The names on this petition aren’t those of Fruit-Fly Guy approved Enviro-phobes … but they aren’t those of a bunch of simple neocon blogger groupies either: Fredrick Seitz Letter
And yes, I know, it’s a dated piece, but interesting nevertheless:
Robert J Eagan, PhD, J. T. Eagen, Dr Joe R Eagleman, PhD, Joe R Eagleman, PhD, Bertram E. Eakin, PhD, Eric Earl, James Earle, O Keener Earle, Thomas Earles, Fred N Earll, PhD, R C Earlougher, R C Earlougher Jr, PhD, M Frank Erwin, Donald R East, W S Easterling, PhD, John Eastlick, D B Easty, PhD, George W Eaton Jr, James H Eaton, John A Eaton, John R Eaton, Philip E Eaton, PhD, Thomas Eaton, PhD, Gordon Eballardyce, Robert Ebbers, MD, Kenneth Ebel, PhD, Dennis M Eben, John R Ebensberger, MD, John Eberhard, James B. Eberhardt, William T Eberhard, William E Eberhardt, Gary Eberly, Jae Ebert, Floyd Eberts, PhD, DP Ebright, Lawrence T Eby, PhD, Bernard Ecanow, PhD, Anita Eccles, Anita Eccles, Andrew Van Echo, Joseph T Echols, Dana A Echter, Alieta Eck …
Wow. That’s a LOT of names.
Echoing Ace: Wow, that’s a LOT of names…and a LOT of money that “Big Oil” must have shovelled out to pay for them all to have signed! /sarc
An interesting article by Dr Tim Ball on the same site. Goes to show the politics involved is leading with histeria not being lead with facts
http://www.sitewave.net/news/
Too little, too late. The Greens have infiltrated all levels. The infestation is worse than the pine beetle and will be much more expensive for everyday folks to live with. Read on….
VANCOUVER.
Accord puts dollar value on green improvements
Dan Hansen, Vancouver Sun
Published: Saturday, March 03, 2007
Businessmen and women from around the country, the United States and South America gathered at the Westin Bayshore on Friday to sign a document that puts a dollar sign on green improvements to services and properties.
About five years in the making, the Vancouver Valuation Accord is the first of its kind. It’s designed to regulate concepts of sustainability into the valuation and appraisal process.
The definition of sustainability here is borrowed from the United Nation’s Bruntland Commission report of 1987: “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
According to Chris Corps, one of the driving forces behind the accord, Friday’s signing means those involved in the valuation and appraisal process — including real estate appraisers, insurers and bankers — will be able to put a firm price tag on green technologies, from solar panels on the roof to the number of trees and grass on the property. Valuators will also be able to calculate the worth of a business’s lower greenhouse gas emissions by taking into consideration the employees’ abilities to walk or cycle to work, rather than drive.
In a keynote speech, Premier Gordon Campbell said understanding the value of sustainability is not just an altruistic cause, but holds major economic benefits.
dahansen@png.canwest.com
phd is cheap and becomes even cheaper with every minute passed
Interesting and impressive list of names…also the 8 page outline is impressive in the evidence it cites…but I doubt any evidence to the adverse will have any impact on indocrinated climate-porn cult followers…their dogmatism has gone beyond science and critical thinking into the realm of faith.
Faith based belief systems do not reason…dogma is accepted at face value and in the case of climate porn, the dogmatics of a man-made climatic cataclysm is stronger than their ability to reason with disputing evidence.
So while I’m glad I have found another source of counter-point evidence to file and retrieve as evidential counter argument to climate hysterics, I doubt if it will have any impact on the fruit fly zealots.
United Nation’s Bruntland Commission:
Whose footprints, handprints, bear paws, Red-Green hands, snake tongue, etc., did the heavy lifting on this hoax-pyramid scheme?
Hint: He is Bob Rae’s Uncle Moe. …-
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Maurice F. Strong and Jim MacNeill to Receive Candlelight Annual Award From U.N. Secretary General Kofi A. Annan
NEW YORK, NEW YORK, Aug. 21 -/E-Wire/– Theodore W. Kheel, President of the Carriage House Center on Global Issues, announced today that the Center’s prestigious Candlelight Award will be presented by United Nations Secretary General Kofi A. Annan to both Maurice F. Strong and Jim MacNeill at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa in September.
