sda2.jpg

November 19, 2006

All Your Weather Are Belong To Us

Just as skeptics are beginning to note that the troublesome "global warming" mantra is being quietly replaced by the more meteorologically inclusive "climate change" - along comes a new catch phrase. Remember where you heard it first.

But the meeting has delayed until next year a decision on who should run funds to help poor countries adapt to climate change.

"Rich countries should have achieved more at this conference and made more firm commitments to combat climate injustice," said Sharon Looremeta of environmental group Practical Action.


Climate "injustice".

To my friends concerned with the legitimate environmental debate: that's code that even you should be able recognize.

"Justice" is an construct of human social interactions. No scientist with a sliver of intellectual self-respect would be caught dead using the word in that context - it suggests that a natural climate unmolested by mankind's activity would be more considerate in how it applies its effects to human populations.

When someone promotes concepts like "climate injustice" they're not talking about the environment. They're talking about your money and mine, and how to get their hands on as much of it as possible.

Remember: socialism isn't a political ideology - it's a pyramid scheme.

The rich get richer, and the poor end up in unmarked graves and re-education camps.

"Environmentalism" was hijacked by the hard left at least a decade ago, and some of us are starting to wonder what it's going to take for you to figure that out. And the Kyoto Protocol? Just more UN-brokered "politics of envy" in hemp and Birkenstock disguise.

Related.

Posted by Kate at November 19, 2006 11:25 AM
Comments

You say "Environmentalism was hijacked by the hard left...".

Could it be because the right wing in protecting their corporate profits did not give a damn about the environmet? Somebody had to fill the void.

Posted by: Canuckguy at November 19, 2006 12:55 PM

Canada can easily decrease carbon emissions by implementing a zero immigration policy.

Since we have a birth rate below 2.1, let's ban immigration until efficiencies and depopulations bring us to 1990 carbon emission levels. It makes no sense to import people from low carbon footprint countries to a cold and vast high footprint country like Canada, what with our central heating and minivans and urban sprawl, while simultantously aiming to decrease carbon emissions both in Canada and globally.

Let's do the globally responsible thing. Let's ban immigration, and save the environment.

Your move, greenies :-)

Posted by: Bob at November 19, 2006 1:02 PM

EVERYONE . . should read this document . . .

Print a hardcopy, read it slowly, examine the graphs . . . speaks volumes of truth.


3w.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/11/05/warm-refs.pdf;jsessionid=BURQP2CCU1I5HQFIQMGSFF4AVCBQWIV0


The great Kyoto ponzi scheme is coming unglued, one small step at a time.

Some journalist somewhere is going to blow the lid of the mess and get him or her a Pullitzer.

The UN, corrupt from the loading dock to Kofi's office.

Posted by: Fred at November 19, 2006 1:08 PM

EXACTLY,. Your post, Kate, makes MORE sense than all of Suzuki and Gore's propaganda has in the last decade.

It is so laughable when the MSM keeps on using phrases as "it is widely believed". Ha. Alien crop circles and Y2K were also widely believed. Why ? Because the Media kept reporting on it as if they were true/real.

"Global warming" , turns out is nothing new,lost it's luster.

Then "Climate Change", has always been happening, can't fool people with that one anymore. Gone too.

Now "Climate Injustice", will try to guilt trip us for awhile with that one.

The description of Socialism as a "Pyramid Scheme" has got to be a MILESTONE !!

The Environmental movement(which at first was undoubtedly good) was definitely hyjacked by Enviro-terrorist-wingnuts. Dr. Patrick Moore, a Canadian, greenspirit.com, was in the middle of this battle 2 decades ago. His own Greenpeace International was taken over by East Block failures when the Berlin Wall fell in 1989.

greenspirit.com "Hard Choices for the Environmental Movement" will explain it all. Especially for Environmentalists worried about our planet.

The sad part in all this is the MSM. One might think they could be charged with misleading Canadians. A Clear and Present Danger.

Posted by: B. Hoax Aware at November 19, 2006 1:17 PM

Just more UN-brokered "politics of envy" in hemp and Birkenstock disguise.

I don't know who wrote this line but it's still got me laughing. Well written truth always makes me smile. Really well written truth makes me laugh out loud I'm so happy.

Pat

Posted by: Pat at November 19, 2006 1:19 PM

Right wing ? protecting corporate profits ? Paul Martin passes a law allowing himself to register his csl boats offshore . Csl building ships in China .And we all know how much the hard left liberals improved the climate . Four plus billion dollars up in smoke and greenhouse gas emissions up 30 per cent . yep

Posted by: john demerais at November 19, 2006 1:20 PM

Here is the K Factor. It's conclusive. K is being emitted next February, 2007 by the UN's smog-pollution factory.

Guess who is "the world's biggest emitter*"?

K knows all; K will tell all in February next; K is an "authoritative U.N. network of 2,000 scientists ". Mao K*yoto Strong is a con$ultant to K.

K is *Rajendra K. Pachauri. K will grab headlines. Promise? ...-

"The weight of science, economics and politics is pushing the world's biggest emitter in that direction.

The science will grab headlines in February, when an authoritative U.N. network of 2,000 scientists issues its first detailed update in six years of the state of climate research. It will present "much stronger evidence" that manmade emissions are changing the climate, says chief scientist Rajendra K. Pachauri." ...-
3w.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1741187/posts

Posted by: maz2 at November 19, 2006 1:21 PM

"Could it be because the right wing in protecting their corporate profits did not give a damn about the environmet? Somebody had to fill the void."

