item for twice the retail rate is waste in spades. It is reckoned that the 21 B-2 Bombers built by Northrop-Grumman cost over USD2 billion a throw (and the operating costs are astronomic) but nobody really expected an intercontinental range bomber to be bought from the penny-jar (even with the Slovak 50 Eurocent that always finds a way in there). Penis pumps though are something I can find on Google in seconds. Is the US Department of Cock (and indeed Bull) lacking a computer? If they are they can speak to me and I’ll quote them an interesting price.

I mean it is sometimes worth looking at the small ticket items too because there are so many and a million here and a million there and soon it is billions and then it’s a billion here or there and then rapidly you are talking serious money.

So, apart from offering a service no one needs because anyone can get it off their own bat and doing this in a deeply inefficient way we come to the real er… meat. I can best sum this with a quote from the article…

“Considering the strain retiring baby boomers will soon be placing on Medicare’s budget, shouldn’t we be focusing this entitlement program on real, life-saving treatment and equipment to serve the health needs of seniors – instead of subsidizing penis pump purchases?

Why did I make that strong (I watched too many “Carry On” movies as a kid). Well, that and who is being subsidised? Not the seniors for sure. Just think who. This happens all the time. Look at the F-35 programme. Would it be interesting to suggest that the F-35 is a farce* on a trillion+ dollar budget which oddly enough (I think) has contracts in 48 states (and abroad). God knows what the congress-types from a pair of states were doing that afternoon. Manning Ted Kennedy’s penis pump (now deployed in Somerset?).

Anyway, it’s all er… pork barrels.

*A late block F-16 knocks it into a cocked hat for half (less?) the money. Possibly less than half the money.

Islamic Vinegar

One school policy to rule them all; unless you are an aggrieved Muslim father in which case all bets are off.

That’s right.  Yet another dhimmi appeasement.

A Muslim father has removed his six-year-old daughter from school in protest at her teacher who confiscated her Islamic necklace.

Despite the fact that school regulations do did not permit the wearing of necklaces, Islamic or otherwise.  But Islam is a special basket case isn’t it.  So Tariq played the only card he holds in his hand – the offended Muslim trump.  And did it work?  Well what do you think?

The Year 2 pupil was told to take off her taweez – a chain containing verses from the Koran – after she was caught playing with it at Nottingham Academy last Monday.

A disciplinary action, surely.  You can’t be paying attention in class if you’re fiddling with an item of jewelery you shouldn’t be wearing in the first place.

As a result, Britain’s biggest school have now made a U-turn on their uniform policy, which dictates pupils can only wear one plain pair of metal studs, and say she can now wear the jewellery in class.

A singular act of cowardice from the school.  Religious offence dictates a change in school policy and the school is now guilty of undermining a member of its own staff for upholding the original, sensible rules and keeping discipline in the classroom.  Way to go Nottingham Academy.  You’ll be putting halal meat on the school menu for everyone, including non-Muslims, to eat next.  Oh, wait.  There’s a good chance you already do…

But now the school has shamefully caved in that should be the end of the problem, yes?

However, Mr Tariq has still pulled his daughter out of lessons for over a week after he branded the teacher’s actions an ‘insult to Islam.’

FFS!

Give these idiots an inch and they take a mile of piss.  Verbally disciplining his darling daughter and removing a necklace equates to a  religious hate crime?  Seriously?

He is now demanding that she be placed in a different class away from the teacher who banned her ‘sacred’ locket.

Well the school caved in once so why not issue another outrageous demand to see if the school rolls over even more quickly?  The law of unintended consequences anyone?

Yesterday Mr Tariq said: ‘My daughter was really upset about it when she came home – she was in floods of tears.

How traumatic!  What is the world coming to when a kuffar teacher corrects a distracted Muslim child in the classroom?

‘This is very sacred to her and to our religion. It should not be taken off Muslims and it is something she holds very dear indeed.

All secular schools must kowtow to Muslim demands or else.  Islam is a special case so your rules do not apply to Muslims and don’t you forget it.

‘To have it taken off her for the entire day and be shouted at by her teacher like that is an insult to our religion.

Diddums.   Kids get disciplined by their teachers every day but their parents don’t usually create about it or try to turn it into a religious hate crime.

She said she had only been itching her neck and had got the taweez out to scratch her neck.

Why would she need to take the entire thing out just to scratch her neck?  Or isn’t it Islamic to simply reach behind and scratch?

‘But the teacher thought she was playing with it and swinging it about.

Probably because that is precisely what the girl was doing.

‘The whole thing really upset her and I don’t think she is happy in the class any more.

Kids attend school to be educated.  Not being happy with teacher from time to time is par for the course.  Discipline in the classroom isn’t a popularity contest and nor should it ever be.  Until Miss Tariq learns that “no” means “no” she’s going to remain unhappy.  It’s a shame her father failed to teach her that before she started school.  But then he clearly doesn’t understand what “no” means either.  Nor does the school apparently.

I think it will be better if she moves to a different class so I have taken her out of school until we can get this issue resolved.

I think Tariq should be prosecuted for keeping his daughter out of school and depriving her of part of her education in an attempt to blackmail said school into giving in to his delusional demands.

The academy has now agreed that Saniya can wear the item on religious grounds – except in PE and swimming.

Spineless!

Saniya, who lives with her parents in Bakersfield, Nottinghamshire, said: ‘I wear it every day.  My taweez means a lot to me and I think she should have asked my parents before making me take it off.’

It was teacher’s fault!  And now I can play with my necklace in class whenever I want and not suffer the consequences because they would be an insult to the beliefs of my, and my parents, Dark Ages religion including the bits they make up as they go along.

Headteacher Steve Jones said: ‘After speaking to Mr Tariq about his daughter, we decided Saniya could keep her necklace on in school, under her polo shirt, apart from the PE and swimming lessons.

He’s talking like the child is a special, one-off case.  Here’s news for you Steve Jones, she isn’t and she won’t be.  Not now you have sold out your school rules.  You should have told Tariq to go up himself.  Instead you have let an Islamic genie out of the bottle that will be used against other schools now that you have set a precedent.

We would always consider exemptions on the basis of religious principles.

Then why bother having a school policy at all if any Tom, Dick or Tariq can come along and bend it to suit their own religious prejudices?

Indeed, in Saniya’s case, we were able to reach a compromise with Mr Tariq.’

So the child can remove the necklace but only when the father dictates to the school she can?  And this is called “compromise” is it?

