VIRAL meme alert : "Deniers deny denial-conspiracy link, claim conspiracy"

WATERMELONS! Under the bed!

Trust EOR to come up with the funniest take on the whole "deniers-see-conspiracy-in-study-that-links-deniers-to-beliefs-in-conspiracy-theories".


Yes, there ARE people "watching" the deniers...

Got the MEME above in my post title, off the comments section of WTD (WATCHING THE DENIERS) .

If you are at all interested in confronting the Big Lie that denies that Man faces any physical restraints on his greed, I suggest you subscribe to WTD ....

The NEW Normal : barges stuck in mud on America's natural highway, the Mississippi

GOP denies this is a DROUGHT !

Caught this on CBC Radio's ever reliable AS IT HAPPENS show: a fascinating interview with a barge company owner lamenting what damage this year's drought has done to barge traffic on America's cheapest, most profitable super-highway : the immense Mississippi- Missouri-Ohio River system.


This river system is probably America's best economic advantage - or it was 

Forget trucks, planes or trains : this ole man river really totes them bales and moves them freight.

And during this summer,the 'warmist' on record,  it is hurtin' - bad......

* Tip of the hat to Mike at Australia's Watching the Deniers (cute name alert !) for maintaining his long running litany of climate change induced natural disasters under the smart title of "THE NEW NORMAL"

The reason climate skeptic MUST see conspiracies everywhere

Tin Hats against CLIMATE CHANGE

There is a reason why all climate skeptic wear tin foil hats.

Suppose you are a DENIER cum SKEPTIC and your honest scientific beliefs teach you that wrenching changes in the Natural World are literally *impossible* and that only moderate oscillations up and down around an eternal norm are possible .

That is, you un-skeptically believe in the sort of self-flattering-to-humanity type of science that is still taught in our High Schools.

Then you must account , if only in your own mind, for why hundreds of millions of other, decent, honest, ordinary people seem so convinced that the climate is drastically and maybe even permanently changing.

To deniers, the only possible rational reason is that these decent honest people have been conned by a conspiracy, with either profit or domination the co-consprators’ true ultimate aim.

We WARMISTS must equally ask ourselves why so many ordinary people on the other side believe so readily in conspiracy wackiness – unless their scientific beliefs have left them with no alternative explanation……

"Wake Up Call Channel 2" is absolutely certain about everything , including today's JEWISH conspiracy

We Are Strange , Austin

Abstract : "David de Rothschild  & the Global Warming Hoax" : this brief video is the most insightful autobiography I have ever had to endure.

VIDEO REVIEW : Reading a scientific article can be very frustrating : the authors seem to be so,so cautious about asserting that anything can be known for absolute certainty.

I mean, I know that reality is actually like that : as uncertain as the weather is three days from now - but do we really want to have to read or listen to all that uncertainty in our off-hours ?

Why not just grab a beer and a sofa and wallow in ten free minutes of absolutely 100 % total certainties.

Relax, turn off your brain : you are about to enter a Certitude-Only Zone....

But. But if you are skeptical of easy answers, if you historian-oriented (as I am) it is in fact very very hard indeed to have to listen to conspiracy theorists.

These dudes are just so certain about everything and anything : non-stop certitudes delivered smoothly, slickly, at about one every five seconds - for 10 interminable minutes.

As autobiography,  Wake Up Call Channel 2's YouTube video on David de Rothschild's supposed plot to take over the world for the Jews via the Global Warming "scam", is a fascinating CAT SCAN through the hyper-active neurons and  synapses of a world-class world-conspiracy-freak .

I am referring to the fellow who wrote it and probably narrated it (at breakneck speed).

I mean, as a super bookworm and over my long life, I have probably read more words than the population of China has had hot dinners, but Thank God, I don't remember much of it.

I mean, I do believe it all did enter my brain cells, but most of it did not stay long and it certainly did not all connect up in one big ball of wax.