Travel around communist China and report back on how the environmental degradation there compares to where us greedy profit-loving North Americans are living.

It is the ideological blindness of "climate injustice" socialists who refuse to acknowledge that the US has reduced emissions dramatically and that great strides are being made (by ghastly capitalists) towards green technology. What's causing this shift? The profit-motive, as businesses go after changing consumer priorities and demand.

Our rich country happens to be in a subarctic/arctic climate. Of course my percapita energy use is going to be more that someone in temperate Sierra Leone.

I shuddered the other morning, as on CBC Radio One they had moved on from discussing peak oil theory to "peak people". What happens when these one world government socialists decide that there's too many people for our environment? In effect that is the entire basis of their theories, that humanity's day-to-day survival in itself is pollution. That we are seperate from Nature, that we should play by different rules. I can't drive a car but Mt. St. Helens can explode for weeks.

Posted by: Elizabeth at November 19, 2006 1:22 PM

This link is not operational. Am I missing something?

3w.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/11/05/warm-refs.pdf;jsessionid=BURQP2CCU1I5HQFIQMGSFF4AVCBQWIV0

Posted by: Pat at November 19, 2006 1:22 PM

Did anyone see the Fifth Estate the other night. The show was called "THE DENIAL MACHINE" It was the most biased
piece of propaganda I have ever seen. It was anti Conservative party as well as anti American (read Bush). It tried to tie big tobacco
with people that have seen through Kyoto. With the usual Liberal m.o it labelled Kyoto detractors as either being stupid
or bought off by big oil.
On another CBC program recently I watched as an expert on climate demonstrated, by coring old trees that 400 years ago the
prairies were hotter and drier for decades at a time. Worse than modern prairie dwellers have ever seen (Including the dirty 30's)

I thought, finally the truth is coming out, and on the CBC yet, Halleluiah. My euphoria didn't last long. Unbelievably it then rolled into a
man made, greenhouse gas. pro Kyoto propaganda piece. Totally ignoring the scientific facts they had just shown on the first half of the program.

I have sent an email to the CBC ombudsman (first time) but I don't really expect anything back. Between the CBC and CTV(Bell, Globe &mail) I am surprised
we get any real (un filtered, Liberal biased) news at all. Shutting down CBC would however be a good start.

Posted by: sageone at November 19, 2006 1:32 PM

Elizabeth, end-of-the-world Cults do not want to be confused with the facts or reasoning. From Jimmy Jones to Kyoto, the method is the same. Fear, panic, the end is coming, DO AS I SAY.. google ~ Earth Charter Oak Lake MB ~ A Cult to end all Cults, the 21st century will be our last, and all that.

Posted by: B. Hoax Aware at November 19, 2006 1:36 PM

"This link is not operational. Am I missing something?"

Pat,

Change "3w" to "www" and it'll work.

Ken

Posted by: Ken at November 19, 2006 1:45 PM

Dear John Demerais,

You're right. Paul Martin did do all of those things. Hmm. I guess it must mean that the Liberals aren't the Left after all. Wow.

Posted by: craig at November 19, 2006 1:46 PM

Once again, the measures being urged have little basis in fact or science. Once again, groups with other agendas are hiding behind a movement that appears high-minded. Once again, claims of moral superiority are used to justify extreme actions. Once again, the fact that some people are hurt is shrugged off because an abstract cause is said to be greater than any human consequences. Once again, vague terms like sustainability and generational justice --- terms that have no agreed definition --- are employed in the service of a new crisis.

Michael Crichton article "Why Politicized Science is Dangerous"

It makes for an interesting read. It can be found here:
3w.michaelcrichton.net/fear/

Posted by: ural at November 19, 2006 2:16 PM

"Could it be because the right wing in protecting their corporate profits did not give a damn about the environmet? "

What a crock. Better still the left looks to loot the treasuries of the west to fill the pockets of their friends. Example the east coast seal hunt brings in approximately sixteen million dallars a year to those who participate in the hunt. Greenpeace rakes in over a hundred million dollars a year protesting the hunt.

Climate change? NEWS FLASH the climate has always changed. The looney left goes after CO2 as if it were a precurser of Global warming when in reality there is no correllation between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and global temperatures. They ignore solar cycles, volcanic activity and anything else that proves them wrong. Note this little article from the WP

"By Susan DeFord
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 3, 2005; Page GZ03

Amid all the death and destruction caused this year by hurricanes, national weather experts have this advice: Get used to it.

"We have now entered a multi-decade cycle in which we expect hurricanes to be more intense and more frequent," said Nicholas K. Coch, a professor of geology at Queens College in New York who has spent years examining the history and dynamics of hurricanes. His studies have convinced him that the chances of a major hurricane striking the populous northern Atlantic coast, from Virginia through New England,are increasing."

I would venture to say that this years lack of hurricanes will undoubtly be called a fluke rather than part of a natural cycle.


But look how the kooky left reacts when the dig appears to be headed in their direction
CTV NEWS
Oct 3, 2006


In addition to defending his environmental record, the premier(McGuinty) also sent a warning to the federal government.