The Candlelight Award is based on words spoken by Adlai Stevenson about Eleanor Roosevelt, “She would rather light candles than curse the darkness.” The award is being presented to Mr. Strong and Mr. MacNeill, Mr. Kheel said, for their distinguished service to the United Nations and their key roles in promoting and advancing sustainable development.
Mr. Strong was Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. The Conference, referred to as the Earth Summit, attracted the heads of virtually every nation in the world. Under Strong’s leadership, Agenda 21, a global blueprint for sustainability in the 21st century, was unanimously adopted by the participating nations. Mr. Strong was also the Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in June of 1972. That conference, together with Rachel Carson’s book “Silent Spring,” aroused the world’s awareness of the wanton destruction inflicted on the environment through indiscriminate development.
Mr. Strong, a Canadian, is currently Chancellor of the University of Peace in Costa Rica, and an adviser to Secretary General Annan.
Mr. MacNeill, also a Canadian, was the Secretary General of the World Commission on the Environment and Development, named after its chairperson, former Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland of Norway and frequently referred to as the Brundtland Commission. He was a prime author of the Commission’s world-acclaimed report, “Our Common Future,” in which the Commission defined sustainable development as “satisfying present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Mr. MacNeill was also, until recently, Inspector General of the World Bank.
The Candlelight Award was presented last year by Secretary General Kofi Annan to Klaus Schwab, President of the World Economic Forum, on September 10, 2001 at the inauguration of the Carriage House Center. The award presentation was described by Mr. Annan as “a welcome next step in the process of encouraging dialogue between the public and private sectors.” …-
http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/1307
“According to Chris Corps, one of the driving forces behind the accord, Friday’s signing means those involved in the valuation and appraisal process — including real estate appraisers, insurers and bankers — will be able to put a firm price tag on green technologies, from solar panels on the roof to the number of trees and grass on the property. Valuators will also be able to calculate the worth of a business’s lower greenhouse gas emissions by taking into consideration the employees’ abilities to walk or cycle to work, rather than drive.”
Well this displays how easily the whores of the business world clasp onto a scam that will profit them by devaluing property.
Let’s cit past the crap and see it for what it is…an attempt by property speculators to create a temprorary artifical impact on market values. It means that a lot of equity is beein peeled away from realesate making it a buyer’s market…all under the holy fruit fly crusade.
This is the thin edge of the economic gouging that carbon scamming will bring to the economy unless consumers stomp on this profiteering on myths.
You can see where irrational climate hysteria will take us now? Every scammer out there will be riding this to extort some cost from you that you never had to bear before…inflation to be sure, but also a stagnating economy as the effects of carbon tax and inflation and devaluation take their toll on the liquidity of the middle class.
It is all very well for some scammer to say a home needs “carbon” upgrades…it is quite another matter for the resident to make the improvements…or pay the taxes which are levied to make him make the improvements or buy a new car or whatever. I see this as whipping a horse that has gon down under the strain of a burden to heavy for it to carry.
I thin that the idiocy/greed of market forces who jump on the carbon fraud will create inflationary conditions that the market cannot bear..it will also stagnate productivity and cost jobs.
Eoyore: Check the Update.
The update points to just one of Al’s “inconvient truths”…do a google on Al/Occidental Petroleum/armand hammer.
Al still is knee deep in big oil profits and now tries to redeem himself by swapping investment to a carbon credit investment bokerage for the elite.
After I read what Gore Vidal wrote about this loon, I don’t think you could find a bigger hypocrite this century….except perhaps Chairman Moe the capitalist communist.
good writing:
http://ctv2.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070302.wxrussia0303/business/Business/businessBN/ctv-business
canada should follow
I hate to go Usenet on you guys, but *snicker*.
An “impressive list of names,” eh? I liked “Dr. Red Wine,” myself, although “Geraldine Halliwell,” with her discipline listed as “biology,” is also worth a chuckle.
Anyone who thinks this petition is worth the cyber-space it occupies should check out:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
You enviro-haters ‘ll have to do better than this.