My brain - like your brain - is wired imperfectly, perhaps by kindly divine design.

I do not lie awake nights, unable to sleep as all my neurons and synapses connect to each other , finding connections between anything and everything I ever read or saw or smelt or touched or tasted.

I don't know how it happened that my brain cells don't do that : perhaps unfortunately my mother choose not to drink , smoke or have sex with strange men during my pregnancy, I don't know.

"The snatchers have taken over our fluoridated water, and now our watermelons : our bodies are next..." ---- James Delingpole, fabulist

But some of us are blessed with a sixth sense : an uncanny ability to see connections under beds, in the fluoridated water, through the radio, inside watermelons (!) : whatever.

And they are now leading the denier-charge to prevent us being enslaved by a Jewish environmentalist conspiracy to use some easily-faked signs of global warming (Greenland ice cap and mid-west corn fields) to trick us into giving our rights to own guns and cheat on our taxes.

Don't let THEM do it to us . (Cue the Fifties cheesy SF movie music.)

Go now children -run !!!! -  and scream it from car to car :

 "They're here , already ! " "You're next !" "You're next !"

Claiming climate change is "a conspiracy of banking families" is NOT about bankers: it is all about FAMILIES

Putting together a cabal of a half dozen of the world's biggest modern global banks (each with a few million individual shareholders) don't make for the most credible world-wide conspiracy.

 How on earth do they all gather together to agree on a coup and how do they all keep a secret ?

Paranoid theories, to be credible, must claim the conspiracy is of a closely knit group - perhaps a secret order of Masons bound by blood oaths or better still, an extended family with members all over the world, but still bound by the blood of old fashioned ethnic family loyalty.

Paranoid conspiracy theories needs, above all, foreigners to plot it because even the brain-addled potential converts to the paranoid's scheme know that westernized families no longer display any such loyalty or willingness to keep secrets.

FAMILY is the ultimate dog-whistle code word ...

Hence "family" is the ultimate dog-whistle word for Jewish Conspiracy. The occupation of that closely knit but globally flung family is immaterial, as I suggested in my comments on Watching the Deniers, earlier this evening:

Evans’ theory is not a harmless theory about an economic conspiracy, in fact it is not about bankers at all.
Instead it is a very dangerous theory about an ethnic conspiracy , ie a conspiracy among a “closely-knit” family taking over the world , that theory could just as easily claim this tight little family group is into being world wide diamond merchants.
This what makes me so uneasy and so angry : because family IS the ultimate code word for Jewish conspiracy.
A modern global bank might have 2 million separate shareholders and it seems hard to see them all conspiring to plan a coup — and keep it a secret.
Paranoid theories absolutely need visions of “foreign” others with “old fashioned values” of “absolute family loyalty” to make their world-wide conspiracies work.
But immigrants will tell you that “old fashioned” ethnic families squabble just as much as modern western families do – if not more so !

Watching the DENIERS squirm over smear that Rothschilds behind Climate Change

The so called Climate Change "debates" have moved on beyond the science of the question --- way way beyond.

One of the world's leading climate change denying groups, the immodestly title Galileo Movement, with a veritable Who's Who of the world's top climate deniers as its scientific advisors, has recently taken to publicly claiming that the people behind all this climate change talk are Jews-Bent-On-World-Domination.

Oh they didn't put it quite that baldly : since the Holocaust, that has been judged both legally and politically risky.

Dog Whistle phrases, coded phrases all the anti-semites soon learn with a broad wink,wink, hint, hint are what stands in today.

So it is Tightly knot cabals of big banking families with names like Rothschild who are the banksters that will make trillions over carbon trading, the new "fiat" currency and the grease to pave the way to one world government domination.

Shades of Henry Ford's eternally popular fake document, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, lurk behind everyone of those time-worn phrases.

Over 100 years old but, apparently, still going strong as every new generation of paranoid anti-semites comes along.

The Jewish Conspiracy claims were reported without comment by the big newspapers around the world before 1945 - but after that became verboten - until this year.