Other parents gathered at the school gates gave mixed opinions on the incident.

One mum, whose son goes to the school, but did not wish to be named, accused the head of caving in and bending the rules.

Bending the rules in this way is a smack in the face to everyone who abides by the rules.  I wouldn’t want to send my kids to any school that prefers to undermine its own staff and policy to suit the unreasonable demands of one religiously intolerant individual.

She said: ‘It is ridiculous that they felt threatened enough to change the rules like this.

If it was a lad with a Christian cross and he was messing with it then I am almost certain the rules wouldn’t have been bent to let him wear it.

And, quite probably, would have been told not to misbehave in class if he went home and whinged to his parents about it.

At the end of the day if the girl is messing with the chain and it is distracting her or others from working then that’s why the rules are there.

Quite.  If this lady gets it why didn’t the school?

Another father said: ‘I agree it was wrong as it does mean that much to them as a religion.

Actually it doesn’t mean any such thing.  If it did the Muslim professionally aggrieved posse would have potted this supposed “insult” by challenging school policies regarding “sacred” necklaces long ago.   I suspect the Nottingham outbreak was down to a one man band.  Expect this “sacred necklace” crap to go viral.

However, they have said she can wear it in class now – so surely that should be the problem resolved.

I have a sign that says Beware Low Flying Pigs he can stick at the bottom of his garden.

If wishes were Porsches…

…our political effete, according to the recent (and ongoing) ano-cerebral effusions emanating from the LibLabCon party political conferences, remain incompetently pedestrian and intellectually gastropodal.

Trying to out-stupid everyone else by applying a thick coat of Pledge (sic) to turds and desperately making outrageous and unworkable promises that we know from bitter experience will perish faster than a duck on a lava lake if they get into office, is just scamelling embarrassing. Come the next general election, if there is a reason to vote for any these morons hidden deep within their rabid electioneering rhetorical bollocks I haven’t found it yet.

Witless Downfall

It had to happen.  The infamous Downfall internet meme has finally entered the orbit of the Fylde’s anti-fracking fraternity.  According to the Blackpool Evening Gazette, the attempt by Frack Free Fylde (FFF) to land this turkey has resulted in it burning up on reentry.

A ‘comedy’ video which shows gas fracking bosses as high-ranking Nazis has sparked controversy after it was aired at a public meeting.

I think the Gazette means niche comedy video.  It must have had the anti-frackers rolling in the aisles.  The Cuadrilla CEO is really a frustrated double glazing salesman?  It has me laughing too but not for the reason FFF intended.

The video, a scene from the war film Downfall, had been overdubbed so Adolf Hitler appears to rant about people on the Fylde coast rising up to oppose to the controversial shale gas exploration process.

Those stratosphere bound people apparently being our old friends Residents Action on Fylde Fracking (RAFF) since they are mentioned both in the narrative and the credits.

The five-minute long film was met with laughter at the meeting at St Annes community centre where Gayzer Frackman, from the pressure group Frack Free Fylde, gave a lecture.

Clearly not everyone was amused.  There was a stoolie in the audience.  And it was a shade over four minutes but why let a little thing like accuracy get in the way.

But Fylde Council leader, Coun David Eaves, has described the video as “a disgrace”.

I prefer to call it an “insight”.

And Tina Rothery, from another anti-fracking group Residents Action on Fylde Fracking (RAFF), distanced her group from the video – which has received almost 300 hits on YouTube.

Was that before or after Councillor Eaves took umbrage I wonder?  RAFF is associated with the video by name – twice.  It is partly a tribute to RAFF.  Distancing itself from the video apparently doesn’t include posting a comment below the video condemning the use of RAFF’s name.

She said: “We all have different audiences. What Gayzer attracts and what we attract are different crowds.”

Because the likes of the infamous and equally wrong Gasland is the video of choice in RAFF circles?

St Annes Town Council member Coun Carol Lanyon said: “From my personal point of view I find it distasteful.

I’d go for humourless.  Satire is supposed to be witty and/or funny even if the message is bonkers wrong.

“It’s not to say I’m in agreement with fracking, but I think there’s a better way to go about it (opposing the process) than tasteless satire.”

By using, for example, one’s position on the local council to make the case for your prejudice via a soundbite in the local rag?

However, Mr Frackman has defended his decision to show the video at the meeting, which was attended by around 40 people.

Well he would, wouldn’t he.  After all he has no hard science to fall back on, only fear-mongering and ad hominem.

He said: “You’ve got to have a little bit of humour every now and then. It’s satire and that’s been going on for years.”

I think he might mean satyr because when it comes to humour the video has the wit of a goat’s arse.

Downfall is a German language film which depicts the final 10 days of Hitler’s rule.

Mr Frackman says he found the fracking version of the film while searching for something else on internet video site YouTube, and does not know who created it.

Perhaps he was looking for the latest release of that famous eco-rock band, Shale Gas Devastation, but had to settle for second best – the Titanic of protracted, double glazing salesman punchlines.

A link to Frack Off’s website appears beneath the video, but the group has denied it is responsible.

Poor Gayzer, abandoned not once but twice.  If you can’t rely on your fellow anti-fracking activists who can you rely on?

During his speech to the meeting Mr Frackman also accused the Government of “pandering” to big oil and gas companies over plans to drill at sites on the Fylde, and hit out at claims the process could lead to cheaper energy bills for householders.

Yet despite the knives in the back he remains stolidly on-message and off the reality trolley.

Fracking is the process whereby chemicals and water are forced deep underground at high pressure to release gas

Mr Frackman said: “The only people going for (fracking) are the Government, fracking companies and their shareholders.

Yet Gayzer has no qualms about benefiting from the fruits of Gaia’s rape.  His talk wasn’t given by candlelight.  His computer isn’t made out of wood and organic cotton.  And no doubt the carpark outside wasn’t devoid of motor vehicles.

“When they get the shale out, we won’t be getting it – they’ll be selling it to the highest bidder.”

I think Gayzer should get his mental lead out.  Cuadrilla is not a charity.  Making a profit out of supplying energy is not a crime against humanity, it’s what makes the world go round and raises our standard of living from the mire of a short and often brutal primitive existence.  Unlike renewables Cuardrilla does not soak up billions in public subsidies.  Remove the money extorted from us all in order to subsidise “sustainable” wind and solar industries and they will sink without trace because they are parasites, not honest businesses.  Cuardrilla actually has the real potential to produce a commodity we desperately need – a cheap, reliable source of energy that doesn’t depend on our volatile and unpredictable weather or upon mass deforestation to make wood chip pellets for back-up power plants when the weather goes moody, as it so often does.