He told Ottawa not to come down hard on the auto industry in an effort to reduce greenhouse gasses.

"The one thing we will not abide is any effort on the part of the national government to unduly impose greenhouse gas emission reductions on the province of Ontario at the expense of our auto sector," McGuinty said.

I guess Mcguinty would rather raid Alberta coffers than pilfer his own.


First nations water supplies are well below the standard of the rest of Ontario and too many have boil water advisories, yet the left has a more pressing concern, an invisible gas sold with a busted hockey stick(Canadians love of all things Hockey sarc.)

The Hockey Stick Graph Busted
From Technology Review
"McIntyre and McKitrick created some meaningless test data that had, on average, no trends. This method of generating random data is called Monte Carlo analysis, after the famous casino, and it is widely used in statistical analysis to test procedures. When McIntyre and McKitrick fed these random data into the Mann procedure, out popped a hockey stick shape!"
More here on busting the Hockey stick
3w.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/Climate_H.pdf

I emphasise the Hockey Stick Graph because it was the main piece of so called evidence used to convince Canadians of man made global warming. The hockey stick is in effect a global fraud as is Kyoto.

Fight real pollution not invisble hogwash.


Posted by: one of the other greg's at November 19, 2006 2:19 PM

wow Katherine, is there anything out there like this that escapes your gaze?

Posted by: qwerty at November 19, 2006 2:44 PM

Could it be because the right wing in protecting their corporate profits did not give a damn about the environmet? Somebody had to fill the void.

Posted by: Canuckguy at November 19, 2006 12:55 PM "

the collapse of eastern bloc communism exposed the worst wide area contamination ever. a legacy of the stalinist era.

on the other hand, the prosperity we in n america have because of the success of our economic/socio/political model, provided those of us with the inclination, the resources and time and clout necessary to raise a collective NIMBY. as a consequence the offenders had to literally and figuratively 'clean up their act'.

anybody else need some spin doctoring? LOL !!!

Posted by: qwerty at November 19, 2006 2:57 PM

A question about polluted water supplies on Native Reserves, and now a boil water order for BC. Why isn't our Dart team out their producing good water. What stats were given as to how many gallons of pure water Dart could produce/day.
What is next, an order that one can only drive on odd days, breath on even days, work on days ending in Y, unless it is a holiday. These idiots wouldn't know good science if it hit them in you know where. Lets make donations to greenpeace, save the (pick your species) and other envirowacko organizations non deductible. Global warming is the new religion of all leftist kooks.
My solution to co2 reduction is for all liberals, torontarians, ndpers, green supporters stop breathing for 10 minutes/hour, preferably at the same time each day. They could do this at the same time the muslims pray. Also, ban immigration from mid east countries.

Posted by: maryT at November 19, 2006 3:06 PM

"qwerty at November 19, 2006 02:44 PM"

Please select a different nickname, as we have a regular commentor who has used it for some months. Add a "2" if you prefer.

Posted by: Kate at November 19, 2006 3:11 PM

This whole idea of global warming climate change is being pushed by the watermellon enviromentalists GREEN ON THE OUTSIDE RED ON THE INSIDE who want to take away our electricty our homes our cars and have us living a miserble 3rd world existence its time to and whats more our senate has refused to ratifi the junk science inspired KYOTO TREATY its time to send the kyoto treaty to the paper shreader its not worth risking our nations jobs and economy over something based wholey on junk science and unreliable computer simulations

Posted by: spurwing plover at November 19, 2006 3:15 PM

Apparently, Minister Ambrose is now back on board with Kyoto:

3w.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=8cf4fde5-f400-4f88-83d3-d372d693bb60&k=42398

It's strange that the commenters here are so dismissive of the greenhouse gas-cliimate change thesis, given that just about every government on the planet--including the favoured CPC back home--agrees on the legitimacy of the basic science and the need to reduce industrial emissions. You must know something they do not.

Posted by: A at November 19, 2006 3:17 PM

"Climate injustice"....I smell a Third World shake-down, shades of master shake-down artist Jesse Jackson, in play here.

How fast before Friends of the Dinosaurs surfaces wanting reparations too?

Posted by: penny at November 19, 2006 3:31 PM

This just goes to show. That the left believes in magic.

Of words to change one to seem to be another. If only we find the right word they chant in the drafty halls of there webbed minds.

Than they will believe & follow us. We will dazzle them into compliance with our audio switch of the month.

Orwell was correct in using a pig farm as his analogy on socialism. The smell of hypocrisy, is nose numbing. Let alone the greed glimmering in the eyes of these con men.

This is about the mental heights they can reach logically. Only a superstitious ignominious, would believe a word change, can dispel their lies of this being a money transfer program to our very enemies. I am sick of thee traitors allied with the Jihadists.

Both of them are anti-human death cults.

Its about time we got severe with these deluded misfits. Send them to these Islamic paradises for free. A one way ticket. Either that or send the Quislings to jail for life.

Posted by: Revnant Dream at November 19, 2006 3:53 PM

You will not believe what the weather tinkers are up to now.

Check it out here.

http://tinyurl.com/agfqx

Posted by: John at November 19, 2006 3:59 PM

'climate injustice'. What a marvellous term; only a socialist, only a mindless and arrogant leftist, could coin such a term - essentially stating that the Natural World was actually a Social World and could by, indeed must be, controlled by man.