And in Rupert Murdoch's native Australia, of course - the land that taught Mr Make-It-UP everything he routinely does till this very day.

One of the country's leading paper chains (Fairfax) ran the comments - without addressing them - in all their newspapers throughout the land, giving them the widest popular publicity.

(To be fair as possible - perhaps they did so out of deference to their newest (and fattest) major shareholder, a big fan of some of the more extreme climate denying members of the Galileo Movement.)

"Watching the Deniers" is relentless in pursuit of DENIER distortions

Luckily, just as greed and denial never sleeps, nor do its opponents - never more true than in the case of Mike at the aptly named Australian blog "WATCHING THE DENIERS" , better known to his many fans around the world as WTD .

Mike, a forty something IT specialist from Melbourne, who describes himself as a centre left market oriented independent, has been all over the deniers' doings like a dirty shirt.

The mainstream press ignored the "Climate Change-is-a-Jewish-Plot" allegations - as did, surprisingly, the mainstream Climate Change Believing blogs !

Mike just kept churning out his updates on this story, faster than the deniers could spin their yarn in defence of their statements.

It was all rather like the three authors of  The Federalist Papers overwhelming opponents to ratifying the American Constitution by the sheer volume and speed of their papers in favour of the federalist cause, back in late 18th century America !

It is amazing, considering WTD's ability to build this story on the deniers' smears against Jews, that there is no Wikipedia article on this blog : a hint for someone perhaps ?

All climate-deniers are equal but some are more equal than others...

Bloody in-fighting among the tiny tots in the climate deniers camp this week recalls similar infighting among the farm animals after the Glorious Revolution in Orwell's Animal Farm.

You remember, when Napoleon's killer-dogs tore the throats out of the pigs and hens, in a very public execution.

Sou from Bundangawoolarangeera has a nice post on  all
throat-tearing here.

 She credits WTD (Watching the Deniers) as being an excellent news source and SVE can only agree with that assessment : required daily reading --- from the 99%, for the 99%.

Great fun, but a bit pathetic too , because these poor denier nobodies have long been used by libertarian think tanks / newspaper chains / political parties as very public, easily ridiculed , stalking horses for the libertarians' own sinister ends.

the real paymasters of the tiny tots deniers are the sinister libertarians

But when the public ridicule gets too loud - as it is now over the Galileo Movement's managing director Malcolm Roberts saying climate change is all a Jewish bankster conspiracy, the libertarian powers-to-be remain silent in the deep shadows, unwilling to come to the defence of their embattled dupes.

Just as Napoleon's real paymasters were the human bosses , who were content to remain in the shadows when the killings were being done....

Op-Ed piece in Australia's most "left-leaning" daily by a denier who blames climate change on JEWISH bankers

It this is what Australia's most "left wing" daily will do, it is very hard to know just how Australia's "right wing" dailies can top that stunt.

Maybe by having a Op-Ed piece on climate change denial by Hitler himself , back from beyond the grave ?

The Fairfax Group-owned daily The Age is one of Australia's oldest and most distinguished publications and has been known, in recent times, as Australia's only left-leaning daily.

But coal billionaire cum climate change denier Gina Rinehart has bought a big hunk of Fairfax and installed some of her allies on its Board.

Watching the Deniers is now reporting that The Age has now published a long climate-denying op-ed piece by Dave Evans - without mentioning, in the interests of balance, objectivity and disclosure, exactly who Evans thinks is behind the whole climate change debate.

Libertarians blame climate change debate on JEWISH banking families

It just so happens that one of Gina's biggest raves is the husband and wife team of Jo Novo and Dave Evans - both who love to rave against the powers of Big Money taking over the climate change debate.

They don't mean Gina and her billionaire denier buddies though : it is all down to those traditional bete noires of the Libertarian mind set : Jewish banking families like the Rothschilds.