As for “get the shale out” I’d like to see how they extract rock from a borehole measured in inches.

Energy firm Cuadrilla has several potential drilling sites on the Fylde coast.

They’ve never made a secret of it.

Cuadrilla has declined to comment on the issue of the video.

So what?  The video says more about the anti-frackers than it does Cuadrilla.  Even the activists understand that.  With the exception of Gayzer and the Judean People’s Front FFF of course.

However a spokesman for the company said: “While we are at the exploration stage in our work to unlock Lancashire’s considerable shale gas potential, we are confident that natural gas from shale could play an important part in Britain’s energy mix.

“A growing number of reports show that shale gas could help to replace gas imports, improve energy security and create well-paid jobs in the sector.

“Gas is a commodity and, like all commodities, increasing supply, in particular supply located close to domestic demand, will exert downward pressure on price.”

Providing they frack with care because the Fylde aquifer is between them and the shale deposit, I’m not going to argue with that.

As for the Vale of Glamorgan issue alluded to in the video, I’ll let you Google that for yourselves.  It’s not the victory the anti-frackers want you to think it is, particularly since Welsh Water has now retracted its “small risk of contamination” assessment upon which the local council based it’s refusal to allow test drilling.

Trogger*

The Daily Wail is up in sanctimonious arms about a “notorious internet troll” they have exposed.  Why is the Wail’s blood up?  Because uncompromising blogger Old Holborn verbally slaughtered a couple of sacred cows that no one dare tell bad taste jokes about.  And it caused the twatterati to descend into a frenzied virtual lynch party.

This is the face of one of Britain’s most notorious internet trolls.

As his alter ego Old Holborn, Robert Ambridge is responsible for a series of vile and offensive Twitter posts that have brought him death threats.

Apparently death threats are not as vile and offensive as taking the micturation out of a taboo subject.

Thousands were outraged when Ambridge, who appears on his Twitter page with his identity disguised by a plastic pig mask, tweeted about the Hillsborough Stadium disaster. He posted a picture of two overweight women and claimed ‘this is what crushed the 96’.

Whereas the millions who have never heard of OH and are too busy having a life to tweet probably couldn’t give a stuff.

Moral outrage.  The most persistent bane of our post normal society.  A dangerous threat to free speech.  Is OH offensive?  I’d say yes, having read his blog on and off over the years.  Sometimes I agree with what he says and on other occasions I think he’s a git.  I wouldn’t issue a death threat to shut him up though no matter how offensive his remarks.  Nor would I be insisting that “something must be done” to silence him.  If he wants to be a git making gittish remarks designed to annoy authoritarian gits then that’s his prerogative.

Ambridge, 51, a recruitment consultant and father of six from Braintree, Essex, also made disgusting comments about the murder of James Bulger which deeply upset his mother. But an unrepentant Ambridge claims people who are offended by his comments have only themselves to blame.

Yes, being offended on the behalf of someone you’ve never met has become a full time sport for the perpetually affronted brigade.  My reaction?  OH is being a controversial git gleefully poking what he knows is going to be a hornets nest to provoke a reaction.  The adult thing to do, if you are offended by him, is ignore him, not give him the oxygen of publicity.  But it seems we are not dealing with adults and that includes the journalists and the police.

‘It is not my responsibility what other people find upsetting. I didn’t target anyone. I didn’t send an email. They chose to read what I wrote. If they don’t like it, they should turn it off. I don’t care what people find offensive.’

Because making crass remarks might be offensive to those prone to outrageous bouts of herd apoplexy but it is not an offence in law.   It certainly isn’t a hound ‘em and flog ‘em out of gainful employment offence.  Oh wait, yes it is.  People have the right not to be offended.  By anyone or anything.  Anywhere or at any time.  And the authorities will be there to mollycoddle wounded feelings and take names.  All in the name of social inclusivity and clamping down on naughtiness to make the world a better place for everyone who is happy being a touchy-feely herdthink drone.

Justifying his tweet about Hillsborough, he added: ‘This is dark humour. People might not like my humour but I think it is funny and it gets a chuckle.’

So where is all the outrage about taking the mickey out of fat people?  Don’t they deserve to be treated with sensitivity?  Well no, because it is socially acceptable to believe that all fat people are greedy and stupid and deserve all the derision they get even when they don’t. Unlike Merseyside’s tragically deceased they aren’t a protected species when it comes to verbal abuse or offensive jokes.  Either everyone is a target or none at all.  I’ll settle for everyone because none at all is a tyranny.

This week, the self-proclaimed ‘satirical terrorist’ will seek to justify his vitriolic internet posts in an ITV documentary called Fear And Loathing Online.

Well yes, OH can be quite loathsome when he puts his mind to it.  However the only fear in this particular Wail story comes from the death threats of the morally outraged.  OH hasn’t actually threatened anyone, merely piddled them off.  Not the same thing.  So how come he’s the only pariah in town right now?  Have the thousands of column inches dedicated to our not bombing Assad being wrong, wrong wrong, finally run out of steam?

Ambridge agreed to be filmed without his pig mask, although his face was not shown. But The Mail on  Sunday traced Ambridge to his dilapidated Victorian home in Braintree.

Matthew Hopkins journalism at its most odious.  I’ll assume that howling mobs, pitchforks and flaming torches were optional extras not available on expenses.

With an appearance more akin to Coronation Street’s hapless cafe owner Roy Cropper than a cutting-edge satirist, he initially denied he was Old Holborn.

So what is a “cutting-edge satirist” supposed to look like?  And who wrote the benchmark specifications for the physical appearance of one?  Fatuous journalism at its most infantile.

But later, speaking at the wheel of his battered Toyota vehicle, gap-toothed Ambridge said: ‘I am there to upset the apple cart. It is a form of entertainment. Trolling is like putting a fishing line in a shoal of fish and seeing what you can get.’

I can see a pattern building here.  It’s not just OH’s opinions that are low rent.  His dilapidated house, battered Toyota and crooked teeth are proof that the Wail is dealing with a lowlife scumbag who needs to be put in his place – six feet under if the Twatter mob get’s its way.  He hasn’t broken the law.  The fact that he’s overweight, white and middle aged isn’t a criminal offense although the Wail is trying to build a case on those shifting sands of stupidity.  He has six children.  So what?  I am led to believe he has worked hard to bring them up instead of relying on the state to do it.  That isn’t a crime either.