Posted by: ET at November 19, 2006 4:04 PM

So far, no environmental injustice in the Maritime Provinces caused by global warming. If last winter and this fall are any indication of what global warming has in store for us, all I can say is bring it on.

Posted by: Mark M at November 19, 2006 4:15 PM

In order to fully understand the implications of the current status of global warming, let us go back and analyse the recorded weather and environmental data over the course of the past 10 million years...

Oh Oh. There goes that theory...

Posted by: Brian M. at November 19, 2006 4:25 PM

The left believes in more than magic. The left believes it is God. ...-


Talk of manipulating Earth's climate (Here we go again)

The Boston Globe ^ | November 18, 2006 | John Donnelly
WASHINGTON -- The idea seems like something out of a Superman comic: A machine or missile shoots tons of particles into the atmosphere that would block the sun's rays, cool down the overheated Earth, and reverse global warming. ...-
3w.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1741250/posts

Posted by: maz2 at November 19, 2006 4:26 PM

Kate,

I agree with you that rhetoric like 'climate change' and 'climate injustice' obscure what is a legitimate environmental debate. But I have two concerns about your own rhetoric:

1. You say much too assertively that 'justice is an [sic] construct of human social interactions.' This implies that 'justice' is merely a social construction that has no natural basis, i.e. justice is simply whatever we decide it is. This obscures the legitimate debate about whether there is true justice or not. After all, if there is no true justice, then, in effect, might is right, and our only response to Al-Qaeda is that we're stronger, not that we're more just. Moreover, then all your rants against the hard left are only that, mere rants with no basis in reality. A much more neutral way you could have put it, and what I think you meant, is that "justice is a property of human social interactions." This leaves the debate about its conventionality open.

2. I'd also suggest making more use of the general rule: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Many leftists are very sincere in their beliefs about climate change, thinking their views are truly just, and so it's more accurate (and usually more rhetorically persuasive!) to attribute their mistakes to incompetence.

Posted by: mjsiebert at November 19, 2006 4:26 PM

msiebert - I'm aware that Kate can very capably argue her own case; however, I have a few comments on your post.

You want to change the sentence 'justice is a construct of human social interactions' to 'justice is a property of human social interactions'. I disagree; I prefer the first sentence.

The reason is because your suggestion, the second sentence, removes the agent (human social interactions) as the source of justice. This sentence ensures that justice is not an accicent but is the result of clear intentions-to-be just; human actions are geared towards achieving justice.

Your sentence makes justice a peripheral and accidental appendage of human social interactions.

As for a debate about 'true justice' - I think that the basic human rights as, eg, in the US Declaration of Independence, (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) are the basic 'true' rights. Most other 'rights' are social and are, indeed, whatever the society decides. That doesn't mean that 'might is right'. Al Qaeda rejects basic human rights.

As for malice versus incompetence, one has to wonder about the rejection by the left of science (whether it be the number of Iraqi dead or the complexities of climate change)and their preference for anything, anything, that discredits the USA and Bush. There's more than a touch of malice in that approach, wouldn't you say?

Posted by: ET at November 19, 2006 4:43 PM

In typical lefty fashion they spout pure garbage and offer up zero for a solution. What exactly are we supposed to do, commute to work on a bicycle, heat our homes with warm farts?

If any of these R-tards had any sense they would realize that technology is what it is. We are not advanced enough to deal with this maybe issue at the moment. More research is required to validate the concept of 'global warming' in any event. Also at present alternative energy sources don't make much sense either. The processes involved in creating solar panels for instance are a 1000% more toxic to the environment then a few tons of vaporized coal.

Posted by: missing link at November 19, 2006 4:46 PM

'This implies that 'justice' is merely a social construction that has no natural basis, i.e. justice is simply whatever we decide it is.'

In the natural world, might makes right. Nature is aristocratic. In the jungle, the tiger rules. The fox suvives by tearing out the throat of the rabbit. Nature is "red in tooth and claw" as Tennyson instructed us.

If you want to try to decide whether there is a universal justice in the cosmos, arising in a transcendent comprehension, that is fine. I will leave you to your deliberations.

One of the nice things about the Kyoto Protocol is that in the US 95% of the people have never heard of it. Maybe I need to re-think my gripes about people not taking the time to be informed. There may be a great virtue in remaining uninformed... hm...

Posted by: Greg in Dallas at November 19, 2006 4:48 PM

Sheeessh, did I have it all wrong! I thought climate injustice meant it wasn't fair that the people who had big homes on the coast of California were going to get too much rain if things continued on!

Posted by: al-lea at November 19, 2006 4:52 PM

Taliban Jack Layton/NDP adds his CO2, and a whiff of H2S to the atpoosphere. ...-

LAYTON UNVEILS PROPOSED CHANGES TO CLEAN AIR ACT
NDP Leader Jack Layton has revealed the significant changes he wants to the Tories' Clean Air Act, a piece of legislation he says is "not honest."

Layton unveiled his party's demands Sunday on CTV's Question Period. Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently invited the NDP to help refine the widely unpopular document which all three opposition parties slammed, saying it did little to tackle climate change. ...-
national newswatch


Smell/clean up this, Jacky. God made it for you, honestly. ...-

Rotten-Egg Gas Suffocating Fish Off African Coast
Satellite photographs show that the Namibian coast off southwestern Africa is belching up massive amounts of hydrogen sulfide gas—commonly known as "rotten egg gas" ...-
nat geographic

Posted by: maz2 at November 19, 2006 4:53 PM

Speaking of weather, The Weather Network just had a "news" item on the "horrors" of a climate catastrophy in Vancouver. Brown water, no water, out of bottled water. Yep.