Anti-semitism and climate-change denial : surely a match made in Social Credit Hell .....

denier BLOGS ; read 'em, but don't write about 'em : focus on THINK TANK deniers

We are handing deniers a winning narrative - how can we be so dense ?

I love to read the blogs of the denier-fighters in the morning, none more so than Mike at Watching the Deniers, a denier-fighter from down under in Van Denier's Land  .

He's an ordinary guy like me, with a day job and all, trying to find out the time to peck out his assaults on the deniers and offer his support for the climate believers.

And I try and find time occasionally, very occasionally, to read the blogs of the deniers.

But I don't ever - EVER - write about the denier bloggers.

He does - I don't.  Mike & Mike : yes, we disagree.

But not on climate change, but rather on the tactics we bloggers might use if we really want the world to take some action on global warming as soon as possible.

I save my small poisoned penmanship to poke at the big guns of denial : those key hired hands of denial , aka the libertarian advocacy think tanks.

Here is why.

We already have the ordinary public (ie the unsophisticated), all be it weakly, on our side.

In Nova Scotia, even the most rural illiterate have heard about global warming and are always ready to half-seriously blame any heat or storm event upon it.

We have public science on our side - the peer-reviewable active climate scientists are 97% (or better) for us.

(True, weathermen-cum-climatologists are frequently against these newly visible basic research type of climate scientists, because until recently even an ugly guy could always get laid in a small town, if a woman recognized him from his TV weatherman job : he was a Star !

Sheer envy, over this transfer of status to new climate experts, lies behind 99% of the bile against climate change among the significant percentage of old fashioned weathermen who claim to disbelieve climate change.)

But this aside, we have public science as well as voters on our side.

We have TV on our side - here I disagree profoundly with Jim
Hoggan of DeSmogBlog. In his chapter , Manipulated Media in his great book Climate Cover-Up, Jim says the shift from a reading culture to an visual and oral culture has hurt us denier fighters.

I, by contrast, think that the relatively small percentage in the past who actually enjoyed reading are still around, still reading, still enjoying it.

The others prefer TV, yes, but we must recognize that TV in  2012 is not the TV of 1952.

The growth in cheap, light video camera equipment, satellite transmission, the internet's YouTube, the growth of national TV news networks in every third world nation - all this means any and every storm in the world is likely to flash before our eyes and ears rather than be something only an astute reader of the New York Times used to read on page 53 , paragraph 12.

We do have more and more powerful storms than we did 60 years ago - but we can only demonstrate this truthfully in some long complex journal article that only scientists in that area could understand and believe.

Lucky for our side, we don't have to.

Because those same denier-oriented TV networks we love to hate, in an increasingly competitive news market, hype any and every bit of dramatic news video ---- and storm disasters top that list.

So - ironically - the Murdochs of this world are converting voters into believers on their companies' TV news, regardless of how many unread OP ED columns in their newspapers claim its all baloney !

What we don't have on our side is popular science (and about half of the educated classes: the rich half.)

Only one group among the many people that makes up the denier
classes can provide credibility in that area of popular science for deniers.

Big corporations and the super rich have no credibility, nor do industry lobby groups, nor do denier politicians. Not on science, for sure.

Frankly, nor do denier bloggers.

Peer-reviewed scientists who blog are respected - as peer-reviewed scientists, academic historians who blog are respected - as academic historians, professional journalists who blog are respected - as professional journalists.

Blogging is something we all feel we can do and about half of us have seemed to have tried it at least once : it gets no respect.

Denier bloggers get no respect when they blog, either, even if they were once well known scientists before they went off the rails.

It is only when big money hand-delivers them a lot of cherry-picked snippets of facts and a bundle of money and asks them to write a book around those snippets and assuring them it will get a real publisher, a round-the-world book tour, guest speaker talks-at-seminars and interviews with the biggest media, do they become respected --- as "authors".

When we ordinary (non-expert) people with day jobs and no hidden funder become denier-fighter bloggers and then proceed to engage only other bloggers (who happen to be deniers), outsiders see us both as just typical hot-air-driven loudmouths.