Ambridge worked for Alchemy Recruitment in Braintree until April, when he was first outed as a notorious online troll. Following his Hillsborough comments, people bombarded the firm with phone calls and threatened to burn down its offices.

OH is a blogger who stirs the smelly stuff with a big spoon and then muses upon the fruits of the fall-out.  He’s certainly not everyone’s cup of cha.  Internet trolls lead the unsuspecting into an ambush which isn’t OH’s modus operandi at all.  But then, given the inferior, poorly informed and lacking a shred of research dross that passes for journalism these days, I suppose the confusion is understandable.  After all the newfangled  blogging media has only been around for a decade and a half – give or take.  Not enough time for the legacy media to catch up.

However, the ancient practice of witch-hunting is alive and well in the twenty-first century.  Anyone associated with someone possessed of free speech a penchant for controversy an aversion to political correctness the Devil’s evil forked tongue and tail is fair game and must be purged for the good of society. Don’t you just love this popular resurgence of a deeply unsavoury hysterical historical custom?

An investigation was launched by Essex Police over tweets relating to the Boston bombing, as well as the Hillsborough disaster and the Bulger murder. Ambridge has since left the company.

So are they going to investigate everyone who believes OH is entitled to his opinion no matter what sacred cow he’s tipped?  Are they also going to investigate the death threat tweets and emails he and his former employer received?  If not, why not?  Or is it now legal and acceptable to put someone in fear of their life for upsetting the herd or because they employ someone who has?

Police said the CPS is considering whether to pursue a case of criminal communication through social media involving a 51-year-old man from Braintree.

Clearly there is a certain demographic that never found its way out of the infants playground.  It is not the job of the police to nurse bruised sensitivities and pander to the chronically indignant.  Their job is to investigate, arrest and charge actual criminals, not harass people who upset the mores of self-indulgent, social puritans. So OH caused offense with his crass and very black humour.  So what.  It’s not like he was caught red-handed molesting kiddies, drowning kittens or mugging old ladies for their bingo money.

I was disgusted by the people who happy-danced at a certain old lady’s funeral a few months back.  But they were entitled to do that. I was content to mutter “gits” at the TV screen.  I certainly wasn’t motivated to hunt them down and send them death threats on behalf of the bereaved family.  Nor do I expect the police to “investigate” the matter as a possible “hate” crime.  Yes there was hate.  A lot of it.  But was it a crime?  Hardly.

 

*  It seems the Wail doesn’t know the difference between a controversial, politically incorrect blogger and a troll, notorious or otherwise.  Hence, Trogger.

Warble Gloaming? Do you want Ice with that?

David Rose has a very fine article in the Mail today, which is sure to have Global Warming Doomsayers in a panic, and leave the BBC and the IPCC with omelette amounts of egg on their faces. The silence from the BBC is deafening and the IPCC has cancelled its latest three volume report while it desperately scrabbles for answers as to why global warming has stopped for the last 19 years, and the Artic ice, far from disappearing entirely as gleefully predicted, is already 60% larger than it was last year at this point in time.

As David Rose reports…

“Some eminent scientists now believe the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century – a process that would expose computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming as dangerously misleading.

The disclosure comes 11 months after The Mail on Sunday triggered intense political and scientific debate by revealing that global warming has ‘paused’ since the beginning of 1997 – an event that the computer models used by climate experts failed to predict.

In March, this newspaper further revealed that temperatures are about to drop below the level that the models forecast with ‘90 per cent certainty’.

The pause – which has now been accepted as real by every major climate research centre – is important, because the models’ predictions of ever-increasing global temperatures have made many of the world’s economies divert billions of pounds into ‘green’ measures to counter  climate change.

Those predictions now appear gravely flawed.”

Could this be the beginning of the end of the massive climate fraud scam? I fear not yet awhile. Politicians capacity for self deception and never admitting they are wrong, is legendary. How many trillions will they waste and how much chaos will they wreak before the truth dawns on them?

Wreck the Casbah. Again.

Ooer, Missus.  Someone really has got his knickers in a knot.

Britain has stepped through the looking glass into a weird and distorting new world, and one from which I fear she will never step back. By refusing to punish a foreign dictator for his despicable use of poison gas on unarmed civilians, we have deliberately relinquished our once-cherished role as one of the world’s foremost moral policemen, and joined the ranks of global spectators, merely tut-tutting from the sidelines rather than taking an active part in defending decency.

It seems that Andrew Roberts would have us believe that Cameron is a shining beacon of masterful statesmanship rather than the vacillating and incompetent spiv we know he really is.  It was the Assad regime wot dunnit because that is the direction in which the Prime Ministerial finger has been told to point.   Others beg to differ.  Our masters are demanding that we discriminate between two evils, despite the lack of any substantiated evidence, when it is far from clear which evil, if any, is the lesser. The only decent thing we can do in such circumstances is to not bomb the crap out of Damascus and kill even more civilians in the name of defending a questionable sense of “decency”.

A huge cultural shift has taken place in our country and historians of the future will focus on Thursday night, in the House of Commons, as the time that the new Britain emerged in all its hideous, amoral selfishness.

If future historians display the blind stupidity Andrew Roberts appears to possess who gives a Scammel Truck what they think?

The Britain we have lost is the one that took its historic responsibilities as a former Great Power seriously and sought to enforce international agreements, such as those banning the use of chemical weapons.

I think the operative word in that sentence is former, everything else is hyperventilated twaddle.  We are a small group of islands.  We are broke.  We no longer have the military might we once possessed.  We can’t even equip an aircraft carrier without the assistance of the French.  Our responsibility is to supply humanitarian aid and nothing more.  Let the Arabs sort their own mess out.  They’re going to blame us for the outcome whether we send in the missiles or not.

The Britain we must now look forward to is the one exemplified by Danny Boyle’s Olympics opening ceremony, where everything socialistic, feel-goody, hipster and ‘progressive’ was glorified, whereas the things we should really be proud about Britain for – such as her place in the front lines of the struggles against Fascism, Communism, Islamofascism and other totalitarian ideologies – were entirely ignored.

Because everyone who came out against bombing Damascus without the benefit of proof is a tofu-eating, Guardian reading surrender marmoset?  Because what we are all required to be are trained acceptance monkeys who swallow every morsel of posturing bollocks fed to us by our political effete, no questions asked?