Just goes to show that having a list of names does not mean a damned thing!
Take note UN and IPCC !
Well, today I saw a hopeful sign that some sense of reality may finally be breaking through. It was the editorial cartoon in the Saturday Winnipeg Free Press, heretofore a charter member in the MSM Politically Correct Club.
The cartoon depicted a stained glass window with a beatific and be-robed likeness of Dr. Fruit Fly himself and a script reading: “Saint Suzuki Ascending on Hot Air Thermals” About to crash through the stained glass window was a brick labelled “Reality”.
In the Winnipeg Free Press. I am not making this up.
“You enviro-haters ‘ll have to do better than this.”
You are a pompous idiot aren’t you Dawg? “Enviorhaters”, ouch! Is that the new term of abuse, replacing ‘climate change deniers’ from you socialist creeps?
Hey, in case nobody informed you and despite your kinds childlike kleptomania of anything pertaining to the environment (and other peoples money), it’s our world also. And perhaps more-so, given that leftoids aren’t reproducing.
Stay on topic, now, Daisy. What–no comment on the Oregon Petition? Small wonder.
I prefer Anglo-Saxon to Greek. “Envirophobe” just doesn’t have that ring to it.
Dawg I have to call B.S. there is no Donald W Wine or Geraldine Halliwell on that petition.
This should be fun . . maybe we can get the CBC to run it as well . Dr Fruit Fly would be apoplectic I should think. George Srombobumbustatalot would be spitting rage, Pete Girlyman would have a fit.
Citioyen Dion would change his opinion & Kyoto would howl in outrage, or the moon.
HERE IS ANOTHER INCONVENIENT TRUTH (BUT THIS ONE WILL INFURIATE THE GREEN LOBBY)
It won’t have made up for seeing the Presidency of the United States snatched away in a late flurry of Floridian hanging chads, but at least Al Gore now has the satisfaction of seeing his climate change manifesto An Inconvenient Truth elected best documentary film by the American Academy of Motion Pictures in that peculiarly self-regarding ballot known as “the Oscars”.
As Gore beatifically absorbed the standing ovation from all those who had cruised via private jet and stretch-limo to the ceremony in Los Angeles, he could also smile in the knowledge of another piece of good news: the British Government had agreed to send An Inconvenient Truth to every secondary school in the country. Announcing this unexpected bit of promotion, the Environment Secretary, David Miliband, declared: “I was struck by the visual evidence the film provides, making it clear that the changing climate is already having an impact on our world today, from Mt Kilimanjaro to the Himalayan mountains.”
I shall be fascinated to learn what accolades Mr Miliband will bestow on another film about climate change, which is to be shown on Channel 4 next Thursday. This one is different, very different. The Great Global Warming Swindle claims to be nothing less than: “The morality tale of the decade.” The film’s director is Martin Durkin. That name might mean nothing to you, but among many British environmentalists it is more hated than that of any multinational oil company chairman.
RtR http://antigreen.blogspot.com/
Dawg I have to call B.S. Correction there is no Red Wine on that list just a Donald W Wine and no Geraldine Halliwell
“Stay on topic, now, Daisy.”
As I said, “pompous.”
And from alan’s comment, I might add liar.
“Liar?” Well, no. I just haven’t been keeping up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition
Seems that some of the more obvious pranksters have been eliminated. But how many of the remaining thousands of people are climatologists? Hint: a tiny minority.
A crystallographer (for example) has no more expertise on global warming than Wayne Gretzky. Signing a petition with a “PhD” after your name doesn’t make you an expert on everything.
Do an experiment (which I did). Take a selection of say 30 names. Check ’em out for yourselves.
I hope you people have more arrows in your quiver than this risible petition.
And Dr. Redwine remains, first name missing and all:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p434.htm
Would an apology be asking too much?
And Dr. Redwine remains, first name missing and all:
You first said Dr. Red Wine big Difference, nice try but no banana for you.
Not that much of a difference, actually. Anyone track down this “Redwine?”
My source was:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
I can’t help wondering if there’s been a bit of retrofitting.
By the way, how many “Joe Eagleman”s are there, anyway? And “RC Earlougher, PhD” brings in his old man, and there are two “Anita Eccles”s…And that’s just in the little piece that is quoted here.