We are momentarily equal to the much richer/full-time deniers - yes.

Yes, momentarily equals in outsiders' eyes - equal loudmouths: denier bloggers and their blogger opponents.

But our bun fight with the denier bloggers is irrelevant to our main aim.

 That main aim is taking down the only credible group the deniers have in the real war, which is always over popular science.

 (Popular Science I define as the whole world wrestling over the meaning of published science's results: in this case, the meaning of their results regarding global warming.)

That group is the libertarian advocacy think tanks.

Only they stand at the nexus between (A) the super rich foundations together with the big corporations and their industry lobby groups and (B) the individual bent scientists who happen to blog, but who are mainly useful when trotted out at think tank seminars and conferences - not as hand-to-hand bloggers fighting us out in the blogosphere.

We bloggers-cum-denier-fighters need new tactics.

We need to highlight, not hide, how unfunded we are, how we work elsewhere unrelated to climate change and only blog in our spare hours.

In our spare bedroom. That we are not experts. That we don't live inside the Beltway or inside the Triangle- that we are nobodies from nowhere.

And that we are davids, in a tremendously unequal fight with well funded, well connected, huge think tanks located in Snottyville and just filled with snotty Yale and Harvard grads.

But - but - despite that, in our spare time and in our spare bedroom we checked the math on their latest glossy report damning climate change - and the math is wrong .

Wrong, wrong, wrong - there on page 17 !

Because while bloggers are dissed as bloggers, we are respected as people who can sometimes scoop the world media on facts and stories.

Now we have a narrative the mainstream media reporters can run with, over the bodies of the people who actually own their outlets:

Little david brings down rich snotty GOLIATH with a tiny slingshot filled with inconvenient facts.....

The WICKED Rev Whewell and how the denier Skygods might just be doing us Earthlings a big favour

Breaking Up : for the Sake of the (human) Family...

"Boring" alert : I have been doing some heavy thinking. 

(The result of reading (via the ever-alert Mike at Watching the Deniers) of Graham Readfearn's account of how the deniers will soon be taking over Australia's government and education, from top to bottom.)

Yep,the deniers are breaking up Science: dividing it up into their science and our science.

And yet, in a strange sort of way, that is exactly as it should be - and as it as it should always have been.

The fact that it not, can be laid at the feet of that versatile, if wicked, polymath the Reverend William Whewell.

One of the many privileges of being a minister in the Established Church of England was to the ability to yoke two together, forever.

Between 1833 and 1840, the beastly Whewell did just that : forcing the unholy marriage between Natural Philosophy and Natural History and calling the spawn of this un-natural union by one word : Scientist.

Natural Philosophy goes under many names today, because all these names ( and sciences) contain bits of the core values of natural philosophy.

Theory-oriented science, lab/experimental science, production science, K-selected science , two-bodied science, Newtonian classical science, science of the First Law ( of Thermodynamics), linear (machine) science.

Natural History actually lives on, weakly, but many sciences also contains bits of its original values in their core.

Observation-oriented science, real world science, impact science, r-selected science, three (or multi) bodied science, Quantum science, science of the Second Law (of Thermodynamics), chaotic (garden) science.

Using Leo Marx's extremely useful metaphor of "The Machine in the Garden", we can see how these two original sciences should have worked against each other, for our and Nature's greater good.

Theory science is very good at creating new "machines"  in the laboratory for the betterment of humanity.

They do so at great ultimate cost, though.

By strictly, narrowly, focusing on only the new machine's invention and excluding all thought of the unexpected consequences when it is introduced into a chaotic, dynamic, resource-restrained real world, they merely postpone the inevitable.

Call them eternally cock-eyed optimists..... or deniers*.

(Albeit, only as deniers of material limits to human invention.)