Where were the references to Winston Churchill, 1940 or the Battle of Britain? They were replaced by children jumping up and down on NHS beds.

STOP PRESS! World War II ends in 1945.  Shift forwards sixty-eight years and the dumb as rocks legacy media runs stories about trampolining kiddies as Syria descends deeper into sectarian violence.   Meanwhile a so called academic jumps up and down on the spot, making a weapons grade prat of himself over something he clearly doesn’t have much of a clue about other than what Cameron says is true because his pal Barry told him so.  And all this before the UN investigation team have even begun to write their report.

I don’t recognise this culturally, socially and morally very different country. On Thursday night the majority of our Parliament knew that they had nothing to fear from their constituents if they indulged in a gross display of Little Englandism, in stark contrast to centuries of traditionally supporting the victims of monstrous oppression.

I don’t recall reading Roberts’ moral outrage about our non-intervention in Rwanda.  Or is genocide not as monstrously oppressive as CWs in Big Academia’s view?

And nothing qualifies as worse oppression than having at least 1,429 innocents slaughtered – 400 of those children – with a weapon so obscene that the world came together in Geneva in 1925 to outlaw it. The only people to have used this monstrous weapon since then have been Benito Mussolini against the Ethiopians in the 1930s, Adolf Hitler in his war against the Jews in the 1940s, and Saddam Hussein in his massacre of the Kurds in the 1980s.

How about the fanatical religious terrorists, Aum Shinriyko, who released Sarin gas into Tokyo’s subway in 1995?  Don’t they count because they were an evil cult rather than an evil regime?

The re-emergence of this foul weapon in the Damascus suburb ought to have – especially as we prepare to commemorate the centenary of the outbreak of the Great War – brought together the House of Commons in solemn support of the Prime Minister’s commendable efforts to punish Assad for taking it out of history’s Pandora’s Box and unleashing it on his own people.

The Prime Minister’s commendable efforts to punish someone whose guilt has only been proven in the court of Australian giant marsupialism Obama his opinion?  For once the HoC did the right thing.  There is nothing commendable about Cameron’s efforts to push us into a war where both sides are as evil as each other.

Yet instead Mr Cameron’s initiative, which stood foursquare in the historical tradition of previous prime ministers faced with such a crime, was voted down. Have we really been so traumatised by the decision to go to war against Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 and 2003 that we cannot even fire a few missiles at a vicious dictator like Assad? If so, Britain’s days as a power that deserves its prominent position in Nato and the United Nations Security Council are going to come to an end.

But we won’t be firing them at Assad.  We’ll be firing them at a city where people live.  And we will be doing it in support of Sunni terrorists rebels who are every bit as vicious as Assad and are as equally capable of using Sarin gas.  For all we know they may already have.

Our ineptitude is compounded by U.S president Barack Obama’s decisive statement last night that military strikes are needed. Yes, he is seeking congressional authority. But he has also declared that he will take unilateral action and ‘confront the menace’ alone.

Obama, no matter how tumescent for war he becomes, is going to have to consult Congress first and Congress seems so concerned about the urgency of the situation it isn’t going to convene and discuss the matter until 9th September when hopefully the information regarding the identity of the guilty parties will be more robust.  If Congress follows the UK’s lead and says no will that make the Yanks global spectating, bagel-eating surrender monkeys in Roberts’ gimlet eyes?

And what of the quality of Obama’s leadership?  This is the man who took fourteen days to admit the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, that took the lives of four American citizens including the US ambassador, was a planned and efficiently executed terrorist attack and not due to a mob enraged by by a pathetic film called Innocence of Muslims.  Suddenly he knows exactly who the Syrian CW culprits are before anyone has had a chance to actually investigate what happened?  And we are all yoghurt knitting traitors for not bowing down to The One’s prescience on all matters Middle East?

Of course there are plenty of Britons who would love to see Britain relegated to the sidelines of world history, and simply opt for the quiet life. All too often, we see on Twitter, Facebook, and blogs, a new generation who want Britain to become just another minor power that watches events from the sidelines: another Norway, Japan, Sweden or Ireland. Somewhere that likes to be liked. Lovely countries all, but they do not matter on the world stage like Britain did – until Thursday night.

That’s bollocks on steroids.  The people of this country will fight tooth and nail to protect their own against invasion no matter what bilge they spout on Twatter or Farcebook.  What we are sick to death of is brain-dead, glory hunting, self-aggrandising politicians getting us involved in wars we have no business poking our noses into especially when we don’t have an ice crystal’s chance in hell of either winning or improving the situation by bombing stuff and hoping for the best.  We already know from bitter experience that this strategy doesn’t work.

I could continue to fisk Roberts’ dross but what would be the point?  It seems that Roberts’ main gripe is that the so called, very one-sided “special relationship” has been fatally compromised.  He thinks that because the majority of people in Britain are against intervention in Syria, with or without proof, its because we are all traitors in the Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden mould.  He fails to consider that we’re Scammelling sick of bankrolling and fighting foreign wars that improve nothing, solve nothing, achieve nothing and come at a cost in lives politicians and their families rarely, if ever, have to pay.

Ever since the initial footage of an unconfirmed CW attack was released onto YouTube the US and UK governments have been arguing the case for “punishing” Assad because the “rebels” couldn’t possibly have obtained a CW (Sarin gas) and deployed it. If Sarin gas is so hard to obtain, unless you are a tyrannical government, how did the religious fanatics of Aum Shinrikyo managed to get hold of enough of the stuff to launch not one but two attacks before they were caught?

The first attack, in 1994 killed seven people and injured five hundred.  The second attack came in 1995, when Sarin gas was released into the Tokyo subway during the morning rush hour.  Eight people died  and thousands were injured, many critically.  It remains the worst terrorist atrocity to take place on Japanese soil.  So who supplied the cult with CW?  Some rogue state?  No.  They manufactured it themselves in a laboratory.  Is it such a huge leap to believe that Islamic terrorists, who we know can manufacture Ricin, also have the knowledge to manufacture Sarin gas?  After all, the poison has been around since 1938 so the procedure can’t be that complicated.

To point the finger at Assad alone is disingenuous.  It is a dangerous lie to insist that only the Assad regime has the capability to possess and deploy CWs in Syria.  To go ahead and launch missiles using this deeply suspect presumption as a justification  is nothing less than a war crime.

Hysterical warmongering aside, no must mean no.  We’ve had enough of this false prospectus, interventionist BS.  End of.