A little healthy skepticism, please. If this were a “pro” petition, you guys would be all over stuff like this.
Dawg: Since your scientific understanding is so rudimentary, I’ll have to assist you.
Climatologists come in a variety of forms for starters. It is a generic term for a number of disciplines. For example, one of the leading deniers is a paleoclimatologist.
As well, you need to understand that it takes a whole bunch of disciplines to evaluate and research climate; from biologists who study the nesting patterns of snow geese in the arctic, to physicists. You see, its an incredibly complex issue, and spans a knowledge set that no single discipline can amass. Even your average PhD meteorologist doesn’t have a knowledge or research base to cover all the meteorological understanding that goes into saying something like “GW will cause fewer but more violent hurricanes”.
The included petition never was intended to be a list of scientists who specialize in anything even remotely to do with climate research. It’s just a petition with a lot of very well educated people in it … that’s all. Let’s keep in mind, that the key proponents of human caused climate change are not climatologists but politicians, geneticists, and UN bureaucrats.
Take Suzuki for instance … his CV doesn’t lend itself to climate science, yet it doesn’t prevent him from having an educated opinion on GW.
What is peculiar though, is that there is no single source on the net available that compiles the entire IPCC evidence and methodology used to form its conclusions. Not one that I’ve been able to find, and I’ve had the able help of readers at my blog who are believers in human caused GW.
Your stuck in the old failing of the left Dawg, which is to discredit by character attack; not on the science. Your criticisms as expressed are entirely and wholly irrelevant to the issue.
I bet you couldn’t provide us with a list of the names of all the scientists who contributed to the IPCC findings. Oh, you may come up with a list of names, without CVs as provided in IPCC docs, but no comprehensive list. You won’t even be able to come up with a comprehensive and fully vetted summary of the research either, which includes all dissenting opinions, all unexplained anomalies of which there are many, all failed predications, along with the reasons why they were rejected by the IPCC. All you’ll find is summaries and conclusions designed for idiots … which would be you and me according to those who have created this stuff.
So, go ahead and attack a list with doctors, dentists, and all sorts of PhDs … any one of whom has as much right and capability to decent as Gore or Suzuki or you or me. They have proven, by getting PhDs in the first place, that they at least can put in 8 or more years of university.
And finally, if you are correct that only climatologists have a valid say, then you have just eliminated likely 90% of the science that goes into GW research. Nice work.
It’s just a petition with a lot of very well educated people in it … that’s all.
Well, then, that’s not much, is it?
Forget this “character attack” nonsense–that’s a falsehood. I want to know what a petroleum geologist has to say that’s any more authoritative than what I (or you) have to say. Why don’t you enlarge on that, instead of indulging in character attack of your own (“Since your scientific understanding is so rudimentary”, “Your [sic] stuck in the old failing of the left Dawg,” etc.)
A petroleum geologist is a geologists first; he has a background that gives him more credability than you or I.
If you want to play that game then …
What is a Fruit Fly specialist who’s paid by an environmental activist organization?
… or a politician who wins an Oscar and has shares in “Big Green”?
… What is an IPCC administrator who is an unelected bureaucrat from a developing country which stands to make billion in carbon trading?
… and who is Joe Shmoe of the IPCC who is one of dozens of names who don’t even come with an attached CV?
You see Dr. Dawg, it’s like me saying that you can’t be trusted with anyting to do with industry because you have a union background … or that I can’t be trusted with anything to do with restorative youth justice because I’m in education. Even working full time for Exxon does not eliminate one from having a valid opinion or even valid and credible scientific data.
Whether someone works for Exon or the IPCC makes no difference, because they all come with strings … including the paleoclimatologist from Russia who’s research if funded by the IPCC and environmental industries who want to sell Carbon Credits.
The only thing that counts is the science … and that is only conclusive if you deal with the IPCC. Very credible scientists disagree though, and you have to ask yourself why. Some of them even believe in GW as being human caused, but they are very disturbed by the IPCC lack of accountability and process and shoddy peer review process.
Anyone, from me, to you, to an MD. on the petition above should sit up and listen when that happens; when credible men who believe in GW cry a warning.