Other kinds of personalities - call them worriers, doubters and yes, even, sceptics and cynics - are needed to discover and warn us about what happens when the shiny new machine leaves the Lily-white walled laboratory and heads out into the great big dirty, noisy, untidy, unpredictable, real world, aka the garden.

Skygod science and Earthling science are meant to clash - we only get their full benefit when they do clash.

Now, I will argue and you are free to disagree, that we earthlings do accept the right of production science to exist (pardon me while I check to see if my latest i-pod touch 4 is fully charged !)

But as well , we fully support the right of impact scientists to fully interrogate production science's impact upon the real world, for good or bad.

Reality ate my homework....

(Think of it this way : we earthlings think every teenage student should have the right to spout off whatever they want on the exam paper. But we also fully support the right of their teachers and parents to fact-check their work afterwards.)

Skygods do not : intellectually they are still the same 16 year old boys at the very back of the classroom who already know everything, and are bored beyond reason with futher schooling --- they see themselves as doers, not thinkers.

Despite this, they paradoxically take their old (pre-1970s) high school science teachers at their word (!).

  That word being there is only one kind of science and it's job is to produce and produce and produce an ever growing cornucopia of stuff : from biological food stuff to nuclear radioactivity stuff.

Deniers tell us that production scientists and their kindly employers can be fully trusted, by us the voter and consumer, to make sure nothing bad ever happens ; we promise -- this is why we are firing all those unnecessary interfering (impact) scientists that work for the government.

Deniers, very much against their own ultimate wishes (be very careful of what you ask for !), are busy taking us back to a pre-Whewell era when two sciences duked it out, with two opposing, alternative, visions of this single planet : skygod vs earthling.

Consider it my life's work to help the deniers tear Science apart : for the betterment of the world......

DEANE PRIEST led to Canberra guillotine while pot-banging housewives jeer

Whoa Pony ! Not quite there yet , but there is no doubt Aussie housewives are hot to trot about the soaring prices at the outlets of the Brumby's Bakery chain.

I learned all this from Mike at Watching the Deniers who in turn got it from The West Australian, who first broke the story - kudos to them !

Deane Priest , the MD (boss) of the chain wrote a chatty little newsletter to all of the chain's franchisee telling them to jack up prices in July and just blame it all on the new Carbon Tax.

Outrage followed when The West Australian newspaper reprinted the newsletter.

The carbon-pollution-loving ultra-Liberal party went ducking for cover and the federal government's consumer protection agency ,the ACCC, announced it would investigate for possible price gouging.

Deane Priest's only crime, as far as I can see, is stupidity and a marked lack of ability in the two-facedness-department.

He should have taken a lesson in two-faced audacity from the ultra-Liberal party leader Tony Abbott who said:

The truth is the carbon tax is going to impact on every price in our country 

Well Tony - I can call you Tony can't I ? - the government here in Canada can put up taxes all it likes on booze, fags and lottery tickets - I don't drink, smoke or gamble and as long as they don't tax swearing , I feel secure.

The fact is that taxes often have a differential impact, not a universal impact , which is why new taxes are so frequently used to nudge society in different directions rather than simply used to raise extra revenue.

In fact Green Party types like Canada's Jim Harris frequently propose "revenue neutral taxes" - for example, taxing carbon polluters but then giving all that revenue to encourage new renewable energy producers.

The net effect is that the government has no more revenue, but human society has been eased away from self-engineering its own 'climatic' doom.

So for example, a small local bakery that generates its own electricity off its own roof panels and then sells its bread in its own shop won't see the cost of its bread rise, but their big competitor, reliant on external energy and selling their bread - by carbon-burning truck - over a wide area, is going to see a true cost rise.

Ultimately, locally-made and sold bread, using local sunlight, will cost less to the customer and become more popular, while the big regional bakery (say Brumby's)  goes belly up.

Its called a market solution and its coming from a socialist government - a bit odd that , Tony, but what can you do ?

Yes, Tony, they did used to call them 'sin' taxes - "hitting only the sinners and sparing the saints" , back in the days when most people still believed in sin.

But Tony, burning carbon is a sin, when there are cost-competitive* renewable alternatives.

Cost-competitive, as in the eyes of energy accountants' bean counting.

 A lot more tough-assed than slackers like you, me and Tony, these hardnosed buggers rightfully count in the cost of externally-borne pollution costs , set them against internal profits, and then find consistently negative values.

 For example, when burning the most common types of coal (sulfur-dirty,high moisture content, low BTU per mass) used in much of our electrical production.

I  feel I can call Tony Abbott an ultra-Liberal (aka a libertarian) rather than a conservative as most media are inclined to do, because true conservatives, like myself, tend to be a censorious lot - always wanting to tax the other guy's sins.

But Mr Abbott has consistently been against taxing any sins - in opposing a tax on sinful carbon he is at least being consistent - to himself and his party's true (ultra-Liberal) values.

But just as consistently, even in very rich countries, bread remains the Staff of Life and woe be tide any party that lets its cost soar too high.

Then they face certain defeat at the polls - or even a date with the modern version of the dreaded guillotine blade, as the events of Libya in the Arab Spring  demonstrate yet again.....

Pierre-Simon Laplace & Denier-Determinism rebuked by US Federal Court of Appeals

It seems eternal vigilance is the price we must all pay for freedom from the scourge of Denialism.

Around the clock, around the world, thousands of ordinary citizens are scanning their newspapers, their computer screens and TV sets to catch the latest outrage of denialism and stem it before it spreads.

I didn't catch the recent decision of the US Federal Court of Appeals, in which it ruled that the EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom , every time it approaches a scientific question.

But I subscribe to an email feed from  Watching the Deniers  (and so should you) and Mike there had caught the story.

 I dutifully read it with (admittedly) scant interest, until I hit that stinging quote about the atom.

The implied rebuke to Late Modernity's mixture of Positivism, Scientism and Determinism (the core of Denialism) could not be missed by someone attuned to the history of science.

I heard definite echoes of Pierre-Simon Laplace's famous Demon being referenced here.

Here is what I put in my comment to Mike's article in Watching the Deniers : (early morning typos corrected !)

Michael Marshall says:

July 3, 2012 at 9:54 am

 The man spanked the hardest by this court decision is long dead. His name is Pierre-Simon LaPlace, the father of Determinism and hence at least a godfather to Denialism.
In the heyday of Scientism ,1875-1965, it was exalted that one day Man would achieve his goal and by knowing the position and direction of every atom in the universe, would know all of the past and all of the future.
Today no scientist who believes in global warming believes this any more . Along with this court, they accept that we must base decisions on strong probability instead of absolute certainty.
Kudos to which ever justice who wrote this decision – they obviously recalled the undergraduate science of their youth with fearsome, biting, accuracy !


The deniers are very well funded and we can't match their il-gotten lucre, but we can exceed them in our fervour..... 

Aussies in YELLOW (PERIL) LEVEL moral panic over carbon tax, but BC is okay on its tax

Thanks to a world wide fifth column of denier-watchers, I can keep up with denier activities all over the world.

Mike at WATCHING THE DENIERS is full of vim and vinegar over the deniers there attacking the new carbon tax.

It seems to be that Aussie-land is reliving its WHITE AUSTRALIA moral panic mode, only this time over The-Carbon- Tax-Peril (color undefined).

If you are still reading this by the time this post hits your internet connection, then you will know that the world did not end and the sky did not cave in as Prime Minister Gillard pressed the button to start the tax-collecting process.

Australia's latter day Millerites will have to sheepishly climb off their hilltop vigils and return home to work, mortgages and taking out the garbage.

The green-leaning Pembina Institute here in Canada has just released a report that should reassure queasy Ozzie Landers (what timing eh - or am I being needlessly cynical about my dear colleagues ?) ; they say claim that BC has taken its carbon tax in stride.

They say that 64% favour the tax ( there is that percentage again - only this time in favour of carbon taxing --- its almost like the ritualistic 99.9% that voted for Comrade X in all those commie countries long ago.)

My own view is that if the tax survives two years, it will survive for the long term --- so let us hope Gillard's government holds together that long, to give this tax , as LABOUR is wont to say, "a fair go" .....

who is WATCHING THE 63% of australians who are DENIERS ?

I will keep repeating it until I am not just red in the face, but a whale of a rainbow of colours in the face:

The true measure of the numbers of deniers in our world is not the number of highly vocal, well paid, loonies but rather it is the percentage of ordinary citizens (us) who deny we need real carbon taxes to actually cut global warming.

In the Australia that is home to "WATCHING THE DENIERS" , that percentage is 63%, according to the latest polls  from the Lowy Institute on the Gillard Government's new (& very modest) carbon tax. Green voters ? 38% of them are also opposed to this carbon tax. Weak reeds indeed !!

Deniers are nothing more and nothing less than latter day modernists, (aka skygods) and in this post 1945/ post hegemonic age, they still make up about 60% of the world.

Greens, commensalists, earthlings, "renewers*", postmodernists - call us what you will - we only make up about 40% of humanity.

Attacking raving loonies, rather than that nice-but-doubting couple next door is the moral equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel - we  shouldn't do it - I won't do it.

Too many citizens claim to be - but can't be - both in favour of saving whales and rainbows and opposed to carbon taxes.

If you won't want carbon taxes then don't be a hypocrite ; get out there and shoot every rainbow blowing whale in Nova Scotia that you can see and dig every foul black tar pit you can find.

If you are determined to have places like Harper's Canada actually led the way to Hell, at least be upfront about it - don't be Po-Faced....

* renewers is the opposite of deniers - one side denies non-renewable energy will ever run out or cause problems ( and once they HAVE mined this earth out, it is off to new vistas on Mars) - the other says we should husband our renewable energy if this earth, Life's only lifeboat in the universe) is to survive.

Mike of WATCHING THE DENIERS writes in the spirit of Cobbett and Twain

If you don't read the Ozzie blog WATCHING THE DENIERS you really must.

Mike writes in the style of the William Cobbett taking on the British government over its ill-treatment of troops at Ely (an article that got him two years at Newgate for sedition .... and made him forever famous as a defender of the ordinary people).

He writes in the style of the Mark Twain who took on the American government for the genocide at the Moro Crater.

Both of these articles crackle with wit, energy, bile, sarcasm and will still delight and outrage you despite the fact that the government claims demolished in both have long ago been forgotten.

I use both, daily, as a model for my writing.

Mike probably doesn't - but he has channelled their spirit none the less -- just read him ripping into his favourite bete noire among the many Ozzie denier organs - enjoy !

count me in among the anti-deniers: albeit, anti the LIMIT-deniers ...

Michael Marshall

The DENIERS swept the WEBLOG Awards (The BLOGGIES).

They should be congratulated for their efforts - just as we un-deniers, non-deniers,anti-deniers need to be told to do better and pull up our socks.

Its quite a battle out there: for every GREENIE WATCH there is a WATCHING THE DENIERS.

(Both blogs as it just so happens, are from Australia.)

My stance on denial is a little off the mainline, IMHO , because it is a little deeper, a little bit more fundamental.

I am after the WHIGGISH majority among the scientists operating in the world of Popular Science (science outside the Beltway of Peer-review) : which at some time or other includes almost all scientists, however defined.

Limit-deniers: sunnily dismissing any belief that ultimately humanity might never know everything there is to know about reality.

Panglossians.

Today they deny that man's efforts to change the climate could ever go 'out-of-control' (ie , of the control of Man and into the control of Mother Nature).

Tomorrow they will deny that it makes more sense to recycle the refined common metals we already use here on Earth than it is to mine them from asteroids.

Their denials of limits or restraint upon Man's abilities are , characteristically, limitless.....