Then on the G&M's web site, oh horror of horrors. And then, AND THEN, the Globe's own great Canadian Commenters (bless them) took over. Hardly without exception, 20 commenters set the MSM straight. comments like; "Hey, I friggin live here (Van) and there is no probs." "Water hardly brown at all, and besides first time in decades at that". "Lots of bottled water here." "Don't even begin to think of blaming this on so called Global Warming. These so called rain storms have been happenning since time began." "That this is a 4 day Media Headline is pathetic"

And so we have it. Now, in this day and age, for the first time since the Printing Press was invented, way back in the 1500s, the frigg'in Media can be taken to task. Their cover blowen. INSTANTLY !!! !!

If, instead of the Weather Network(Environment Canada stool) and the Globe & Mail, Canadians would tune into Blogs, such as sda, they would be on the correct path instead of the GARDEN PATH.

Posted by: B. Hoax Aware at November 19, 2006 4:54 PM

Socialism isn't a political ideology - it's a pyramid scheme.

Kate, may I suggest a line of SDA t-shirts with that as one of the offerings. It's just brilliant!

Posted by: Mississauga Matt at November 19, 2006 4:59 PM

B Hoax Aware - you know, when I lived in Quebec, boiling the water was a regular occurrence. I remember one season - both fall and winter, it was 'boil water advisory' all the time. Bottled water was the norm there - and there were several times during the year, when the water was so brown and filled with sand, it was impossible to use - boiled or not.

Posted by: ET at November 19, 2006 5:11 PM

Thanks for saying that, Kate.

It needs to be repeated often. Kyoto is, at best, a giant hoax and more probably a deliberate scam.

I resort to sarcasm:

So you believe weather forecasts?

So you believe a politician's promise to improve the weather?

I am going to do my bit by being 10% lazier.

Posted by: Wimpy Canadian at November 19, 2006 5:28 PM

Bob, what a clever argument. I will try it out

Posted by: Wimpy Canadian at November 19, 2006 5:29 PM

Thanks for your comments, ET, but you may want to rethink some things.

For example, there's a problem with saying that 'human social interactions' are the 'source of justice', i.e. that justice is an essential (not accidental) part of human social interactions. This is tantamount to saying that all human social interactions are just. Is this what you really want to say about the 9/11 terrorists? I doubt it. So it's much more correct to say that justice is accidental to social interaction: otherwise we could never say that any social interaction was unjust.

However, I'm with you if you want to say that an action must come from just intentions (rooted in human agency) to be truly just. People do things that are 'technically' just all the time when their intentions were completely unjust and selfish. And if you were trying to say that justice is something that's naturally good for human beings to do, not something merely optional and unbeneficial for them, then I can also agree with that. But this doesn't mean that justice is an essential, necessary feature of all human action. It just means it should be.

I'm also glad you think human rights are truly just. But you have to realize that in order to say this, you must believe that justice is not merely conventional, but has some basis in reality, and that we can somehow know this.

By the way, Greg in Dallas, your conception of nature is narrower than the one I was intending. All I'm saying is that justice must have some basis in reality independent of human opinions on the matter. And this question shouldn't just be something I'm concerned about - the defence of your (and my) Western way of life depends on it.

Posted by: mjsiebert at November 19, 2006 5:31 PM

Elizabeth, I can second that view. My sister and brother-in-law (yes, they are married) have just done a month long trip around China.

SMOG.

The first thing they mentioned to me was the pollution. As they become wealthier, they will probably reduce the amount of pollution. (Not my sister et al but China).

Contrary to leftists and watermellons, it is WEALTH that allows us to be concerned about the environment. It is the poor who pollute most.

Also, let's not forget that "global warming" is NOT about pollution as CO2 is a necessary atmospheric gas for life on this planet. And there is some schools of thought that suggest more is better.


Posted by: Wimpy canadian at November 19, 2006 5:38 PM

Pat, when someone posts "3w." they are really being cute, they really mean www.

Posted by: Wimpy Canadian at November 19, 2006 5:39 PM

Missing Link,

Sorry, but farts are Vorbotten. That's methane, which is much more deadly, according to the scriptures, than CO2.

But you are right. Canada does have the most energy consumption per capita than any other country. this is because it gets bloody hot in summer and bloodty cold in winter and there is a bloody long way to go to get to town, it being so large.

The USA also has high energy consumption, but it does represent 20% of the global economy.

BTW CO2 is proportuional to energy consumption, nmore or less, which is proportional to economic activity.

Posted by: Wimpy Canadian at November 19, 2006 5:49 PM

Andrew Coyne had a funny op/ed in the post yesterday. Apparently, Al Gore believes that what mankind is doing on earth is unbalancing the universe.

I think it's unbalancing something else.

Socialism as a pyramid scheme, very funny, and very insightful.

Canuckguy,

I guess you've never travelled in a car, or a plane, turned a lamp on, or boiled an egg, huh?

I suggest, rather than further sullying the Canadian name, you change your moniker to Leftard Guy. It's infinitely more appropriate.