 

Trifecta: Obama’s “Foreign Policy” of Confusion, Weakness

Bill Whittle, Scott Ott, Steve Green at PJTV:

Al Qaeda Is On The Run? Obama’s Foreign Policy Projects Confusion and Weakness

August 6, 2013 — Part 1 of 3, per PJTV

Phil Ossify

Phil Plait (sic), an astronomer and climate alarmist who bizarrely states to possess The entire universe in blog form is a self confessed zombie slayer. His zombies are very scary because they take the shape of ideas of climate change denial. Because climate change deniers and their heretical ideas are born from the festering boils on Satan’s scaly backside and it is the bounden duty of the righteous to kill dissent the facts evil unbelievers.

Thus he tilts at his own personal windmill wind turbine when he attempts to slay this anti-AGW beast 0f an idea, armed only with a Warmist approved crib sheet and a small group of sycophants acolytes.

As someone who speaks out against those who deny climate change…

But he doesn’t mean climate change, does he. He means Anthropogenic Global Warming. Only an imbecile denies the existence of climate change. AGW sceptics don’t deny climate change. They do, however, question the extent to which human activity affects the climate. And that gets right up Phil’s nose.

again

Oh, those wacky professional climate change deniers! Once again, they’ve banded together a passel of people, 90 percent of whom aren’t even climatologists…

Clearly Phil doesn’t do irony well. Or perhaps understand it either since he’s an astronomer and not a climatologist. He obligingly supplies a link to the offending document but doesn’t go quite so far as to pointing out which parts of the nearly fact free opinion piece are bilge and which parts are nonsense. Or, for that matter, which fact or facts he considers to be correct. Given his in-your-face, post normal science credentials I’m assuming the facts he’s happy with are the very facts under dispute by the signatories. After all, who wants to read about the claims of that international relations and public administration guru august scientist, Ban Ki-Moon, a world renown climatologist, being being brought into disrepute by all those upstart physicists, chemists, geologists, engineers and meteorologists?

And then there is that pesky “cherry-picked” graph that David Rose, a Daily Mail journalist, used to demonstrate the ongoing lack of warming that came to a halt in 1997.

The first graph clearly incenses Phil.  Not because the data is wrong, which it isn’t, but because it begins in 1997.  You see it is difficult to put a nice, straight, upwardly trending line through truncated data that clearly shows a flat line.  So Phil helpfully supplies a second graph, one whose plotted data begins somewhere in the mid seventies, so he can draw his neat, upwardly mobile line.

But wait.  Didn’t the previous cool period end sometime in the mid seventies?  You know, the same cool period that had climatology Cassandras predicting an imminent ice age?  Wouldn’t the exclusion of that data give the false impression that the climate was warming prior to the vague starting date of Phil’s preferred graph?  Did he think no one would notice his own cherry-picking?

…and again

Ah, yes. Hot from the University of Consensus, Not Facts.  It seems that I am forced to repeat myself so here goes.

Fact: CAGW sceptics do not deny the reality existence of global warming.

Fact: CAGW sceptics do not deny that man does alter the climate in a certain way, albeit in a mostly localised way (UHI, agriculture, pastoralism etc) and has done for thousands of years. It is interesting that Phil uses the word reality rather than existence because clearly his reality does not inhabit the realm of real world data. Even his own alarmist side has finally acknowledged that global surface temperature stopped rising sixteen years ago. Phil desperately needs to keep up to speed on the recent developments otherwise he could end up sounding like a fool.

Uh oh.  Too late.

…and again

Apparently a burning issue within the alarmist camp Phil’s reality is who labelled what.

Seriously…

…and again….

Carbon dioxide is eeeeeeevil! And Mariana Ashley agrees.

Mariana Who?

Oh, that Mariana Ashley.

Mariana Ashley is a freelance blogger who primarily writes about how online education and technology are transforming academia as we know it. Having spent a good portion of her professional career trying to reform high schools in East St. Louis, Mariana is particularly interested in how online colleges in Missouri make higher education a possibility for students of all backgrounds.

I see she’s very shy about touting her degree in climatology.  Or Phil is a shameless hypocrite.

I knew exactly what Marshall Shepherd, the 2013 president of the American Meteorological Society, meant the moment he talked about having to slay the “zombie theories of climate science.

Strangely enough AGW sceptics have the same problem. As for zombie slaying, it seems that Marshall received the idea first. Phil borrowed his slayership from Marshall just like he’s borrowed the rest of his warmist mantra from fellow alarmists.  I have yet to encounter an original idea in Phil’s posts.  All his arguments are from discredited, climate groupthink authority.

These are ideas that cannot be killed, no matter how thoroughly they are debunked. They always rise to shamble again, reanimated by the deniosphere.

Yes, the idea that honest data and falsifiable empirical evidence trumps climate modelling and name-calling does have that peculiar undead quality. It simply refuses to lie down and die in the face of stupidity.

The Hockey Stick is broken.

True.

…the world hasn’t warmed in 16 years…

Also true.

Antarctic ice is growing.

At a rapid rate.

These ideas are all wrong, demonstrably so, but they are still walking the countryside, looking to eat innocent people’s brains.

These facts are all correct, demonstrably so. Even the most senior of warmists have conceded that warming has ceased. They are all deniers now. Except Phil and his cheerleaders of course.

The only way to slay these undead specters is to keep hammering them, repeating the facts, getting the word out there, and making the message palatable to the folks who may not have all the information they need to make an informed decision on global warming.

Phil’s problem is that people are discovering the information they need to make an informed decision on global warming. Unfortunately for Phil it isn’t the right kind of information. Hysteria and alarmism tend not to make any kind of message palatable especially when it is becoming increasingly expensive to keep warm in winter. I award Phil an F for his communication skills.

Which brings us back to Shepherd. He gave a great TEDxAtlanta talk where he takes on the teeming mass of climate change denial zombie ideas.

The science has moved on, even for the warmists. Watch the video and decide for yourselves which side owns the teeming mass of climate change zombie ideas.

I love this guy. He’s reasoned, genial, and calm.

A veritable paragon of warmist virtue, I’m sure.

My favorite part was at 11:34 into his talk, when he says weather is your mood, but climate is your personality.

Which is as meaningless as saying weather is your toast but climate is a full English breakfast. But hey, Phil was impressed so you should be too.