The only thing that counts is the science
So, then, Paul, names on a petition don’t really count for much, do they? I have a fair degree of formal education myself, but sticking my degrees after my name on a global warming petition carries no more weight than signing a petition about altering baseball rules.
Suzuki is simply asking people to listen to the real experts–scientists who specialize in climate. These Oregon Petition signers, on the other hand–the ones who are for real–are saying that global warming is bunk. But most of them have no more authority to comment than some ex-union boss. 🙂
They only do Dr. Dawg in that they demostrate a very serious concern by capable people … in the end though, its the science that counts. And don’t forget, there are many “climate” scientists in the denier group.
Suzuki provides absotely no link to the hard science he espouses. I’ll give you a link to a piece I did the other day … it talks about the very least of what I’d expect. Suzuki is providing us with only the most simplistic of conclusions from one side … and no scientific basis to explain away the deniers … instead he engages in character assassination (shills for big oil). It’s very shameful.
http://cjunk.blogspot.com/2007/02/ipcc-report-article-of-faith-part-2.html
and
http://cjunk.blogspot.com/2007/02/quacks-cranks-and-junk-science.html
There are several hit sites set up to personally attack the scientists in the second url I give. VERY shameful … grade 8 level debunking attempts and character assassination. What are GW people hiding when they have to stoop to that?
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine
http://campus.queens.edu/faculty/jannr/bio103/kyoto.htm
Sorry Dr.Dawg I see you already uncovered the BS these people are spreading.
Reno was a real humdinger in her time.
she kiboshed the career of Michael Moriarty when he was on the original Law & Order series,
‘she KGBed me’ he said in the interview.
apparently he said something highly critical of her methods, thus proving him right….
“And Dr. Redwine remains, first name missing and all:
You first said Dr. Red Wine big Difference, nice try but no banana for you.
Posted by: alan at March 3, 2007 8:44 PM ”
no alan, Redwine and Red Wine is clearly the same play on words ie FAKE name with a minor spelling variation just to drive the point home.
“yes we have got no bananas, weve got no bananas today”
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
Dispute that carbon fanatics
Dogmatic Dawg provides us with this intellectual flatulence: “You enviro-haters ‘ll have to do better than this.”
To which I had made this prediction:
“Faith based belief systems do not reason…dogma is accepted at face value and in the case of climate porn, the dogmatics of a man-made climatic cataclysm is stronger than their ability to reason with disputing evidence.”
So we have a coulple of climate pourn fantics who point to a funny name in the petition and ignore the majority of legit doctorate signatories on it…Blinders on full stun.
We also note that aside from evoking ad hominem attacks to posters NONE of the climate porn trolls provided any disputing evidence to counter the 8 page missive the petition’s author submitted. ( not surprising because it’s full of math and data plotting and all that unsexy yucky stuff that leftoid mutants can’t make an emotion-based attack on)
To date no peer review of the institute’s paper has been accomplished…the conclusions in the paper remain unchallenged and un disputed by published counter arguments. Therefore it stand until proven false in conclusion…but that didn’t stop the left from launching a wisper campaign full of innuendo and character assasination focused at the authors…but no hard scientific counter argument.
The only counter spin offered comes from a left wing media filter web site which accuses the paper’s authors of not being climatologists and being funded by organizations with right of center politics….sounds exactly like the Suzuki foundation…who publish their own papers which never see peer review and is staffed by no one with a climatology degree and funded by left of center organizations. Tit for tat…pot-kettle-black
Guess the climate porn wanks missed that little tidbit….never good to reveal things that question the validity of climate porn dogma.
*sniker* 😉
“A crystallographer (for example) has no more expertise on global warming than Wayne Gretzky.”
(Or, a fruit fly expert and child abuser? Or, a failed and whiny political hypocrite with hidden profit motives – who, when confronted with the melting polar caps on Mars declared, “What we are doing (on Earth) is upsetting the balance of the universe”?)
And,
“A little healthy skepticism, please. If this were a “pro” petition, you guys would be all over stuff like this.”
(Did you read the backgrounder section of the petition? Didn’t think so.)