Posted by: irwin Daisy at November 19, 2006 6:02 PM

mjsiebert -

No, to say that 'human social interactions are the source of justice' does not mean that justice is an 'essential' or universal act; neither does it mean that it is accidental. The opposite of universal is not accidental; that's a third category. Interestingly, the universal and the accidental are similar in that both are decontextualized. The opposite of universal in this case, is the particular - and the particular is contextualized and dependent on its relations with other variables.

The analogy would be, for instance, with Aristotle's differentiation of justice into 'part is natural, part legal'

The definition of 'what is just', apart from the most basic human rights which are indeed universal, is a social construct. Justice is not accidental to social interaction. It is particular to social interaction and is therefore dependent on social norms.

As to whether justice is an essential or necessary feature of human life - I'd have to say that it is essential. The reason for this is because the human species is social - and cognitively social. The interactions of individuals of this species must be viewed as 'just' otherwise, the individual emotions (anger, fear) take over.

As for the basic human rights - they are few, as I've said, and are 'innate rights'.

wimpy canadian - yes, you are right about the smog; I have contacts in China. All cities are seriously affected by smog; people have year long asthma and sinus problems. When they come over here, even to our large cities, that's the first thing they comment about - the clean air. Water? Hah - you never drink the tap water, never. Even such 'environmentally advanced' actions as recycling is unheard of in China.

Posted by: ET at November 19, 2006 6:10 PM

mjsiebert,
ok, but you realize you're talking about the climate. Therefore we are discussing the natural world in the narrower sense.

My first inclination when I hear the term "climate injustice" is to assume the climate itself has unjust intentions, singling out one group rather than another for benevolent climate conditions.

Where does it end? Gravitational injustice. Stellar injustice.

Very quickly a discussion of justice marches off into the philosophical regions of universals and the transcendent. There are other ways of considering this, of course, from the point of view of communities and consensual decision making. However, that by no means ratifies the idea that justice comes from humans making some mutual decisions.

And furthermore, a whole lot of humans would not sign on to the consensus.

And once you've decided that the discussion has to be taken into the transcendet, things become very dicey around here.

Gotta go, date with a frying pan.

Posted by: Greg in Dallas at November 19, 2006 6:20 PM

How do we equate socialism? my construct would be:

socialism=(ignorance+malice^2)

Just this weekend in Vancouver the stars aligned to give a clear view of socialisms corrosive effects.

As mentioned above we had a severe rain storm, but nothing too much out of the ordinary, result, our socialist controlled water system is delivering water that cannot meet Canadian water drinking standards. World class city-I don't think so. maryT sensibly asks why the DART teams water purification equipment could not be activated, the answer of course is because the military cannot transport it with its current equipment-thank you fiberals. And when the inevitable earthquake happens, what then?

Think I am making too much of this? maybe so, it is a temporary inconvenience that will resolve itself naturally no thanks to our socialist municipal politicians.

What then of the populace amazing ignorance when it comes to matters of "climate change". In our local rag the Vancouver Sun, they have commissioned a poll. After years of mandatory public education (by mostly socialist teachers) the populace is asked this question. "I am desperately concerned that if we don't take drastic action on climate change/global warming right now, the world may not last much longer than another couple of generations because of the damage thats been done" Result - an astounding 72% totally agree with the statement. These bozo's honestly believe that the world may not last much longer than about fifty years, whatever "may not last much longer" means but lets charitably assume they interpret that statement as meaning that man could not survive. Unbelievable, what sheer ignorance of scientific facts, and maybe its because our esteemed Vancouver Sun publish articles frequently with headlines similar to one this weekend "Right now, for the first time in tens of thousands of years, you can swim to the North Pole" thats right, our oh so knowledgable writer actually believes that you can swim to the North Pole in November. Gullible? ignorant? malicious? or all three? BTW she reliably informs us that polar bears are drowning in the Arctic. What next? fish are drowning in the ocean!

Also this weekend the Sun publish a personal eco-footprint calculator, I invite you to view it.
You can rate yourself, but be warned if you like regular baths, have an average home, wear nice clothes go to work in a car you are gonna be made to believe you are a bad citizen, on the other hand if you are a smelly hippie who does not work and shares your home with non-family members you will be rated as a good little socialist.

Oh Canaduh!

Posted by: Cascadian at November 19, 2006 6:36 PM

Iceberg calves have recently been seen from ashore New Zealand; first in 56 years. Of course, the water from the melting calves raises the sea-level. ...-

Antarctic Ice Sheet Mass Balance (yep, it's growing)
Mass balance of the Antarctic ice sheet.

Wingham, D.J., Shepherd, A., Muir, A. and Marshall, G.J.

What was done The authors "analyzed 1.2 x 108 European remote sensing satellite altimeter echoes to determine the changes in volume of the Antarctic ice sheet from 1992 to 2003." This survey, in their words, "covers 85% of the East Antarctic ice sheet and 51% of the West Antarctic ice sheet," which together comprise "72% of the grounded ice sheet.""

What was learned Wingham et al. report that "overall, the data, corrected for isostatic rebound, show the ice sheet growing at 5 ± 1 mm year-1." To calculate the ice sheet's change in mass, however, "requires knowledge of the density at which the volume changes have occurred," and when the researchers' best estimates of regional differences in this parameter are used, they find that "72% of the Antarctic ice sheet is gaining 27 ± 29 Gt year-1, a sink of ocean mass sufficient to lower [authors' italics] global sea levels by 0.08 mm year-1." This net extraction of water from the global ocean, according to Wingham et al., occurs because "mass gains from accumulating snow, particularly on the Antarctic Peninsula and within East Antarctica, exceed the ice dynamic mass loss from West Antarctica."

What it means Contrary to all the horror stories one hears about global warming-induced mass wastage of the Antarctic ice sheet leading to rising sea levels that gobble up coastal lowlands worldwide, the most recent decade of pertinent real-world data suggest that forces leading to just the opposite effect are apparently prevailing, even in the face of what climate alarmists typically describe as the greatest warming of the world in the past two millennia or more. ...-

3w.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1741303/posts

Posted by: maz2 at November 19, 2006 7:06 PM

Wonder why David Suzuki is all of a sudden back commenting on things? Could it be that his little foundation has not been getting any donations lately?
Earth Summit, Kyoto, Mo Strong(snake oil salesman), dah! Dhimmi's, sheeple, Lie-berals, stupid is as stupid does!

Posted by: Bruce Randall at November 19, 2006 7:17 PM

You say much too assertively

I believe Michelle Malkin says:

"Boo-freakin' hoo"

in response to drivel like that.

Posted by: Malkin Mailbag at November 19, 2006 7:18 PM

Wimpy Canadian:
Somerwhere along the line I read that in early development a country's enrivonment gets "dirtier" up to about $5500 GDP per capita, and then steadily cleaner after that. I believe it's called the "J curve". It's intuitively sound I think: when you're barely covering your necessaries, a clean environment is a luxurious abstraction; later, when these necessaries are covered and there are surpluses, a clean environment becomes more highly valued.

Posted by: Me No Dhimmi at November 19, 2006 8:23 PM

Concering the Fifth Estate Show referenced above:

The CBC doctored the list of signatories on the open letter to PM Harper - Professor Singer was actually down around #50, while they show him as the third. They also show the letter as being on the front page of the FP when in fact it was the second to last page in the comment section - see http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605. Note also the incorrect info on the program about all those other than the 19 Canadians being Americans. Many other mistakes as well but that alone should make you question how much of the show was correct.

Posted by: Tom Harris at November 19, 2006 9:55 PM

The buzz words aren't only 'climate injustice'; they include 'environmental racism'. Wow.

The verbiage is: "environmental racism and climate injustice" and it refers to their view that "people of color, Indigenous peoples and workers bear a disproportionate health, social, and economic burden of a society addicted to a fossil fuel economy. As such, they are the first victims of government inaction, corporate abuse, and ..." etc, etc.

Actually, you can use that tactic with any rant against anything in society; you just mix natural processes and social processes. The environment and climate are natural; injustice and racism are social. Put them together; the fact that they don't really mix is not relevant; words are great; they hide reality.

Hmmm. How about being specific rather than general.
'acidic soil injustice' and 'short growing season racism'. That can cover geographic areas in parts of the north. You can't get a decent crop grown. That's unjust.

Or, 'swampland injustice' and 'insect racism'. After all, if you live in the rainforest and are bothered by insects - that's a clear case of discrimination. You ought to live in a megacity.

Or, 'limited sun injustice' and 'cold racism'. That refers to living in the far, far, far north.

Posted by: ET at November 19, 2006 10:39 PM

This whole Kyoto thing is just plain stupid.We contribute well under 2 percent of greenhouse gases. We have 34 million people
China has 1.4 billion people and want the same standard of living we have.
India has over 1 billion people and want the same standard of living we have.
Look at hundreds of underdeveloped countries and you can see where I am going with this train of thought.The science behind Kyoto is about as valid as the science behind second hand smoke. If you tell a lie often enough,it will become the truth.

Posted by: pj at November 19, 2006 11:29 PM

I'm surprised more people don't call it Climate Reform Against People.

Posted by: Saskboy at November 20, 2006 12:57 AM

Every Cult has essential properties;

# A belief that is initially, hard to prove, either way. Aliens are coming — runaway greenhouse.

# Some kind of end is coming. Death from outer space — life ending climate warming.

# Believers will be saved, some how. Drink the cool-aide — abandon their lifestyle.

# Create panic and fear. Alien Crop Circles — falsified climate data.

# Someone can save the duped. Jimmy Jones — the UN

Posted by: B. Hoax Aware at November 20, 2006 2:02 AM

1) Feb. 2, 2006 — The NOAA Climate Prediction Center announced today the official return of La Niña.

... Typically, La Niña events favor increased Atlantic hurricane activity, however, Jim Laver, director of the NOAA Climate Prediction Center says, "It is too early to say with confidence what effects this La Niña event will have on the 2006 hurricane season."

w3.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2572.htm

2) August 10, 2006 — Weak El Niño conditions may appear by year's end, but if it does, it will happen too late to have an impact on the 2006 Atlantic hurricane season.

w3.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2679.htm

3) Sept. 13, 2006 — Scientists at the NOAA Climate Prediction Center reported today that El Niño conditions have developed in the tropical Pacific and are likely to continue into early 2007.