This one is important because the deniers love to say, “what global warming?” every time it snows. Incredibly, though, this type of claim seems to work; people tend to believe more in global warming after a hot summer and less after it’s cold. Slaying that particular zombie would go a long way toward more folks accepting that global warming is real.

Yes, how silly of people to point out the bleeding obvious mistake  summer and winter for regular seasons rather than what they really are; runaway global warming.

Tied to this is the idea that we can’t be certain what the future holds. Climate models aren’t perfect, so we can’t be 100 percent sure how much the world is warming.

Because the climate models predicted more snow, not less. They predicted that temperature is not driven by increasing levels of atmospheric CO2. And they also predicted the ongoing sixteen year halt in warming. Except no, they didn’t predict any of those things.  They can’t even simulate past climate.  We might be able to guess what the future holds but in truth we have no idea really. Nor do climate models. The only certainty is uncertainty and guesswork.  You’d think that Phil would understand that.

However, when it comes to knowing that climate change is real and we’re in for trouble, the models are already good enough.

Hardly.

The hockey-stick graph is quite real and has withstood years of slings and arrows flung at it by the deniers.

Right up until the moment it was defenestrated by the corrupt and biased UN IPCC for being too embarrassingly wrong for even it to stomach.

And in fact the models are getting better all the time; it’s getting hotter, and in the next few decades we’re in for a hell of a time.

The only thing getting hotter is Phil’s warmist fever.

We need to be doing something about this, and now.

Think of the cheeeeldren!

We need to be investigating nonfossil fuel energy sources far more, really leaning in on finding more efficient uses of the fossil fuels we do have to use, and legislating ways of making sure there are incentives for people and companies to do so.

Using fossil fuels more efficiently will benefit everyone. Making them unaffordable in order to fund unreliable renewable energy that needs fossil fuel back-up is insane. State “incentives” to replace reliable fossil fuels with hideously expensive and inadequate green energy is killing people and industry. Bad idea. Very bad idea.

But instead we have to waste our time fighting the horde of zombie denials and trying to be heard above the well-funded and very loud groups who rely on distraction and false doubt to spread their viral ideas. This is the zombie apocalypse, and, unfortunately, it’s all too real.

And Phil calls himself a scientist…

Banks open, citizens are now to forget the last two weeks

Back in the days of the iron curtain, the East Germans had department stores and they were ‘open’

Open in the sense that the doors were open, but not open in the sense they could discharge their raison d’etre, namely supplying goods people wanted to buy with hard currency. This was not entirely their fault. The East-Mark was a joke currency and whilst people would go in and buy anything that was for sale, it was simply a case of get it whilst it was available, because the supply chain wasn’t exactly efficient either.

Now what has this jaunt down memory lane got to do with contemporary events you ask? Well the media has been reporting that the Cypriot banks are now open. Of course you can’t draw out vey much or cash cheques and quite how the import supply chain is going to work seems to have been missed by everyone*

But what really got my spidey-senses tingling was a talking head on the TV this morning explaining that this was the best possible outcome for Cyprus. Now setting aside the normalcy bias this seemed an astonishing statement. Talking-head explained that if Cyprus left the Euro, their currency might depreciate by more than 40% and really the government was helping its hapless populace (sic). You see, they aren’t criminal looting scum, they are helping. Not Orwellian at all.

So let’s set aside that their banking system will now die. The currency controls aren’t worth a damn because it will just mean a slow death not a fast one. It may allow breathing space for some kind of re-capitalisation, but no-one wants to do that; that’s what started this whole farce in the first place. Let’s set aside that devoid of 40% of their cash, large numbers of businesses will clearly go bust then watch unemployment zoom (and then watch it get ugly). Let’s also set aside that the tourist industry (which I guess is their second biggest industry) will be decimated. Would you go there as a cash rich foreigner? You may as well paint a bulls-eye on your back. Let’s set aside that any kind of major purchases (cars, houses, holidays) are now more or less impossible without government permission (so bye-bye property rights) and this thieving is the kind of nonsense we expect to see in South America.

None of that matters because a new Cypriot pound might depreciate against the Euro by more than 40% so this is the best option ~ apparently. Well of course, it might well depreciate but then, imagine what a weak currency might do for the tourist industry. Perhaps not looting savers in the first place would have protected the existing banks. Even if they went bust (but were not looted) others could set-up, and in a few years the currency might recover. Currency fluctuations are temporary, looting is for life. But no, this is the best option, because the telly-box says so.

* If you can’t take money out of Cyprus, how can you import stuff?

Govt. propose removal of AGW from under 14s curriculum, Guardianistas outraged

Oh dear, so sad, too bad. I am motivated to play a tune on Nick’s micro-violin.

Debate about climate change has been cut out of the national curriculum for children under 14, prompting claims of political interference in the syllabus by the government that has failed “our duty to future generations”.

Climate change? Let’s inject some honesty here, Juliette. When you say climate change you actually mean Anthropogenic Global Warming. You know, that humungous politico-scientific scam that has finally been falsified to the point that even warmist scientists pro-AGW climatologists activists are admitting their evidence climate models were not merely wrong but very wrong. All the accruing, real life evidence to the AGW contrary has a lot of warmists on the run; at least the ones who are astute enough to see which way the empirical wind is blowing. To be frank, I see this draft, should it be adopted, as a welcome reversal of the political interference that forced AGW into the curriculum and propagandised our kids, scaring them stupid with visions of a greenie auto-da-fe. And this was initiated by the very same government that spectacularly failed in its duty to ensure that future generations weren’t burdened with the biggest debt in UK history.

The latest draft guidelines for children in key stages 1 to 3 have no mention of climate change under geography teaching and a single reference to how carbon dioxide produced by humans impacts on the climate in the chemistry section. There is also no reference to sustainable development, only to the “efficacy of recycling”, again as a chemistry subject.

What’s this? An outbreak of common sense regarding sustainable development? Can’t have that…

The move has caused alarm among climate campaigners and scientists who say teaching about climate change in schools has helped mobilise young people to be the most vociferous advocates of action by governments, business and society to tackle the issue.

Yes, all those brainwashed pre-fabricated neo-inquisitors little activists lost to the cause. What a tragedy.

“What you seem to have is a major political interference with the geography syllabus,” said the government’s former science adviser Prof Sir David King. He said climate change should be taught alongside the history of – successful – past attempts to curb chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), which is blamed for the depletion of the ozone layer, and air pollution caused by coal fires and cars.

And King, who took the Labour coin as its chief scientific advisor, wasn’t politically motivated by his paymaster’s agenda at all.