And,
“Forget this “character attack” nonsense–that’s a falsehood.”
But,
“You enviro-haters ‘ll have to do better than this.”
Hoisted by your own petard, as usual, Dawg. How does it feel having absolutely no credibility?
The falsehood, for the reading-challenged, was that commenting on the expertise of the signatories was a “character attack.” It was not. It was a criticism, though, of those who wave their credentials around to give their opinions spurious authority. I’ve never seen Suzuki do this: he’s simply interested in the issue, and he’s sounding the alarm.
The point about the “backgrounder” section is obscure. My point was that a petition supporting the notion of AGW would have people here crawling all over it with magnifying glasses. The spurious names, the repetitions, and the expertise of the signatories, would all be fair game.
How does it feel having absolutely no credibility?. I wouldn’t know. Enlighten me.
“The point about the “backgrounder” section is obscure.”
As I said, you didn’t read it. So therefore, you are not presenting rational arguments based on what the signatories signed, you are simply relying on the traditional leftist tactic of character assault, regardless of your inane semantics. Furthermore, Suzuki doesn’t “wave (his) credentials around to give (his) opinions spurious authority,” simply because he’s a fruit fly expert and has no credentials to wave around in this area.
You have been enlightened.
Not by you.
The backgrounder has nothing to do with my argument. Nothing whatsoever. It’s not what the signatories signed that is even at issue: it’s the use of academic credentials to add authority to their opinions, even when their own fields are at some remove from the topic at hand.
And you even give me my point, on a Royal Crown Derby platter:
Furthermore, Suzuki doesn’t “wave (his) credentials around to give (his) opinions spurious authority,” simply because he’s a fruit fly expert and has no credentials to wave around in this area.
Well, precisely. But being a fruit fly expert is no further away from the issue than being (for example) one of these:
The first of the signers was Earle Aagaard, last time I checked. He’s a believer in “intelligent design,” aka creationism. The next is Roger L. Aamodt. His specialty is cancer research. The next is M. Robert Aaron. He’s an electrical engineer. The next one is Ralph F. Abate. He’s a civil engineer. The next is Hamed K Abbas. He’s an expert on agricultural pests. Then there’s Reza Abbaschian, another engineer, who appears to know something about crystal growth. I can’t find Paul Abbett. Ditto Wyatt E Abbitt III. Then comes David M Abbott Jr., a petroleum geologist. Ursula K Abbott is a professor emerita in the field of avian sciences. Nothing on Will S Abbott. Riaz F. Abdulla: theoretical physical chemistry. J M Abell: another geologist, again in the petroleum field.
And the dreary beat goes on. The difference between these guys and Suzuki is, precisely as you say, that Suzuki doesn’t wave his credentials around.
Not by you.
The backgrounder has nothing to do with my argument. Nothing whatsoever. It’s not what the signatories signed that is even at issue: it’s the use of academic credentials to add authority to their opinions, even when their own fields are at some remove from the topic at hand.
And you even give me my point, on a Royal Crown Derby platter:
Furthermore, Suzuki doesn’t “wave (his) credentials around to give (his) opinions spurious authority,” simply because he’s a fruit fly expert and has no credentials to wave around in this area.
Well, precisely. But being a fruit fly expert is no further away from the issue than being (for example) one of these:
The first of the signers was Earle Aagaard, last time I checked. He’s a believer in “intelligent design,” aka creationism. The next is Roger L. Aamodt. His specialty is cancer research. The next is M. Robert Aaron. He’s an electrical engineer. The next one is Ralph F. Abate. He’s a civil engineer. The next is Hamed K Abbas. He’s an expert on agricultural pests. Then there’s Reza Abbaschian, another engineer, who appears to know something about crystal growth. I can’t find Paul Abbett. Ditto Wyatt E Abbitt III. Then comes David M Abbott Jr., a petroleum geologist. Ursula K Abbott is a professor emerita in the field of avian sciences. Nothing on Will S Abbott. Riaz F. Abdulla: theoretical physical chemistry. J M Abell: another geologist, again in the petroleum field.
And the dreary beat goes on. The difference between these guys and Suzuki is, precisely as you say, that Suzuki doesn’t wave his credentials around.