... Also, the development of weak El Niño conditions helps explain why this Atlantic hurricane season has been less active than was previously expected. El Niño typically acts to suppress hurricane activity by increasing the vertical wind shear over the Caribbean Sea region. However, at this time the El Niño impacts on Atlantic hurricanes are small. "We are still in the peak months of the Atlantic hurricane season, and conditions remain generally conducive for hurricane formation," said Gerry Bell, NOAA's lead seasonal hurricane forecaster.

w3.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2699.htm


These scientists need "help" to explain what HAS happened - It doesn't instill a lot of confidence in their ability to predict what WILL happen.

BTW: Who do I submit my bills to for my climate injustice incidents?

Posted by: ural at November 20, 2006 2:57 AM

If they want to get Canadians on side with Kyoto they have used the wrong word. We are used to 'injustice' in Canada--they should have used 'climate racism' or climate homophobia' to get our attention!

Posted by: George at November 20, 2006 9:49 AM

I've got to second Mississauga Matt's suggestion for the t-shirts. That phrase combined with your logo would make great walking billboards. Put me down for four, large.

Posted by: Mike_RoA at November 20, 2006 10:25 PM

Al Gore can yammer all he like about GLOBAL WARMING all the time while traveling around in his private jet and his gas guzzling limo the same way with those wackos in hollywood yapping about people who drive SUVs while traveling to their dumb award shows in their 4 MPG limos

Posted by: spurwing plover at November 22, 2006 12:10 AM

The reason that global warming 'denial' is being linked with tobacco (smokers of tobacco, NOT pot smokers)is because the msm has not failed to notice how people of all political stripes (with the notable exception of our Prime Minister, Mr. Stephen Harper and some other MPs of the Conservative Party who can think past tomorrow's beer in a smoke free bar) were so eager to jump on the anti tobacco band wagon.

Never, in the history of the free world, has such a organized demonetization of a huge percentage of citizens been orchestrated. The 'demonetization' of smokers of tobacco was vicious and shocking -and disgusting. Did any of the antis care about the inevitable bankruptcies of bars and restaurants, bingo halls, casinos, nightclubs, the refusal of smokers to volunteer their time.....? NO, They(the antis) all wanted smokers banned from smoking , all the time.
Banning smoking was one of Hitler's 'control' ideas. The control freaks were just 'testing the waters' when the idea of banning tobacco smoking was introduced as a health measure. It caught the imagination of control freaks (and some otherwise intelligent people) and the control freaks got the answer they wanted - you CAN control people by dividing them with junk science about minor issues - divide them and they fight among themselves so the bad guys can sneak in under the door of Freedom and take over.

IMO, there is absolutely no reason why property owners cannot decide for themselves whether or not they want people who enjoy smoking to smoke in their establishments that are NOT owned by the public. I don't like raw fish so I do not go to sushi restaurants. I would go to a Steak House if I wanted steak. Simple...but you get a bunch of self righteous fanatics on a 'mission' - Heaven help the 'naysayer' - smokers just stay home and go to house parties hosted by people of their own ilk. Sad though, in that it has marginalized the interaction between friends who smoke and those who don't - I never see the people I used to have coffee and a smoke (or not) with on a regular basis. The reason: I don't bother buying a coffee in a coffee shop when I know that I won't enjoy it - why should I ? - I make better coffee at home and I don't have to go outside in a blizzard to smoke.

I don't care about the issue for myself anymore - I do feel sorry for all the people who have 'gone under' in the hospitality industry though; smokers were a major group of consumers who have stopped consuming. I have saved a lot of $$, so there is a good side, I can better afford a holiday in a place that welcomes smokers!

Posted by: Jema54 at November 22, 2006 3:20 AM

This might enlighten people - it is just a small sample of the many mistakes in the Fifth Estate piece:

Fred Singer corrects the record

If you would like more on their errors, let me know.

Posted by: Tom Harris at November 22, 2006 3:26 PM

Jema54. Excellent article. Although I do not smoke,my wife does.I went to great length to research second hand smoke and all I found was junk science that made Kyoto look good. We had planned to vacation in Canada but decided to go overseas instead.There are still many countries that are smoker friendly.We had friends cancel a visit from Japan because they found out Vancouver had no smoking restaurants.We will meet in Mexico in 07 instead. They had also planned to take in the Olympics in 2010.Also canceled.I wonder if the government has any idea how much it is costing them to shut out 25% of the population. I think not.

Posted by: peterj at November 22, 2006 11:01 PM

Jema54. Off topic but absolutely correct.

Posted by: peterj at November 22, 2006 11:10 PM

Here is the link to the open letter sent by the 61 climate experts to Stephen Harper:

http://tinyurl.com/ygdmzq

One of the major experts signing this letter appeared with me on CFRA radio, Ottawa's leading AM radio station last night - you can listen to the whole show on line in the following eight 15-minute chunks - comments very welcome (yes, I know Chretien signed Kyoto in 2002, not 1992, little slip there):

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL1.mp3

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL2.mp3

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL3.mp3

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL4.mp3 - not working right now and so I have notified the Web master.

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL5.mp3

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL6.mp3

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL7.mp3

http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/GLOBAL8.mp3

Sincerely,

Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
Executive Director
Natural Resources Stewardship Project
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2

e-mail: tom.harris@nrsp.com
Web: www.nrsp.com

Posted by: Tom Harris at November 22, 2006 11:33 PM
Site
Meter