“If all of these aren’t issues for geography classes, then where should they be taught?” asked King. “It would be absurd if the issues around environmental pollution weren’t core to the curriculum.I think we would be abdicating our duty to future generations if we didn’t teach these things in the curriculum.”

Assuming that carbon dioxide is a pollutant – which it isn’t.

The draft contrasts with the existing curriculum: under the heading of geography, there are several mentions of the interdependence of humans and their environment and the impact of that on change, including “environmental change”. The current syllabus explicitly discusses sustainable development and “its impact on environmental interaction and climate change”.

The current syllabus is explicitly biased when it comes to the warmist interpretation of “climate change”. No sensible person would argue against a balanced curriculum. So what does that make you and your pals, Juliette?

“It’s just hollowed out argument,” said John Ashton, the government’s climate change envoy until last summer, and a founder of the independent not-for-profit group E3G. “Climate change should have as much prominence as anything in teaching geography in schools.”

If you listen hard enough you can hear the sound of this rent-seeker’s P45 being printed out. How I love the sound of greenie wailing and gnashing of teeth. It’s so cathartic.

The shift of any mention of climate change from geography to chemistry “makes me more concerned, not less”, said Ashton. “What’s important is not so much the chemistry as the impact on the lives of human beings, and the right place for that is geography.”

Because who cares what atmospheric chemists and physicists have to say. Science has no place in climatology. Yes, I can see that now…

The proposed changes, which are still under consultation by the Department for Education (DfE), were broadly welcomed by other groups, including the Geographical Association which represents more than 6,000 geography teachers, and the Royal Geographical Society.

So the geographers are happy about the proposed changes. That kind of puts a spanner into the greenies gears, surely.

“In the past, in some instances, young people were going to start on climate change without really knowing about climate,” said Rita Gardner, the RGS director, who does, however, want climate change taught at GCSE and A-level. “What we have got [in the new draft] is a much better grounding in geography, and it has the building blocks for a much better understanding of climate change and sustainability.”

That’s all good and dandy. I don’t have a problem with climate change being on the curriculum but let’s make sure it’s based on science and not on faith, okay? And let’s hear both sides of the sustainability ideology. And how it measures up to the fact that if CO2 is such a dangerous pollutant why are we about to burn millions of tons of US trees in a ludicrous attempt to decarbonise ourselves back into the pre-industrial era?

A DfE spokesman said the idea that climate change was being excised from the national curriculum was nonsense: “All children will learn about climate change. It is specifically mentioned in the science curriculum and both climate and weather feature throughout the geography curriculum.”

Three cheers for the science curriculum. So long as it isn’t dumbed down with AGW bias as it currently is.

Supporters of the government’s move pointed out that geography teachers could still teach specific issues such as “how human and physical processes interact to have an impact on and form distinctive landscapes”.

Putting the geography back into geography and (hopefully)removing the pro-AGW activism. What’s not to like?

Other potential lead-ins to climate change include specified teaching about ecosystems, the accumulation of toxic materials in natural life, and the difficulty for some species in adapting to changes in their environment.

Yes, but let’s not limit that accumulation of toxic materials to non-toxic CO2, eh? And please let me witness the struggle of greenies as they twist in the wind (sic) to prevent changes to their cosy little authoritarian environment.

A source at the Liberal Democrat-led Department for Energy and Climate Change said they were relaxed about the changes: “There’s nothing from the DfE that says climate change is off the agenda or will never be taught. Sensible teachers will look at that as the broadest of signposting.”

So how come the LibDem-led DECC refuses to look at the broadest of signpostings that AGW is one huge crock of the proverbial?

However, the UK Youth Climate Coalition (UKYCC) said climate change was too important to be left to the whim of individual teachers.

Christ on a pogo stick! If the Guardian scrape the bottom of the activist barrel much harder they’ll run out of barrel.

“It appears climate change is being systematically removed from the curriculum, which is not acceptable when this is the biggest challenge our generation is going to face, the biggest challenge future generations are going to focus on,” said Camilla Born, an international expert at UKYCC.

Sadly hyperbole isn’t being systematically removed from the greenie rhetoric which is clearly too big a challenge for those suffering from a failure of logic and the ability to read the draft correctly.

Critics also point out that the danger of waiting until GCSE courses to teach about climate change in any depth is that only a minority of pupils study geography at that level.

But strangely those same critics fail to point out that despite brainwashing children to the greenie cause, the majority dump the main subject pushing the AGW BS hypothesis at the first available opportunity. Looks suspiciously like the kids are far smarter than the greenies want to believe.

Sarah Lester, a policy researcher specialising in climate change education at the Grantham Institute of Climate Change at Imperial College, London, said also rejected the argument that pupils first needed to learn the “building blocks” before they were taught about climate change. Such issues were already taught in the three sciences, even religious education and citizenship – and “all come together in geography”, said Lester. “I don’t think that’s what’s being done: I think it [climate change] is just being stripped out of the curriculum.”

Ah, the fragrant aroma of warmist rent-seeker panic. Shame it can’t be bottled.

Dhimmi Chucklelugs Rides Again…

Our favourite Trainee King is on top simpering form today on his tour of the Middle East. Talking to those lovely chaps in Qatar, he has let it be known that he is so fascinated by Muslim culture that he has been taking lessons in Arabic for the last six months, so that he can read the Koran in it’s original form.

Well best of luck with that Your Hopelessness. The man who tried to teach you Welsh, once told me that you have about as much natural ability in learning languages as a poached egg.

“I tried to learn it once but I gave up. It goes in one ear and out the other.”

Yes some of us have already spotted the gaping chasm between your left and right earlobes, Your Obtuseness.

This is all a warm up for him becoming the Defender of Faiths when he finally Zimmer frame assisted ascends to the Throne of course.  And we can look forward to more Peers of the Realm of this Calibre. I’m sure.

Meanwhile, his Consort, (Keith Richard’s mum) was having a chat with the ladies of Qatar. Seems they are rapidly moving from the 7th Century and are almost approaching the 17th… They’ve got jobs! Well not quite real ones, more home shopping really. But hey it’s a start isn’t it?

I could be a slippery slope though for you Qatari males if you don’t keep an eye on them you know. Mobile phone parties today, Ann Summers Hen do’s tomorrow. “No it’s an electric toothbrush Ali, honest! You know how much you love my smile. It’s the only thing that isn’t covered up”.

%d bloggers like this: