O…M…G – Video explodes skeptical kids in bloodbath

My Inbox exploded with tips today, this one in particular. This unbelievably vile video from the 10:10 campaign takes the award for the most disgusting climate and carbon reduction video ever. It is in a class by itself, which is off the scale. See also Ryan Maue’s post below this one on the 350.org tie in for 10:10.

What were they thinking? They weren’t, because this is going to have the exact opposite effect they intended it to have. I don’t have words to describe my disgust with the video.

WARNING: GRAPHIC VIDEO IMAGERY


Here is what they say about it on YouTube:

The1010Campaign | September 30, 2010

http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure

Whippersnapping climate campaign 10:10 teams up with legendary comic screenwriter Richard Curtis – you know, Blackadder, Four Weddings, Notting Hill, co-founded Comic Relief – and Age of Stupid director Franny Armstrong to proudly present their explosive new mini-movie “No Pressure”. The film stars X-Files’ Gillian Anderson, together with Spurs players past and present – including Peter Crouch, Ledley King and David Ginola – with music donated by Radiohead. Shot on 35mm by a 40-strong professional film crew led by director Dougal Wilson, “No Pressure” celebrates everybody who is actively tackling climate change… by blowing up those are aren’t.

I know people will be upset by this, please keep your comments civil – Anthony

=======================================================

RELATED STORIES:

Lower Than This They Cannot Stoop

Global Work Party Day on 10/10/2010: come up with your own event

UPDATE1:

Some people in comments whether this is some sort of horrible spoof. It appears to be direct from 10:10, as the URL highlighted in yellow below on the YouTube description links directly to the 10:10 promotional web page:

http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure

which is a subpage of their main website.

http://www.1010global.org

UPDATE2: They are so proud of this “mini-movie” they did a “behind the scenes” video of it.h/t to WUWT reader “scarlet pumpernickel”.

UPDATE3: Hot Topic (an AGW proponent site) in New Zealand thinks this video is “obviously effective

About these ads

603 thoughts on “O…M…G – Video explodes skeptical kids in bloodbath

  1. That’s my team, Tottenham Hotspur.

    The guy in the middle, Ledley King is my all-time favourite footballer.

    I feel… abused :/

  2. Monty Python sketch, right?

    From the Ministry of Silly Ideas?

    No?

    Oh, dear.

    REPLY: Ministry of Stupid Ideas more likely – Anthony

  3. Oh that was spectacular! No, really, I support this kind of rubbish because it shows exactly the mentality of the people we’re actually dealing with here. This, then, is the face of the modern environmentalist. “No pressure,” they’ll lie as they reach for the button. This is a masturbatory fantasy for these people, and it reflects the very nature of the world they want to live in.

  4. This is a joke, right? A satire? They don’t actually think this will encourage people to see things their way, do they?

  5. The people being this travesty of an advert are clearly delusional. Using the same tactics as the Taliban suicide bombers is really the way forward?

    I think it time for all CAGW sceptics to come out of the closet and tell the green loonies who funded this piece of junk exactly what they think!

  6. It is my personal opinion that “environmentalism” is simply used as an emotional hook to get people to sign on to a leftist political agenda. The left is extremely frightened at this point and not just in the US. What you see here is a desperate measure by desperate people. The latest election in the Western world saw Sweden re-elect a center-right government for the first time since the end of the last ice age. In the Western Hemisphere, Hugo Chavez recently suffered a major defeat when his party lost its 2/3 majority in the legislative branch and he can no longer rule by decree. Today the security forces in Ecuador are doing something or another against the Venezuelan assisted leftist government there.

    The political left is suffering defeat after defeat in country after country and is set to suffer a sweeping political bloodbath in upcoming US elections. Their agenda is at risk and they are doing the best they can to scare people into supporting that agenda even after they have lost political power.

    This is probably going to get even worse and more common over the next year or so.

  7. Like something out of a George A Romero film.

    Actually, I thought the brain washing of school kids was more horrific but I can see your point, I don’t see this engendering carbon reduction. It’s a bit silly really.

  8. Said it before and say it again..desperate times call for desperate measures, more mind games.Where do they drag these low lifes from.

  9. Well I thought it was a funny ad, sorry. But I do agree that most intelligent people will see this as a direct threat from the ‘more equal’ pigs.

    Revolutions a coming, tick tock.

  10. This campaign must rank up there with New Coke and Edsel in the list of the most stupid marketing ideas. It only shows ase what their most strident critics claim then to be. Will anyone at all be convinced by this. it looks like a campaign put out by their opponents.

  11. It’s really, really HARD not to be un-civil about this. I mean, wow. Just… wow. I seriously felt like throwing up, not because of the gore, but because of the sheer loathing that exudes from the ad.

    Honestly, though, I don’t know why I expected anything else.

  12. OK, I finally believe in conspiracy theories, because somebody working within the CAGW community must surely be a saboteur without compare. We’ve had the ‘we know where you live’ thing and the planes flying towards NY and now this. Now we know where all the oil money we’ve been waiting for has gone. It’s an advertising stroke of genius.

    There will be sensible people all over the world thinking ‘it no longer matters if these people are right about global warming, I don’t want to live in a world controlled by them. I am Sparticus!’

  13. This is really scary propaganda. It is not funny because I believe that is exactly what they have in mind for skeptics in the near future.

  14. The film stars X-Files’ Gillian Anderson, together with Spurs players past and present – including Peter Crouch, Ledley King and David Ginola – with music donated by Radiohead. Shot on 35mm by a 40-strong professional film crew led by director Dougal Wilson…

    That certainly sounds like a low carbon production.

  15. I have a very dark sense of humour but wow. How is that supposed to be funny? I am loath to make these comparisons but this message of comply or die harkens back to Stalin and Hitler. I am surprised they didn’t have any Borg references “resistance is futile – you will be assimilated”. This is about as close as you can come to advocating violence. Aren’t there laws against that? Geesh. If there isn’t a huge backlash about this then we are truely doomed. I still can’t believe what I just watched. I know sometimes we joke that those that advocate reducing the human population in order to limit our damage to the earth are welcome to start with themselves but as far as I know no one on the sceptic side has advocated the murder of their opponents. The sad thing is that the people that made this and participated in this probably do not see what is wrong with this.

  16. O.M.G.

    This has to be a joke. If they use this commercial they will either lose all respect, or if they don’t lose all respect we are in more serious trouble than a warmer climate could pose.

    These people have lost touch with reality. I have never seen such a vulgar display of bullying and intimidation. The message is, If you don’t do as we instruct we will violently kill you.

    They must be having us on.

  17. Civil? Fortunately, my feral instincts have been curbed or I’d see this as an obvious threat to me an mine and would respond accordingly.

  18. Any individual or organisation that thinks that by blowing up either children or adults , let alone Gillian Anderson, who disagree with them is continuing in the well worn footsteps of those who burned witches. The world has advanced, largely, through the efforts of those people who ‘dared to be different’.
    OT, slightly,: why are the scientists who tenaciously hold to the idea that the ‘science is settled’ so woried about thier grants? Surely, if the science is still open to further investigation and discovery their grants will be easier to come by?

  19. “and”,not an. They’ve gotten me good and angry. Are they simply fantasizing about homicide or encouraging it?

  20. This video is very revelatory of the mindset of the Watermelons. It needs to be widely distributed and seen by all.

  21. I can just see some real nuttos actually doing something like this. Enviro crazies already have done some pretty awful things- spiking trees, burning up SUV’s etc. This is one step further.

  22. What am I doing in 2010? I pass the word about WUWT. I helped a colleague create a public presentation of the malfeasance at Darwin Zero. I explain that science includes skepticism or it’s not science. I steer people to Dr John Costella’s website that fisks the 1000 CRU emails http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/ I point out that H2O is a far more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, and nobody is proposing to control water vapor. I point out James Hanson’s predictions from 10 years ago have been rather inaccurate (especially the sea level rise predictions). I ask people if they’ve been to the beach lately and is it still there? I point out that climate has been changing for 4 billion years and humans are not responsible for that. I wrote a detailed and thoughtful argument against CAGW belief to a national magazine that wasn’t published, but I hope 10% of the editors read.

    If I can get 10% of the people I meet to think for themselves, I will have accomplished my goal for 2010. And if you still want to reduce CO2 emissions, the best and cheapest way to do that is by replacing coal burning power plants with neutron burning power plants. 59 nukes are under construction now, mostly in Asia and eastern Europe. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf02.html

  23. Wow! No pressure, just do as we say or we’ll blow you up. They’ve obviously given up trying to persuade the doubtful.

    Now it’s all about giving licence to the committed to vent their anger and hatred on those who don’t toe the line.

    Water going down the plughole circles faster and faster, then suddenly just disappears. Like these zealots will. Very soon.

  24. It silly season in the political world so I suggest everyone email this to their Congressional representative who has fallen for this carbon reduction scam. Let them see first hand just how looney their beliefs are.

  25. It’s a useful illustration of how arbitrary and unpredictable the requirement to achieve that 10% reduction could be. The studio presenter thought reasonably enough that she was ‘doing her bit’ by participating in the publicising of the scheme but without explanation or warning she was condemned.

    The fact is that many have lifestyle habits that make them prudent or below average emitters but unless they submit to the specific fashionable (even if totally misguided) methods of reduction then without explanation or warning they are condemned.

    I wonder whether the creators of the video were actually intending to subvert the environmentalist movement by pointing up the sheer arbitrariness of their demands, the ignorance of science and data behind them and the bottom line cruelty that would result from forcible implementation especially in the developing world.

    I think 10 – 10 should ask for it’s money back because they have been well and truly shafted.

  26. If this video was really produced by AGW supporters it means they have gone beyond civilization and law . . . . to chaos.

    Is it really produced by AGW supports? Really?

    John

  27. Not evil, just stupid?

    Unbelievable, utterly unbelievably unfathomly stupid on their part. I certainly hope that CP, RC, Tamino, et al denounce this for the travesty that it is.

  28. This is advocating terrorism, plain and simple. I could understand that they may want to shun people who don’t agree, but blowing them up and then going about life as if you didn’t just commit murder? Its horrific and dehumanizes their opponents. I’m stunned that anyone would think this was a good idea.

  29. It’s hilarious!

    Have I got this right? Was this really produced by global warmers? How is portraying those who support global warming as mindless vindictive psychotic terrorists going to win them support?

  30. The whole of the Royal Society would be candidates for that red button then ?

    “the new guide accepts that important questions remain open and uncertainties unresolved”

  31. On the bright side, it’s clear that most environmental do-gooders are their own worst enemy… Just cheer ‘em on to do more “work” like these commercials and we won’t have to lift a finger. LOL

  32. Reaction is coming in from around the world on this disgusting video.

    [snip] Sorry, this puts words in the mouths of people who haven’t said these things. Let’s not go there, not even in pursuit of satire. – Anthony

  33. Hollywood narcissists have always been useful idiots to fascist idiologies.

    The conservative media will have a field day with this. O’reilly is coming on soon.

  34. From The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film
    “Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age. What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? Clearly we don’t really think they should be blown up, that’s just a joke for the mini-movie, but maybe a little amputating would be a good place to start?” jokes 10:10 founder and Age of Stupid film maker Franny Armstrong.
    What a relief. They don’t “really” think those who don’t agree, or just don’t care should be blown up, but maybe a little amputating to begin with- hahaha.
    These people are sick; really, really sick. But, the good news is that this just shows how truly desperate they are.

  35. Is this for real?
    Button pressing scenes are Standard Operating gore in today’s shooter video games.
    I would say it’s aimed at the young audience.
    Message would be quite clear.
    If this is really for real?

  36. In every example you could see the cowering fear and sudden realisation on the folk around the victims, I imagine this will be the same with a great many on board with the message when they see this.

  37. Stunning.

    How long before some radical enviromentalist visits violence on a skeptic and references the official “No Pressure” campaign as their justification.

    There are a bunch of unstable people who are in that group.

  38. I really really thought this was a black-humour spoof from some climate skeptic group taking the p*** out of alarmists.

    It looks as if AGW is fast becoming florid psychosis. Just like Nebuchadnezzar who also overreached himself.

  39. I’d like to hope jorgekafkazar is right:

    jorgekafkazar says:
    September 30, 2010 at 3:32 pm
    Looks like disinformation. No actual warmist organization could be that stupid, could they?

    REPLY: Unfortunately, it appears they are. The URL promoting the release tomorrow at their website appears valid.

    See my update above – Anthony

  40. Seriously – if someone asks me now what I’m doing to cut my carbon emissions, my first thought is going to be that they are dangerous and pose a physical threat to me.
    I can’t help but think the producers and promoters of this video are intending to incite violence. This is absolutely dangerous.

  41. If this is a hoax, a satire, it’s brilliant.

    On the other hand, if the 10:10 folks did this themselves, we should thank them! They’ve just done more to undermine their cause than they realize. I’d very much like to see them make more of these!

    That said… if they did this, it means they’re a very special kind of stupid. They really ought to be locked up.. for the common good, of course… and to reduce their carbon footprints.

  42. This seems to be more a video AGAINST making laws forcing compliance. I just can’t wrap my brain around AGW’ers putting this out. No one can be that dense.

  43. I thought it was very funny, personally. :) As for whether it will work, it has got people talking about it, which is the first aim of any advertising campaign.

  44. There is a really bad message to children in this film. The message is that murder of true innocents is permissible if they offend your deeply held belief system. Not quite as bad as Leopold and Loeb but right up there with Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot.

  45. Bob_L says:
    September 30, 2010 at 4:12 pm
    Stunning.

    How long before some radical enviromentalist visits violence on a skeptic and references the official “No Pressure” campaign as their justification.

    There are a bunch of unstable people who are in that group.
    ===========================================================

    It already happened without an ad campain like this with the kook at the Discovery channel not to mention the family in Chile, I think it was, that did the murder suicide deal because of the fear mongering. This will just encourage more I fear.

  46. I tend not to take wacko’s seriously, but in the event that what is depicted in the video were to actually come to pass I have no doubt that the intended victims would not just stand around waiting to be blown up. Especially since the intended victims would quite likely be Republicans and/or Tea Partiers; who, as we know, cling to their guns. I suspect the outcome of such an encounter would likely not favor the survival of the perpetrators – at least not where I live. Fair warning.

  47. “this is going to have the exact opposite effect they intended it to have.”

    No further comment necessary.

    This conclusion is spot on.

  48. Lucy Skywalker says:
    September 30, 2010 at 4:13 pm

    I really really thought this was a black-humour spoof from some climate skeptic group taking the p*** out of alarmists.

    It looks as if AGW is fast becoming florid psychosis. Just like Nebuchadnezzar who also overreached himself.

    ——————-

    Lucy,

    I had not heard of the term florid psychosis previously. I looked it up. It is a good descriptor of the mentality of people who would support the actions in the video.

    It is hard for me to think it really was made by any AGW supporters though.

    John

  49. Fortunatley that wasn’t Gillian Anderson but an alien shapeshifter. Gillian is currently on the mothership having her cerebral implant recharged. Yes I know that the alien shapeshifters used to have green goo ooze from their injuries but because of political correctness they now have to differentiate it from the green goo that emanates from the eco-movements mouths.

  50. One of two things has happened here.

    1. The promoters of this event have been had, and the video’s producers are having a right, good laugh right about now.

    2. The promoters of this event have not been had, and this video is exactly what they were aiming for.

    Either way, this video will only have ‘play’ for those already proselytizing for the new religion. Agnostics and us heretics certainly will not respond…well…to this video.

  51. Meh. Rather derivative and predictable. Maybe using Yakety Sax as the sound track would help. ;-)

    Seriously though, who provided the funding for this disgraceful thing? “Follow the money” is the basis for the whole AGW swindle, after all.

  52. Look, this film is about followers attacking followers. “We were only obeying orders what top scientists say” vs people who only put their hands up.

    No science.

    I say, go to the top. Take the Royal Society “guide” to the cleaners. Damn it, we should, collectively through WUWT etc, be able to do a far better job – just using the same format as they do – paragraph for paragraph. If I had the time, wiki expertise, and freedom from hand problems, I’d set up a wiki JUST to deconstruct the RS guide, and invite all skeptics here to participate. We shouldn’t even need to bother with John Cook’s work – though that would be a good second to RS (a lot more “science”, and Lubos has already done an outline deconstruction). I’d exclude the warmists here from editorial rights to the front pages of such a wiki, on the grounds that they’ve already got room at Wikipedia – and can still comment.

    I tried twice to start a general skeptics’ climate science wiki but Fate stopped me (the first disappeared into the blue; the second was just before loss of Internet & time available and increase of handicap). I cannot oversee it this time. But heck, it should be possible. Just divide the wiki into 59 pages, one for each RS paragraph.

  53. From The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film
    “Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age. What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? Clearly we don’t really think they should be blown up, that’s just a joke for the mini-movie, but maybe a little amputating would be a good place to start?” jokes 10:10 founder and Age of Stupid film maker Franny Armstrong.

    Isn’t this the crux of the issue. People who believe like Franny Armstrong that we are going to cease to exist because of global warming wanting to use the government which will use the threat of violence to make us comply?

  54. No humans were hurt in the production of this really stupid, mindless, disturbing, and deeply disgusting advertisement. On the other hand, sensibility, credibility, and common sense were completely destroyed.

    What were they thinking?

  55. hunter says:
    September 30, 2010 at 3:36 pm

    The logical conclusion of AGW fanaticism.

    I have also long thought the same. The underlying hatred of humanity within the green movement and the fact that human history is littered with event after event where those who dissented from the Authority were ruthlessly eliminated tells me that should the green/environmentalists acquire sufficient power, then they will simply repeat history again, and again, and again.

    Not bunny worshippers – but bunny boilers…

  56. No-one who made the video *supports the actions depicted in it*. It is *satire* and deliberately shocking to acheive its aim of being posted everywhere. They have managed to get a direct link to their video posted on the most well-known sceptic site – pretty successful. Think about it.

  57. “…please keep your comments civil …”
    How? The people behind this should be [snipped] in the [snip] and after that [snipped]. The remainders should be fed to the [snipped]. These [snipping] [snippers] should be sent to the higher latitudes of Korea. How could I possibly stay civil about my feelings about these [snippers]? That’s asking too much. May they [snip] in hell. I think I’ve talked for a lot of us [snippers]. Jeez…

  58. What is the matter with you people ?
    “Don’t you care about the children ” ( Oh yeah they just killed the children)
    “Do you want people to die ?” ( Oh I guess they do, they seem rather happy about it )
    “What about the Polar Cows “? ( There aren’t any polar cows, I just threw that in )
    Distinct lack of shame or perspective showing, in their big money Gore-fest.

  59. “Keep it civil”?

    These people just said it’s OK to kill me for not agreeing with them.

    “Civil”? I think, all due respect, I think we’re way past the tipping point for “civil”.

  60. As a “warmist” I have to say this video is absolutely terrible. I cannot believe that a group could approach this topic in this manner. Absolutely disgusting. These people give all of us who believe in AGW a bad name.

  61. Exposing oneself naked in public is called “indecent exposure”. Exposing the darkest regions of one’s twisted, hateful, demented and delusional mind to the public and it is called “raising awareness”. Frankly I would rather deal with the old, flabby, hairy nekid people (as long as they don’t look as disturbing as me) than see inside the mind of such activists.

    Not that it was not worth a laugh. They actually thought they would seem sane after doing this. I hope lots of warmers are standing next to me when someone exsplats me.

  62. That’s the environmentalists I have shouting about from here for so long.
    Now everyone else can see the real them really up close and personal.
    Finally they came out of the closet.


    Sponsored so deep in the closet by your ‘friends’ at:
    Greenpeace,
    WWF (World Wildlife Foundation),
    U.S. EPA (Environmental Protection Agency),
    U.S. NSF (National Science Foundation),
    U.S. President’s Administration,

    care to add a few more of those so close to your heart?
    A detailed list could save many people a lot of time and would be appreciated.

  63. David Gould:

    “I thought it was very funny, personally.”

    What led you to become an apologist for inciting criminal behavior?

  64. Btw, I also think this video constitutes sufficient justification to place everyone associated with it’s production or promotion on the Terrorist Watch List and the No-Fly list.

  65. First, they gave us animals (chimp, kangaroo, etc.) committing suicide.
    Next, a bedtime story with a drowning puppy and the carbon monster.
    Then dozens of airliners diving into the NYC skyline.
    Next were polar bears smashing into the pavement.
    Now we get the red button – exploding those who don’t go along with their agenda.

    These people are blood thirsty.

    “Spurs players past and present – including Peter Crouch, Ledley King and David Ginola”

    Nope. There was David Robinson and Ginobilli on the Spurs, but no David Ginola.

  66. Ohhh dear… i kinda believe in AGW (CAGW…not so much) But this has me in the mood for a good ole fashioned hippy whompin… I dont think its gonna work how it was intended(unless it is the work o a great saboteur) shakes head to self.

  67. Hmmm.

    The characters fall into three camps.

    1. Sceptics who are explosively eliminated.
    2. Believers who are spared, but shocked by the violence.
    3. Authority figures, who blithly and cheerfully conduct the eliminations.

    This structure fits a psychopathic structure, where the psychopath engages with everyone, lulls them into a false sense of security, i.e. everyone believes they are safe. Evaluates who to keep (the useful idiots) and who to remove (the non-useful, potentially threatening, sceptics). Of course, no remorse, no shock, no empathy, – a perfect depiction of a psychopath weilding power.

    The useful idiots discover too late, once the coercive power has been put in place and revealed who the authority really is. Of course who would dare dissent afterwards if you can be simply blown up with a press of a button.

    Note also that AGW Believers are cast as the Authority figures and the Useful Idiots. Says it all doesn’t it.

    Yes it is hard to believe that an AGW Believing group could be this dumb in managing their message. But on the plus side, they are revealing themselves. They will calim this is just a joke/satire, but it’s not. It’s a clearly drawn wish fulfillment scenario based on their own rage and frustration as the AGW movement crumbles.

    I expect that the AGW “all power” wish fulfillment will translate into actual violence, first against property and tehn against people.

  68. Smokey,

    How is this video inciting criminal behaviour? If it is inciting criminal behaviour, then showing it is inciting criminal behaviour, and Anthony should probably not include it on his website.

    Get a sense of humour, stat.

  69. The absurdity is that a 10% emission reduction will have negligible effect even in the CGM’s with the largest positive feed back. But “nobody expects the Spanish inquisition”. I guess we all have our dark fantasies but some of us are mature enough to suppress them.

  70. Very dark Monty Python funny for ADULTS, unfortunately UK AGW mentality will probably put it into schools.

    Scaring kids into going with their particular flow would be par for the course.

  71. I also like how most of the kids and people who are not participating are portrayed as a little sketchy compared to others. Kind of like the people who are targeted for bullying anyway – so no one will miss them after they have been ‘sploded. Nothing like sending a message. Humanity is always good for a laugh.

  72. Our very own Peter Jackson (Lord of the Rings trilogy fame) started his film making career creating low tech. splatter movies having similarly stupid and mindless plots.

    Difference is that his intent was to have stupid and mindless plots whereas these 10:10 clowns are trying to be serious which actually makes them funnier in a perverse sort of way.

  73. Everyone should flag that video on youtube

    Click flag – disgusting content. I felt sick seeing eyeballs going down the screen, this is not humour.

  74. David Gould,

    This video incites criminal behavior murder. No trial, no jury, just eco-wackos with convenient red buttons. And you are still apologizing for it.

    Rationalizing murder by laughter is no different from certain 20th century Europeans who laughed about buying vacant houses extremely inexpensively because the former owners went “up the chimney.”

    Ha, ha.

  75. “Get a sense of humour” …
    Yeah, it’s as funny as Pol Pot has been.
    It better stays on top of this Website for a while to show some warmists which kind of friends they have. I would change sides after that.

  76. Gould,

    Oh! Forget it! You’re so sick, trying to reason with you is a waste of time.
    (Mr Watts: This is not meant as a personal attack on a contributor. It’s an admission of failure. I can’t communicate with such a *&^%.

  77. What I found most shocking was the nonchalant way The Guardian covered this dirty little story. Here’s my comment on their website (I expect they will delete it):

    I’m from Germany, and I’m still grateful to you, the British (and to your kin from America) for saving us from barbarism (“Die Juden sind unser Unglück”) some 60+ years ago. And now one of the great “liberal” English newspapers embraces barbarism itself (“the skeptics are our misfortune”), and a great deal of their readers seem to think that’s OK. Where will you stop? Driving cars, for instance, causes much more deaths than weather related incidents do…

    The thought that the Guardian could drop to such appalling low levels makes me sad. You don’t expect us to save you from barbarism this time around, do you?

    Reason be with you!

  78. “Sep 1, 2010

    SILVER SPRING, Md. — A man who railed against the Discovery Channel’s environmental programming for years burst into the company’s headquarters with at least one explosive device strapped to his body Wednesday and took three people hostage at gunpoint before police shot him to death, officials said.”

    Global warmers seem to like bombs for some reason, blowing things up?

  79. This is a clever if not too subtle dig at the methodologies employed by not only the AGW and “Inconvenient Truth” brigades, but also cults, religious organizations, dictatorships, peer groups, political and environmental groups. Actually any group that excludes alternative views or opinions – quite common when you think about it.

  80. Look throughout human history. Think about Pol Pot & the Khmer Rouge. Or the Natzi gas chambers. How could such banal things have been done? This video is an education on that. The immature, makers of this video have no awareness of those periods in history called the ‘Renaissance’ or the ‘Enlightenment’. And killing children? Who merely disagree? I’m single, but I’ve changed diapers & have many nieces & nephews. And guess what? They disagreed with me all the time. They were entitled to & I liked them for it. I don’t like the word ‘evil’ but this video maker espouses things that in human history fit that description. Perhaps they should move to North Korea. In any case this has to be confronted.

  81. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 4:58 pm

    How is this video inciting criminal behaviour? If it is inciting criminal behaviour, then showing it is inciting criminal behaviour, and Anthony should probably not include it on his website.

    Get a sense of humour, stat.

    ————-

    David Gould,

    This video that you imply is a so-called “joke” should be shown but not to children. Al Gore did enough harm to children already.

    We will just judge for ourselves what this video is. If it really is by supporters of AGW, then independent thinkers have new intellectual ammunition to use.

    John

  82. This appears to be a big budget production. That would indicate some serious funding coming from ‘head office’.

    Humans who think for themselves are not the target market any more – they’ve rejected the scam. But there’s one major market left: the knuckle draggers, who might just respond to a call to violence.

  83. Two things about this video that totally disgust me:

    First, the school scene and the use of children – this pretty much says its ‘OK’ to separate out and ‘remove’ those who disagree with the AGW point of view – on this alone I hope it gets banned by advertising standards before it even makes it onto any TV channel.

    Secondly, the sheer double faced ‘its OK’ and bang approach to dealing with those who disagree – our society is founded on open discussions and discourse; this is basically an attack on our society and free speech in the name of dealing with climate change. This is an insult to those who died in the great wars and don’t care if its meant to be ‘edgy humor'; that get out clause does not apply when you attach an agenda to it.

    If they think for one microsecond this is going to do anything good to further their cause they are most mistaken – this could well be one of their biggest gaffs.

  84. 10:10 is TERRORISM because if you don’t go along with the insane majority you’ll be MURDERED!!! Greenpeace has crossed the line into seriously dark death threats which are illegal.

    The message is that if you won’t help out we’ll kill you with no problem. As bad as Nazi’s.

    This Greenpeace guy says that if governments won’t solve “it” then it’s up to “us” to solve it. He admires the people at 10:10 “charity” and calls them dedicated.

    I’d call them terrorists for promoting the idea that if you don’t help they’ll murder you and that that would be socially acceptable.

  85. I gotta say this really looks like it is making fun of overzealous activists on global warming while making a good point on the intolerance shown by many on dissenting view points. I mean the name itself ‘no pressure’ is a big clue. I think these guys have their tongue firmly pressed into their cheeks. Anyone who thinks this works pro AGW exposes themselves as an intolerant bigot.

    I LOLed

  86. Proof once again how bad our side (AGW is real & serious) is at propaganda. They should spend more time reading WUWT! More seriously here is a letter I just sent their U.S. office.

    To: washington-state@1010global.org
    Subject: No Pressure you tube video

    Hello,

    I just watched the 1010 “No Pressure” video on You Tube:

    It is disgusting, offensive and counter productive. I don’t know who in you organization is running the your You Tube site, but please contact them and get
    them to take it down. My first thought was that some denier
    group made it to discredit you.

    What is funny about killing people you don’t agree with?

  87. It’s funny until you realize that it caters to those people harbor a desire to actually wipe out those who don’t want to join their agenda.

    Then it stops being funny. Yes, I still laugh at the thought of polar bears raining out of the sky because it was ludicrous. This macabre to the nth degree. Using children is particularly distasteful.

  88. It does not take much to get these greenies to reveal their true sociopathic nature, does it? It is only a matter of time before they put their population reduction fantasies into practice. Who better to start with that the climate sceptics out there?

    Of course, just because the whole point of this carbon-reduction nonsense is to keep the price of energy cheap in China is no reason to look too closely at things, is it?

  89. Stuart
    “This is a clever if not too subtle dig at the methodologies employed by not only the AGW and “Inconvenient Truth” brigades, but also cults, religious organizations, dictatorships, peer groups, political and environmental groups. ”

    I am thinking you really didn’t get it, Stuart.

  90. How about the Greenpeace Unabomber Kid video Propaganda Subversion Advertisement?

    Remember to set aside time on October 10th! It’s Workers Party Day!

  91. I am astonished, in the old fashioned sense of feeling like I’ve been hit on the head.

    So we’re all going to die because of our wickedness and those that don’t genuflect in the direction of our new gods and their high-priests must die as an example to encourage the others?

    Its not ironic, nor even post-ironic – its just plain moronic.

    I weep for our society, so filled with self-loathing that members of it can find humour in a retreat from intellectual discourse in favour of fantasizing about killing the “other” in their midst. Its only 65 years since a World War was needed to stop the last group of people who felt like that.

  92. When the questions comes …

    … I’m gonna put my hand up.

    Just in case. One never knows. Remember the Discovery Channel guy.

    I thought it was funny. Teachers don’t blow up their kids. Employers don’t blow up their employees. Football clubs don’t blow up their star alumni. Not usually anyway. Not before the imperative to protect the Earth anyway. Gillian Anderson only gets blown up in the X Files or on film.

  93. Alex Buddery says:
    (whatever)

    Also didn’t get it.
    John however:
    “I wouldn’t expect anything less from the eco-facists were they given the chance.”
    Gets it.
    They are telling us what they think of us.”” No pressure , if you won’t respond to our fallacious claims about the climate with massive shame and a verifiable reduction of energy usage, then we, the collective, will detonate you like a burkha clad terrorist at a Baghdad market. And then we will laugh about it. “

  94. All in good fun, but would the CAGW proponents be equally as amused should a skeptic produce a “satirical” video showing Gore, Pachauri, Hansen and other prominent CAGW proponents being graphically dispatched in a similar manner as in this video? The video is so blatantly harmful to the CAGW cause that one could just as easily envision it being a “false flag” effort by skeptics.

  95. Lower Than This They Cannot Stoop

    I wouldn’t get your hopes up. Socialist movements always end like this, for real.

  96. I am thinking you really didn’t get it, Stuart.

    No, Jimash, it was you who didn’t get it…it was way too realistic to be taken as a parody. It was a mass murder fantasy, plain and simple.

  97. David Gould, Are you serious? Ask yourself what would happen if this video picked any other group as a target (e.g., Muslims, Christians, gay people, minorities). If it would be wrong to target any of these groups, then the entire premise is wrong. This is not about having a sense of humor, I have a great sense of humor, but this isn’t humorous. It’s vile.

  98. CanaDave says:

    Anyway Dave. I absolutely agree with you.
    Stuart seemed to think that this was a parody of the climate cult, but it wasn’t, it was their fantasy as you point out so correctly.

  99. Stephen Pruett,

    It is not ‘targetting’ anyone in the sense you mean. This is not a video advocating blowing up people who are sceptics. Thus, if the video was blowing up homosexuals, I would look at it in the same light: as a video not advocating blowing up homosexuals.

    I will point out that it is difficult to transfer the context of mocking the persecution complex that some sceptics appear to have, as homosexuals *have* been murdered for being gay and *are* targetted by groups of people who most certainly do want to kill them, but if you could transfer the context, I would find it amusing.

  100. Anyway Dave. I absolutely agree with you.
    Stuart seemed to think that this was a parody of the climate cult, but it wasn’t, it was their fantasy as you point out so correctly.

    Sorry Jimash, I read it the wrong way :)

  101. It might work in the UK and AUS, but unfortunately for them – it is a global campaign and it will not work in the US.

  102. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 5:53 pm

    It is not ‘targetting’ anyone in the sense you mean. This is not a video advocating blowing up people who are sceptics.

    ————-

    David Gould,

    You decided it isn’t about blowing up people who are skeptics?

    Then mysteriously you shifted to something about homosexuals.

    You are losing it Dave.

    John

  103. Sick and disturbing. The fact that they even think something like this would be funny just shows their true feelings towards those that disagree with them.

  104. Blowing up children? Doesn’t get much sicker than that. What’s next? Vidoes of kittens and puppies being tortured?

  105. Curiousgeorge says:
    September 30, 2010 at 4:55 pm
    Btw, I also think this video constitutes sufficient justification to place everyone associated with it’s production or promotion on the Terrorist Watch List and the No-Fly list.

    Agreed.

  106. I don’t believe for a second that this is just straight. It’s a parody and the 10:10 people (who?) must be hopping mad.

    Until you get confirmation that a CAGW believer did this (which ain’t gonna happen), do not believe it.

  107. What next “Doubters Raus?” I have lost a child. Destroyed my first marriage.
    This makes me sick.
    I cannot let this abide. Link- it get it out in their face. Beck,Limbaugh, Hannity.
    for starters. Your congress person. (I have one who will go ballistic.) While I don’t
    aways agree with the above but the audience is huge. In-their-face.
    Fight this evil.

  108. Jimash,

    Yes, there are lunatics. Do we tiptoe around them all and ban comedy violence completely because it might tip someone over the edge?

  109. John Whitman,

    How was my shift ‘mysterious’ given that it was a direct response to someone who had raised the issue of whether I would find it amusing if the subjects were homosexuals?

  110. It is in no way funny. It is sickening.

    If I didn’t know better i’d say it’s a form of threat.

  111. so dumb… so dumb… so dumb…
    There was no humor in this. Just stupidity.
    Oh and P.S. cutting back by 10% isn’t going to change anything. According to the numbers that supposed climate scientist suggest it would delay the inevitable by 8 years perhaps less?

  112. Anthony
    Sorry, but this is a case of America and Britain being two very similar cultures divided by the use of a common language. It is straight out of the poker-faced-irony comedy tradition that runs back to Monty Python. Trust me, it is lethally effective and, I think, hilarious.

  113. Stephen Pruett says:
    September 30, 2010 at 5:46 pm

    David Gould, Are you serious? Ask yourself what would happen if this video picked any other group as a target (e.g., Muslims, Christians, gay people, minorities). If it would be wrong to target any of these groups, then the entire premise is wrong. This is not about having a sense of humor, I have a great sense of humor, but this isn’t humorous. It’s vile.

    Fixed! ;-)

    DaveE

  114. This isn’t about saving the world from global warming, it’s about us using less oil (and other natural resources) so that there’s more for developing nations to develop. Why don’t they just come out and say this instead of trying to scare the crap out of us with grossly over-exaggerated AGW consequences?

  115. Unbelievable… The hardcore Warmists seem to be desperate, lashing out and grasping at straws. Given that the US midterm elections may mark the beginning of the end for the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming Narrative, we’ll probably see many more bouts of unbridled stupidity during the next month and quarter, until the 112th US Congress is elected and seated, and the real investigations begin…

  116. One other thing- supporting the bloody murder of children just because they
    think for themselves?
    No one can convince me that evil is funny.

  117. My sound isn’t working, so I don’t know what’s going on in this thing. But I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to figure it out. They’re blowing up skeptics.

    And wow… LOL! These people are looney tunes! And while I laugh at how incredibily stupid (yet illustrative) this is, I’m somewhat distrubted by the lack of a “no people were harmed in the making of this message” message…

  118. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 5:53 pm
    Stephen Pruett,

    It is not ‘targetting’ anyone in the sense you mean. This is not a video advocating blowing up people who are sceptics. Thus, if the video was blowing up homosexuals, I would look at it in the same light: as a video not advocating blowing up homosexuals.
    I will point out that it is difficult to transfer the context of mocking the persecution complex that some sceptics appear to have, as homosexuals *have* been murdered for being gay and *are* targetted by groups of people who most certainly do want to kill them, but if you could transfer the context, I would find it amusing.

    ========================

    Could somebody please tell me what the hell this guy is talking about?

    Actually, never mind.

    Not interested in what he has to say.

    -Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  119. TomFP,

    I had wondered about that, but I was assuming that not all of the posters here were American. Given it was written by the same guy who did Blackadder, you may well have hit the nail on the head.

  120. Substitute any minority in the place of those who do not agree with 10:10 in this movie and it would constitute inciting others to hate.

    Will charges be laid?

  121. Anthony:

    OK, my response was “over the top”. I thought that in a way, it hit the right button. My comparison between certain “sectarian violence” and what is shown in the video, I don’t think is entirely untrue. My worry is that, to put it in more mild terms, the video has the culpability of the old charge: “Incite to riot..” I think that if film video game makers are constrained to put, “Game includes violence and violent situations..” These “film makers” should have the same constraint.

    In point of fact, why YouTube has not pulled this on “TOS” violation, somewhat stuns me. (Terms of Service.)

    I hope that we can make this point, and as others point out….if we don’t, this may in the long run be done to the complete detriment of the AWG side. (For example, the local “peace groups” in Omaha NE, when I lived there (1980’s), announced they were going to bring in a speaker from the Soviet Embassy to “explain” how Korean Airlines Flight 007 was a “spy flight” and they had the right to shoot it down. The “peace groups” canceled that little exploit as soon as it EXPLODED on them, and then were “back peddling” to dis-avow association with the Soviet Union for a couple years thereafter.) Although I must point out, I take NO JOY in an opponent making such an error.

  122. The good news is, of course, that the clip will serve perfectly as satire on AGW belief.

    The bad news is that the warmists can’t see it.

    It’s a clear sign that large numbers of the most influential and educated people are now irretrievably irrational and prepared to use or accede to violence in pursuit of their irrational beliefs. Again!

    Cleverness was ever the enemy of wisdom. Sarah Palin isn’t the problem. Tina Fey is the problem.

    The world will end not with a bang but a hipster.

  123. “David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 6:19 pm
    Jimash,
    Yes, there are lunatics. Do we tiptoe around them all and ban comedy violence completely because it might tip someone over the edge?”

    But David, It is not comedy violence. It is political intimidation. Aimed at children.
    “Have you no decency, sir ?”

  124. Sorry but I just had to add – one of the best ways to counter defective groupthink is through humour – but it does require that the audience actually has a sense of humour – what on earth’s the matter with you guys? We have our Josh to do our cartoons for us, now here comes a devastatingly, wickedly funny indictment of the warmistas, and you guys go all po-faced and want to trash it!! Talk about pearls before swine! I’m really very disappointed.

  125. PATHETIC, DISGUSTING. BORDERS ON PATHOLOGICAL,….IF NOT PATHOLOGICAL. THESE FREAKS WHO MADE THIS VIDEO NEED SERIOUS HELP…
    I CANNOT TELL YOU ON HOW MANY LEVELS THIS VIDEO DISGUSTS ME. WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU GREENIES….SICKOS…

  126. I thought this was the worst I had ever seen: Animals committing suicide, discouraged by global warming

    But that No Pressure video tops it all. I find it very hard to believe it was not meant as a satire.

  127. I thought the leftist were the ones who always said that might doesn’t make right. Now they advocate killing those who disagree with them? Ha! This shows how intellectually devoid their argument is.

  128. Sorry DDS, I think Spurs just moved ahead of Liverpool on my hate list. At least ‘Arry wasn’t in it. 8-)

  129. This cannot be real. Or can it?

    I fully expect to discover this is a Skeptic “dirty trick,” attempting to make Alarmists look bad. If this is the case, I don’t approve. Let us keep the discussion rational and calm.

    However if this truly turns out to be an Alarmist production, then I am alarmed. For it means they think, (or are at least “testing the waters” to see if,) rational and calm discussion can be abandoned.

    No good can come of abandoning rational and calm discussion, in favor of blowing up those who have differing views. It is a step from peace into war, and all the misery that war entails.

    If this revolting propaganda is truly an Alarmist production, then “it is worse than we thought.”

  130. Jimasherman,

    Can you explain how this intimidates children? My kids would find this absolutely hilarious, but then they have been raised on Blackadder and similar comedy. They also understand the difference between fact and fiction, which seems to be escaping some people, as they are conflating this video with actual atrocities.

  131. Very disturbing … and very dangerous.

    Adolf Hitler would love this stuff.

    I wonder if the REAL scientists that are still actively supporting the AGW are aware of the true size of the monster they have contributed to feed.

    Regards

  132. I’m not sure which is more disturbing: the video or the responses to it, suggesting they be silenced or put on terrorist watch lists.

    I don’t agree with any of it, but last I checked people had a right to express themselves freely. It’s sick, it’s psychotic, but the same freedoms that protect their right to say it is the same one protecting skeptics in what they say. And look at it like this… We must really be getting under their skins for them to produce this garbage. Take it as a sign that we’re winning, because that is what it is.

  133. It occurred to me that there is a “Leftist Slogan” game that can be played with this video. What you do is recall or create a Bill Ayers type Leftist slogan that would be an appropriate “caption” at the end of each scene. To get us started, there is from the Sixties: “If you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem.”

  134. Brainwashing children like that is nothing short of child abuse.

    It`s time politicians (conservative?) started proposing jail sentances for the people who do this to our children.

  135. TomFP,

    If that video is your idea of “humor,” just try replacing the people being murdered — including children — with any other group, race or religion.

    Really, Tom, don’t you think there are any limits to decency? None at all?

    Don’t lower yourself to Gould’s eugenics level.

  136. Smokey,

    You cannot simply replace the group; you need to have a similar context, as I tried to point out above, obviously badly.

    As to limits to decency, there are things that I find offensive that other people find funny and there are things that I find funny that other people find offensive – case in point. :) So I am not sure where you could set the limit. And do you mean a legal limit?

  137. …….with music donated by Radiohead…….

    ===========================================================

    This shocking and nauseating video is ‘Coercive Persuasion’.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive_persuasion

    But global warming has always been about alarmism to try to make people change their lives. So this falls perfectly to who they are.

    And strangely Radiohead has a song that has an anti-coercion message in it. The song is “How To Disappear Completely”. It’s a song I like.

    Now, I have to wonder if the members of Radiohead realize what hypocrites they are.

  138. Well, I promised my heart to only one woman.

    But, on review, I find I have promised my head to three. A sculptor, an occultist, and a forensic pathologist.

  139. Anyone can find out who the contributors to this 1010 charity farce are? It would be interesting to publish names here. Did they get tax credits for contributing to 1010? If so, this is partly financed by the taxpayers. Cute.

  140. The eight stages of genocide (1996) are the steps that every genocide goes through. Gregory Stanton, who had studied the genocide in Cambodia for the American State Department, noticed this when he saw the genocide in Rwanda unfold in just the same way. He wrote up his findings shortly afterwards in 1996. Genocide always follows the very same 8 steps in the very same order:

    1. Classification: the division into us and them. This is extremely common in human society. While it is not a sign that genocide is on the way, genocide would be impossible without an us and a them.

    2. Symbolization: words or symbols are applied to the them: the yellow star that Jews had to wear under Hitler, skin colour, classifications put on ID cards. Again, this is common and is not a sign of genocide, but genocide cannot proceed unless there is some sure way to tell people apart.

    3. Dehumanization: the them become pariahs: they are seen as less than human, as animals or a kind of disease. The Tutsis in Rwanda were called cockroaches before they were killed by the thousands. Killing them was no longer murder – it was just ridding the country of something bad. Dehumanizing words, like “gook” and “nigger”, belong to this step. Unlike the first two steps, dehumanization is not common! It is the first sick step on the road to genocide.

    4. Organization: To kill people in large numbers you need organization: leaders, followers, a chain of command, duties, meetings, guns, training, hate speeches. Sometimes it is the government that does this, but often it is a paramilitary group that seems to be acting on its own (but which the government is either secretly helping or at least turning a blind eye towards). The killing might start at this stage, but not on a huge scale. Examples: the SS in Nazi Germany, the Ku Klux Klan in America, the janjaweed in Darfur.

    5. Polarization: The first people killed in any genocide are not the pariahs themselves but those in the mainstream who speak up for them. The voices in the middle are silenced through threats, arrests or even killings. Now the message of hate goes unchallenged.

    6. Preparation: the pariahs are often separated from the rest of the country – into ghettos, camps, reservations or some undesirable part of the country. Their property is taken from them (they are not coming back!). This step leaves them defenceless.

    7. Extermination: the mass killings, the genocide proper.

    8. Denial: The leaders of the genocide downplay it or tell complete lies and say there never was a genocide. As long as they are in denial the killings can go on.

  141. I am not sure what this is all about, but making a film that shows people getting killed for not going along with an eco drive is insanity to say the least…there is no humor there. You can substitute any belief set you want, here I will give you an example:

    Its the same as watching a film about a teacher cheerfully telling her class “let go gay bashing, who wants to go?”
    Teacher: “you two don’t want to bash gays, ok class, bash those 2..”

    Substitute “gay” for “christian”, “jew” etc. Starts to look familiar to something we saw happen about 65 years ago….

    There is no difference, its just about the beliefs of the individuals…And I for one think this video is offensive as is my example shown above. Both of them would be the same for me and I think its sick that anyone would make a video about this. I think some greens have fallen off of the “sanity wagon” with this one.

  142. Scarlet Pumpernickel says:
    September 30, 2010 at 5:06 pm

    Everyone should flag that video on youtube

    Click flag – disgusting content. I felt sick seeing eyeballs going down the screen, this is not humour.”

    YES

  143. Oh my HEAVENS I missed the first part with the children under 12 being blown up.

    Can we start a “class action lawsuit” against these people? I regard this as PORNOGRAPHY. Now that I’ve seen the beginning, I realize THIS IS SERIOUS. These people are INSANE… this must be exposed and opposed.

  144. I’m still pissed off. If the skeptics produced this video they would be excoriated by the mainstream media.

  145. The film stars X-Files’ Gillian Anderson

    As the poster in Mulder’s office proclaimed, “I want to believe.” But remember, “The truth is out there” and “Trust no one.”

    I think I’m seeing a conspiracy here…

  146. By the way, I’d like to be spared any remarks about the natural superiority of British comedy. Don’t want to be told about the wonderfully daffy and zany Monty Pythonesque touches. It makes me think of a humourless Prince Charles chortling over The Goons, unaware that the real comedy is his Aston Martin running on organic English wine.

  147. I’d like to ask the 2 – 3 misfits here to show us anywhere that the word “satire” appears in this propaganda video.

    It won’t be long before someone uncovers the identities of the producers and organization behind it, and they will be the usual leftist suspects. Anyone want to make a wager claiming that it was scientific skeptics doing parody and satire? …Bueller? Gould? Anyone?

    Even the idea that this was made as ‘satire’ calls their thought process into question. Next, they’ll be claiming that the video of dozens of airliners crashing into buildings was also “satire.”

  148. Mr Gould,

    The first step in preparing the way for slaughter is to dehumanize the victims. When they become less than human, when they can be murdered as nonchalantly as taking out the garbage, then comes the actual killing. This video was not about making an argument in regard to global warming. Intentional or not, this video dehumanizes skeptics and sets aside the need to debate the science under the guise of humour, and proposes that not only is the science settled, but that there is no longer any value in debating with the doubters, they are just a group of malontents who there is no reasoning with and who can be dismissed by making fun of them, going to far as to laugh at their murder.

    There are parallels in history, and the most recent of these was not so long ago that those who survived still live and bear witness to the horrors that humanity is capable of sinking to. If you truly believe that there was no harm in this video, then you are either hopelessly naive, or harbour a belief system that is sympathetic to this strategy.

    The epitaph at the bottom of war memorials says “Lest we forget”. It is unfortunate that some, in their zeal of advance what they believe to be true, have abandoned any semblence of a scientific discussion and instead adopted a strategy of dehumanizing their detractors in a fashion we have not seen since the rise of Adolph Hitler. You may have “forgotten” sir, but I for one have not.

    That the proponents of AGW turn to this kind of strategy says much about the lack of science to back their position.

  149. Also, my take on the video: Simply monstrous.

    And even more monstrous was the behind the scene’s video, where the young chap of about age 10 who was blown up in the first scene says something to the effect:

    “I am very up…to getting blown up, to save the world.”

    Then a young teenage teen actor, says, with a smile on his blood-covered face:

    “Hi my name is Drew Barnard and I think it is fun to explode children…for a good cause.”

    !!!!!

    Now I am sure what these kids are saying, are with a wink.

    We all have the fascination with the blood and guts and halloween and horror. I get that.

    This video is not that.

    There is an extremely sinister undercurrent here.

    AND TO THINK…that a bunch of adults would sanction this and employ children in the skit and blow them up…is just reprehensible.

    Think with me for a second….and answer the following question honestly.

    Who are the ONLY group of people on the planet…who believe it is good to blow up children for a good cause?

    They are called terrorists.

    -Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  150. Really liked Blackadder. First couple seasons, anyway.
    And 4 weddings and a funeral was OK, i guess.

    this is pretty repugnant.
    hope they get their butts sued off next time a fight breaks out in some school about global warming.

  151. “Carbon Dioxide is Healthy for Children and Other Living Things.” I’ve wanted that poster–modeled after the famous anti-war poster from the Vietnam era–ever since I got interested in warmism a few years ago. I just watched half of this video (couldn’t stomach watching all of it) and right now I want that poster really, really bad.

    I also want the bumper sticker.

    Ken in North Dakota

  152. mosomoso,

    I think that the comments were about British and American senses of humour being *different*, not necessarily that one is superior to the other. Obviously, being from the British side of our great anglophone family, I tend towards the British camp for a lot of my humour. But there is a huge amount of fantastic American comedy.

  153. By TomFP on September 30, 2010 at 6:25 pm

    It is straight out of the poker-faced-irony comedy tradition that runs back to Monty Python. Trust me, it is lethally effective and, I think, hilarious.

    ——

    TomFP,

    I found Monty Python to be hilarious.

    In many cases I find the AGW supporters to be hilarious when not pitiable.

    A video showing blowing up kids who don’t support an environmental ideology. It is very disturbing.

    John

  154. Smokey,

    It would be silly for the word satire to appear in a satire – it would kind of ruin it, don’t you think?

    Uncovers the identities? They are right there: the writer, director, organisation, commentators. You may have fantasies about there being some secret plot here, but reality is a little more mundane. ‘Reality’. Remember that word.

  155. “Mr. Knight….have you seen the latest video from The 1010 Campaign?”

    “Why yes, I have.”

    “Mr. Knight, why are you reloading all that ammo, and what are you doing with those rifles?”

    “I told you, son, I just got through watching the latest video from The 1010 Campaign. When someone tells me that they are going to kill me, I usually take it seriously, regardless of whether they are sane or not. Let’s just say an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.”

    “I see what you mean, Mr. Knight.”

  156. It convinces me that fascism is still around and powerful. If governments support this sort of thing, it is time for regime changes. They are perfectly capable of producing those results, if not quite so publicly.

  157. I think people are missing what the video correctly assumes. The video correctly assumes that a large portion of the CAGW foot troops consider skeptics on the same level as vicious pedophiles or worse.
    So the reason this seems funny to them (in the Monty Python tradition), is that they have been very succesfully conditioned to believe that carbon emissions are raping the planet beyond repair, and that those who don’t oppose them are to be seen as inherently wicked, or at least sick. Like it or not, this is the prevalent view among the do-goody warming troops. And it is to the credit of the propaganda machinery that it has been able to create this kind of mindset. So they see it as funny because they say to themselves something like: “We don’t really want to blow them up, of course, we are civilized, but sometimes we fantasize along those lines, because they really are scum.”

    Mike Hulme is the founding director of the Tyndall Centre, and Professor of Climate Change at the University of East Anglia. The Tyndall Centre has been described “an organisation so revered by environmentalists that it could be mistaken for the academic wing of the green movement.”

    The following quotes from this man are simply amazing, and they are, in many ways, at the bottom of why the video in question is found funny. This is what it’s all about. The science itself is a side show for these people. They know they will never lack scientists to go along for the ride, as long as they have carrots to offer them.

    http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2009/10/31/climate-change-and-the-death-of-science/

    Quotes:
    […]
    The function of climate change I suggest, is not as a lower-case environmental phenomenon to be solved…It really is not about stopping climate chaos. Instead, we need to see how we can use the idea of climate change – the matrix of ecological functions, power relationships, cultural discourses and materials flows that climate change reveals – to rethink how we take forward our political, social, economic and personal projects over the decades to come.
    Climate change has moved from being a predominantly physical phenomenon to being a social one…
    Climate change also teaches us to rethink what we really want for ourselves…mythical ways of thinking about climate change reflect back to us truths about the human condition…
    The idea of climate change should be seen as an intellectual resource around which our collective and personal identifies and projects can form and take shape. We need to ask not what we can do for climate change, but to ask what climate change can do for us…Because the idea of climate change is so plastic, it can be deployed across many of our human projects and can serve many of our psychological, ethical, and spiritual needs.
    …climate change has become an idea that now travels well beyond its origins in the natural sciences…climate change takes on new meanings and serves new purposes…climate change has become “the mother of all issues”, the key narrative within which all environmental politics – from global to local – is now framed…Rather than asking “how do we solve climate change?” we need to turn the question around and ask: “how does the idea of climate change alter the way we arrive at and achieve our personal aspirations…?”
    We need to reveal the creative psychological, spiritual and ethical work that climate change can do and is doing for us…we open up a way of resituating culture and the human spirit…As a resource of the imagination, the idea of climate change can be deployed around our geographical, social and virtual worlds in creative ways…it can inspire new artistic creations in visual, written and dramatised media. The idea of climate change can provoke new ethical and theological thinking about our relationship with the future….We will continue to create and tell new stories about climate change and mobilise these stories in support of our projects. Whereas a modernist reading of climate may once have regarded it as merely a physical condition for human action, we must now come to terms with climate change operating simultaneously as an overlying, but more fluid, imaginative condition of human existence.

  158. To see the harm for kids in this video, you have to imagine them passing it among friends or schoolmates. Some of them will discover delight in this video and that delight will be associated with the alarmist message. At its least harmful, the message will be understood by some as “Justice has been done.”

  159. Benjamin said

    “I don’t agree with any of it, but last I checked people had a right to express themselves freely. ”

    Not here in Australia or many other parts of the world. Inciting hate and violence doesn’t sound like any sort of freedom worth diddly-squat to me. Where is my freedom to live with the expectation of not being vilified and threatened because I don’t believe in a theory?

    Michael

  160. Bullies intimidate.

    If they were right, they would not need to intimidate.
    Can the button be reversed to work on the producers?
    NO pressure.

    Definitely must be negatively flagged on Utube.

  161. A comedy? Ha ha, that’s hilarious! Just like jihad is hilarious! Just like war is hilarious! Just like 9-11 was hilarious!

    Far be it from me to suggest that they’d like 9-11 because it destroyed 4 CO2 polluting airplanes at the expense of people blowing up. Gosh…that sounds an aweful lot like that video.

    Good grief.

  162. Francisco,

    Rest assured that I do not consider sceptics to be on the same level as vicious paedophiles. I think a slogan that was used by people on your side of the debate re Al Gore sums up my thinking: not evil, just wrong. (Not that I believe in the concept of evil, but hey …)

  163. Francisco says:
    September 30, 2010 at 6:44 pm

    Oh look, more comedy violence.
    Who cannot see the humor in a chimp hanging itself ?
    After all it is fictional isn’t it ?
    Chimps aren’t really hanging themselves are they ?
    Oh then this must be one of those “Message” things right ?
    Often I don’t get those.

  164. “This is not a video advocating blowing up people who are sceptics.”

    Yes, it is a video advocating “blowing up” and murdering people who are “skeptics”. Clearly it not only advocates murdering people who don’t agree to help “reduce carbon emissions” it advocates going about your day as if nothing happened afterward!!! As if no one was MURDERED! It’s a video advocating genocide of people on a mass scale throughout society everywhere who won’t cooperate with the dictates of those who believe they are “right” about their soothsaying of carbon doomsday.

    If I’m not mistaken in Canada this “video” might even qualify as “hate speech” against those that don’t agree with the dogmatic carbon doomsday point of view since it advocates MURDERING that sub group of society.

  165. There’s a lot of people saying here “they can’t really think that will help their cause”. I find that when it comes to anything controversal, most people (including those commenting here) never put forward an arguement that will help their cause. Instead they put up a banner that is a rallying point for those who believe similarly, but is too extreme to attract those with different points of view. Think of all those talks given to explain global warming tithe people- that are only attended by those who wholehartedly believe in global warming. Skeptics don’t want to go because they’re tired of speakers using misleading generalizations to demonize the skeptics community, they do not get a chance to voice their views, nor are they likely to hear an arguement that they haven’t heard and that addresses their concerns aboutthe global warming science.

    I think in these cases, and in any case involving controversy, people don’t realize that their effort isn’t helping. They just unconsciously lean to presenting a one sided arguement to those who already agree with them because it is easier and they get far more positive feedback then when trying to make an arguement that appeals to the opposition. Also, I’m sure blowing up people sounded like a great idea to everyone who made this commercial, because none of them considered the side of the people who didn’t want to get involved.

    Notice that I too am guilty of presenting an arguement to those who are already inclined to agree.

  166. I’m dumbfounded. Are you sure this wasn’t produced by The Onion? Can these people be that clueless? I bet every skeptic who visits this site regularly could have come up with a dozen ideas for videos PROMOTING CAGW that would be more effective than this. Unbelivable!

  167. Rick,

    You seem to making a common error. The violence in the video is *fictional*; 9-11 was *real* (unless you believe the loopy left conspiracy whackos, of course).

  168. So is this how science is debated now?

    These militant groups sound like terrorist organizations.

  169. I’ve watched it a few more times to see if I can see the *British Humour* in it and I can’t, but:

    A) It is a threat message;

    B) If somebody calls them out on it or sues them, they’re going to backpedal and say it was *British Humour and you Just Don’t Get It*;

  170. Efficiency is a good thing. But like practically everything the left does, the things they promote that actually may have net value are done via propaganda, lies, manipulation, and/or some form of thuggery. There’s a reason the French word for left, gauche, has the meaning it has in English.

  171. Rick,

    This may be a repeat, but:

    This video is *fiction*; 9-11 was *real* (unless you believe the looney left conspiracy whackos).

  172. Anthony:

    Letters sent to the National Post and Globe and Mail, here in Canada. Others need to send a letter to the editor. DO NOT request the video be banned. Free speech is a precious thing, more precious than my personal safety. In Canada, request that the newspaper get a comment about the incitement to murder children who disagree from Elizabeth May and David Suzuki. In the US, James Hansen, Holdren (sp??) and Al Gore, in England . . .

    JE (I’m used to this. I’m a mining engineer. People try to be funny by “joking” about murdering me and my children on a regular basis.Others may not be so sanguine about it)

  173. David Gould;
    “(Not that I believe in the concept of evil, but hey …)”>>

    And there we have it. Defense of the indefensible by one who, by his own admission, doesn’t believe in evil. As he does not believe in the concept of evil, he is incapable of recognizing it when it stands before him, waving the blood of murdered children in his face.

    With all due respect sir (a euphemism meaning none), you have discredited yourself with this statement to a level that no amount of rational discourse could have achieved.

  174. Ric,

    I think that a couple of my posts disappeared – I must have used inappropriate words.

    video: fiction
    9-11: real (unless you believe the conspiracy theory rantings of some)

  175. Anthony Watts,

    My last couple of comments may have ended up in the spam folder.

    REPLY: Banned words no doubt- Anthony

  176. Michael in Sydney, but who defines ‘hate speech’? You are a denier, and therefore are full of hate and working for Big Oil, so your hate speech denying the catastrophe of global warming is a crime against humanity.

    And so it goes.

  177. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 7:21 pm

    ===============

    You can pontificate all you want, David.

    This video is “funny” in the way that British-educated, [and speaking the Queen's English] Pakistani schoolboys, in late 2001, showed CNN what they had as the screensaver on their school computer.

    Guess what that picture was?

    They thought it was funny they had a screensaver with the second 767 crashing into the South Tower.

    -Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  178. I have a great idea for a 1010 Campaign event, and I’m going to do it. I am going to sponsor a 1010 Climate Change event at our local shooting range, and invite several kids from the local 4-H to come out and shoot at my expense. We will change a climate of fear into a climate of empowerment. You would be surprised how empowered you feel when you learn to use a firearm accurately and responsibly.

    How’s that for climate change? How about some other ideas?

  179. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 7:35 pm
    Francisco,

    Rest assured that I do not consider sceptics to be on the same level as vicious paedophiles. I think a slogan that was used by people on your side of the debate re Al Gore sums up my thinking: not evil, just wrong. (Not that I believe in the concept of evil, but hey …)

    ===============================

    Folks, take a little logic journey with me as we juxtapose two of Mr. Gould’s statements side by side….and you tell me what’s wrong with this picture:

    Quote I: “Rest assured that I do not consider sceptics to be on the same level as vicious paedophiles.”

    Quote II: “Not that I believe in the concept of evil, but hey …”

    ?

    -Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  180. To further squash the idea that this is a comedy, if you go to 10:10’s YouTube channel, you see they are an actual working climate organization that has been endorsed by British Prime Minister Cameron:

    …I don’t think he would risk his reputation and image on a comedy, do you? He appears in a video with a 10:10 representative and his Energy Minister gives them a ringing endorsement. They seem committed to 10:10’s goals. This gives the video an even more sinister aspect, having the actual British Government being on board.

    Don’t tell me it’s a comedy.

  181. davidmhoffer says:
    September 30, 2010 at 7:51 pm
    @ David Gould;
    “(Not that I believe in the concept of evil, but hey …)”>>

    And there we have it. Defense of the indefensible by one who, by his own admission, doesn’t believe in evil. As he does not believe in the concept of evil, he is incapable of recognizing it when it stands before him, waving the blood of murdered children in his face.

    ==========================

    WELL SAID!

    -Chris

  182. Steve

    I see your point, which is their point, and therefore I deserve to die. However I have a get out of jail free card to play when they come knocking – I am the ultimate greenie, no matter about my hate speech (actually a positive when I need to convert to the other side) Big Oil employee number or crimes against humanity – I didn’t have kids ;)

    Cheers

  183. Anthony Watts,

    It is possible that the words that I used to describe those who believe that the US government caused 9-11 are on the banned list. Is there a banned list available, by the way?

  184. In Spain, when some TV show needs an audience boost, usually the way to get it is to feature full naked people because that’s what a lot of people like most.

    The same with the AGW show followers, but blood is the preferred sight here.

  185. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 7:49 pm
    Rick,

    This may be a repeat, but:

    This video is *fiction*; 9-11 was *real* (unless you believe the looney left conspiracy whackos).

    =========================

    Umm…correction, for the record:

    This video is *fiction*; 9-11 was REAL; this video is crap and this video is evil because it crosses the lines with pictures of blowing up children.

    Is anything sacred anymore?

    Obviously, David Gould, in your mind, it isn’t.

    Res ipsa loquiter.

    -Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  186. davidmhoffer,

    It seems that you are another person who has misunderstood: *no children have been murdered*. This video is *fiction*.

    As to me not believing in the concept of evil, I think that a discussion on that would be against Anthony’s policies, so unfortunately I am unable to defend the position. I added it because I do not want my use of language in common usage to confuse people as to my philosophical positions.

    • Mr. Gould, since you seem to be so fond of defending this video (on the government payroll no less) I’m wondering if perhaps you may be affiliated with any of the organizations mentioned? Are you a part of 1010, Greenpeace, WWF, or similar NGO?

      Most of us are trying to understand why you act as you do.

  187. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 8:09 pm
    Savethesharks,

    Can you help me with the logic error?

    =========================

    If you can’t figure it out yourself, then there is no use trying to help you.

    -Chris

  188. Perhaps people opposed to carbon emissions who like the video should begin by reducing their own carbon emissions by switching from a carbon-based to a silicon-based diet.

  189. The ‘British humor’ (Gouldian mode) sarcasm tags were apparently ‘interpreted’ by the software and did not show up. :-(

  190. The people behind this movie need help

    http://www.1010global.org/global/about/inside-1010-global

    Any psychiatrist here that can scientifically explain this? Look at their self-described guilty pleasures:

    Guilty pleasure: Out of season strawberries or blueberries.
    Guilty pleasure: Blueberries not in season
    Guilty pleasure: Having to drive, although in a shared car, to reach our organic vege garden and orchard in South Canterbury.
    Guilty pleasure: Music, music, music, all day long, so my stereo and mp3 player spend some KWh every month.

    This is the best one: Guilty pleasure: Oooo – heating in the winter

    Guilty pleasure: far away cheese
    Guilty pleasure: Long hot showers.
    Guilty pleasure: High powered cars.
    Guilty pleasure: long showers
    Guilty pleasure: Good cheese!

  191. Oh… now I get the joke – the AGW crowd are poking fun at their own totalitarian penchant for violence when faced with dissent.

    It’s so tongue in cheek – not directed at sceptics at all, but at the closet dictators within the green movement that just about pop an artery every time someone disagrees with them.

    Now that’s a relief – I first thought that there was a thread of serious intent in the subtext…

    So, we can all reast easy, the AGW crowd are simply mocking their own fringe…

    (arn’t they….)

  192. Anthony Watts,

    No, I am not part of any of the organisations listed or any similar NGO. I like discussing things with people who disagree with me, because that way you learn more and can test your own assumptions/prejudices/irrationalities in a more challenging environment.

    I guess the question could be: why this topic? One of the reasons would be timing: today is a day on which I have limited other work to do, as the parliament is not sitting and the committee system is not yet up and running, it being a new parliament.

    The other is that this is obviously a controversial issue: controversy is more interesting than consensus.

    I should note that this does not mean that I am taking a devil’s advocate position; I honestly believe that this video is amusing and that the reaction to it (and to my defence of it) has been over the top. I am sure you agree that those saying that because I find this video funny I must support the murder of children or find Dachau hilarious are being ridiculous.

    • To David Gould: No, I just find the video juvenile and disgusting – and badly thought out, much like the polar bear falling out of the sky and planes swarming NYC videos produced by other NGO’s trying stupidly to make some point about carbon. If the were going to try to emulate the famous Monty Python skit where the fellow who kept hiding behind a bush gets blown up, they failed with the design. Gore, especially graphically presented Gore, is never funny.

      I find your wasting taxpayer funded time on it bothersome also.

      And, since you aren’t with an NGO, did you have something to do with the video production of this?

  193. savethesharks,

    I always try to help those having trouble with logic. Everyone can learn – even someone like me. :)

  194. Frankly – looks like they are getting a 10% reduction in CO2 emissions via a (forced) 10% population reduction.

  195. Graeme says:
    September 30, 2010 at 4:58 pm

    Hmmm.

    The characters fall into three camps.

    1. Sceptics who are explosively eliminated.
    2. Believers who are spared, but shocked by the violence.
    3. Authority figures, who blithly and cheerfully conduct the eliminations.

    This structure fits a psychopathic structure, where the psychopath engages with everyone, lulls them into a false sense of security, i.e. everyone believes they are safe. Evaluates who to keep (the useful idiots) and who to remove (the non-useful, potentially threatening, sceptics). Of course, no remorse, no shock, no empathy, – a perfect depiction of a psychopath weilding power.

    I suggest to all that they re-read rest of your posting, as it is an excellent expose of what this is all about. Almost a subliminal message that if you oppose them, there is a threat that has consequences. Often such threats are advanced in a dark humour vein so that if pressed on the issue the makers can deny any intent, after all it is only humour for God’s sake. Tell this to the many Australian scientists, EPA workers, employed in the CSIRO, the Bureau of Meteorology, and other government departments who will tell you privately that they doubt the extremist line that is being run in those departments today but, they feel they can’t speak out, for fear of losing their jobs, access to education, research grants or risking exclusion by the action of authoritarian extremists who zealously exact vengeance on those that don’t toe the “official” government line.

    To these fearful individuals the underlying message is very clear. No pressure buddy, your choice, best to shut up and continue to feed your family, lest we push the extinction button! And if you want to complain we will deny any threat, and no one will listen anyway!!

  196. I work in a creative industry, and for years I have been frustrating all of my co-workers by refusing to believe in the warmist theories. How frustrated were they? Lets just say I’m glad they didn’t have the magic little button.

    Earlier this week we were having our seemingly bi-monthly argument on the topic when one of my fellow drones announced that he too was finally convinced that CAGW was wrong.

    I am looking forward to sending the link of the 10:10 video to the rest of the co-workers tomorrow. Methinks by about noon that a couple more will be firmly in the ranks of CAGW skeptics. Keep up the good work 10:10, every bit helps.

  197. I can imagine only two perspectives from which this video might be humorous. From one, the video is a satire of warmist fanaticism. It’s not that funny, but ok. The video is much funnier if it combines the satisfaction of a guilty desire with the reassurance of membership in a righteous in-group.

  198. Perhaps they should air their little masterpiece in Israel. I have a hunch it wouldn’t be so well received by people who have to live with sort of thing as a reality.

    Imagine for a moment turning the tables on them. Suppose some anti-warmist group made a video depicting protesters at a coal fired power plant being roughed up and dragged away behind huge, gas-guzzling pick up trucks. Oh….ha ha ha.

    They would (quite rightly) be appalled and *NOTHING* about it would be deemed amusing. This little 10:10 video is like Monty Python on meth. Maybe they should torture puppies until everyone comes around to their way of thinkin’.

  199. Repulsive, and completely irresponsible. Particularly coming after the lunatic who took over Discovery channel’s headquarters with bombs and firearms. Encouraging environutcases even more is such a good idea right?

  200. “This video is *fiction*. ”

    For some abstract concepts, like hate speech, there is no distinction at all between fiction and reality. This video seems very REAL on some of those concepts.

    AGW is fiction.

  201. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

    We have this video, where children and people are blown up for not having the ‘right’ beliefs, quite ironically on the same day that we have reports of children who found a person’s body – and proceeded to take photos of it with their cell phone cameras, laughing, and began throwing stones at it. These things begs for consideration of just what many children are being taught these days – by parents (or lack of any decent parental oversight), by ‘games,’ by the media – and by commercials or advocacy pieces like this CAGW video (along with the 100’s of planes circling NY commercial, the animals committing suicide one, the polar bears being dropped out of planes, the bunnies (or puppies?) being drown in the child’s bedtime story one… these are all really horrific)

    Schoolchildren who find body in stream then throw stones and take pictures on their phones

    By Claire Ellicott

    A group of schoolchildren who discovered a dead body callously took pictures and threw stones at the corpse.

    Robert Wilshire, who is believed to have been murdered, was discovered partially submerged in a stream by a group of youngsters from a local school.

    They gathered around the body and some of the children took out their mobile phones to take pictures and film the scene. Footage is believed to have been posted on the internet.
    — read the rest online —

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1316604/Schoolchildren-body-stream-throw-stones-it.html#ixzz114hrNGea

  202. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 8:25 pm

    Sorry, late to the discussion. Please point to the humor for me, any humor in this video.

    What is funny about murder of people that disagree with your perspective? What is funny about the advocating murder? You know what I find funny? People that believe they are in any way part of decent society that advocate such lunacy. You don’t believe in evil? That’s because you’ve never been confronted by it. Come back when you grow up and have had experiences you can relate to life. Until then, child, you would do well to shut up and pay attention.

  203. The problem with seeing this as ‘British Humour’ in the vein of Black Adder and Monty Python is that alarmists are being spoofed. Yet serious alarmists have produced this. This does not compute, David Gould.
    ===============================

  204. Anthony Watts,

    Okay – we will have to disagree on gore. It can be hilarious.

    As to wasting taxpayer dollars, I do not consider it a waste to learn more, as knowing current affairs and the various viewpoints on them is part of my job description. Engaging with people on things like this is very useful.

  205. avid Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 7:35 pm
    Francisco,

    Rest assured that I do not consider sceptics to be on the same level as vicious paedophiles. I think a slogan that was used by people on your side of the debate re Al Gore sums up my thinking: not evil, just wrong. (Not that I believe in the concept of evil, but hey …)

    So what was the wholesale slaughter of millions of people in the death camps of Nazi europe in the 1940s – if not evil?

  206. Anthony Watts,

    No, I had nothing to do with the video production of this. I had never heard of the 10:10 campaign prior to reading your post on it.

  207. Wow!

    It’s not easy to sum up a film like that in 25 words or less, but here goes: Abysmal, Brain-dead, Cretinous, Disgusting, Emetic, Facinorous, Gross, Hateful, Infantile, Jerk-off, Klutzy, Lunatic, Mean, Nasty, Offensive,Psychotic, Queasy, Rotten, Sanctimonious, Terrible, Unspeakable, Vulgar, Wretched, Xecrable

  208. It’s good for those folks that the video was made in the UK. It is an incitement to violence.

    We have a pretty and appealing teacher murdering children in front of her class. She was utterly calm, while the children were spattered with blood and were horrified. We have a boss murdering his employees in front of their co-workers. He was utterly calm while the co-workers were horrified. We have a coach murdering a former player in front of his team. Not one of the team members protested. They all just jogged off.

    Murder of those skeptical of climate hysteria is shown to be a matter-of-fact decision. No hesitation is necessary. No reason to introspect. No moral onus is evident. Even the horrified groups don’t really protest the act.

    This, when only one month ago, James Lee, inspired by “An Inconvenient Truth,” armed himself, strapped on a bomb, called humans “filth,” and took hostages, while only a police sniper stopped him from murder.

    The lesson is there for any unstable whack-job. It’s OK to kill AGW skeptics. Pretty teachers do it. Successful CEOs do it. Coaches do it. Not one regrets it. Not one of them hesitates. The only missing icon of moral authority is a minister. It must be the right thing to do.

    The voice-over at the end of the video is clearly an implied threat. “Care to join us? No pressure!” Given the ubiquitous “no pressure” in the video, each time said just before the murder, that final speech is a barely veiled threat of murder if the listener decides to opt out.

    I think there’s a clear case of incitement to murder in that video. It doesn’t look like speech protected by the Constitution to me. If — future forefend — some AGW skeptic is killed by a planet-saver, I’d be asking whether the perp ever watched that video.

  209. Graeme,

    I can’t remember where or exactly when, but I believe you and I go back several years together commenting on various blogs, perhaps The Jawa Report was one. Do you remember commenting there years ago?

    *Excuse me, Anthony, I know this is not related to the discussion, but I think I’ve found an old friend. One of the most articulate and intelligent people I’ve ever known. If I’m out of line, delete this comment.

  210. James Sexton,

    It is not advocating for the murder of sceptics. To find the humour, step back for a moment from the struggle between sceptics and warmists. Think about the over-the-top rhetoric used on occasions by both sides. This directly ties into the irrational fear that a minority of sceptics have – expressed by some on this blog – that warmists are out to kill them all in some version of the holocaust. It is satirising that. And it is satirising the wild language of criminality and sanctions being used by some on my side.

  211. David Gould – you work for the Au Govt.

    Fantastic – is the proposed Carbon Tax simply a means to ensure that the currently underfunded superannuation pensions of public servants are able to be paid?

    (Q? from an Australian tax payer working in the real economy who actually has to produce a service that is good enough that people will choose to pay for it)

    Thanks G.

  212. Anthony I confidently predict that when the UK day starts, you will see another side to this. Since I wrote my earlier remarks I have learnt that the film was made by Richard Curtis, co-creator of Blackadder, and IMO the English-speaking World’s Wittiest Man. He specialises in arid irony and savage, but rather sophisticated satire. The Blackadder opus is peppered with sceptical digs at contemporary mores and fads, and I find it very difficult to credit the man with warmist sentiments. He is any case far too clever not to realise the counter-productiveness of the film. It’s deliciously possible, however, that the 10:10 loonies, who aren’t that clever, have clutched a viper to their bosom.

    I think it’s a brilliant movie, and I salute Curtis for his cunning.

    And if I’m wrong, and the otherwise robustly sceptical Curtis turns out to have a blind spot for climate twaddle, then all we have is a splendidly counterproductive addition to the counter-CAGW arsenal. Chill, everybody, for goodness’ sake. It’s not like he actually blew them up, is it?

    I hopped over to see what the Grauniads cheer-reviewers had to say about it. Most seem to approve, but one or two see the trap – here’s a snippet “It’s like a parody of something that people mocking enviros would do.” Bit convoluted, but you get the point.

  213. As far as I can recall, the video has no text mentioning AGW. So it shouldn’t be long before people provide the video with new voice. You can make it into a sketch showing anyone you want to being publicly assassinated. It could end up as popular as that movie scene showing Hitler complaining in the bunker.

  214. rational debate says: September 30, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    “the bunnies (or puppies?) being drown in the child’s bedtime story one… these are all really horrific)”

    The bunny cries, the puppy drowns:

  215. Graeme,

    Yes. Yes it is. Bwa ha ha.

    I, too, am an Australian taxpayer. I produce things that the elected representatives of the Australian people vote for in the parliament. I assume that they believe that those things are worth paying for.

  216. David Gould says:

    “Rest assured that I do not consider sceptics to be on the same level as vicious pedophiles.”

    Liar.

    Pedophiles are only incarcerated. But you advocate murder as social policy — the murder of children — simply because they don’t agree with your nutty eco-extremism.

    And let’s have no more of your unbelievable horse manure about this video being ‘satire.’ It is vicious, hateful propaganda from the Left, with the clear message that disagreement with your personal point of view deserves the death penalty, with no defense and no appeal. It is not surprising that you are too ashamed [or more likely too careful, because you don't seem to possess a conscience] to admit that your twisted mentality is no different than those who advocated eugenics — and we all know exactly where that led.

    Further, you continue to peddle your perverted idea that because this obscene video is “fiction,” that makes your approval of killing kids A-OK.

    You must be well aware of the fact that Birth Of A Nation, the movie that launched the Ku Klux Klan onto the national consciousness and which portrayed murderers as heroes, was also “fiction.”

    Now tell us: did you have anything whatever to do with this video? Anything at all? Or are you just a sociopath who tries to defend the indefensible?

  217. Graeme,

    We are not allowed to get into that kind of discussion in this thread under Anthony Watt’s policy, as we would need to get into things like the definition of evil and concepts like free will and agency.

    If your question is about what I personally feel about the Holocaust, horrified, appalled, disgusted, saddened, angry, plus other emotions.

  218. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 9:15 pm
    Graeme,

    Yes. Yes it is. Bwa ha ha.

    I, too, am an Australian taxpayer. I produce things that the elected representatives of the Australian people vote for in the parliament. I assume that they believe that those things are worth paying for.

    Strangely enough, I laughed at your response – you got the evil laugh right.

  219. It looks like the buttons eliminated roughly 10% of the people in the video, thus achieving a 10% or so emission reduction without any sacrifices by the survivors. Cool.

    Wait. Now they want another 10%?

  220. I couldn’t watch the whole thing.

    The lesson I learned from their video is that the warmists who created this believe an acceptable way for a community of 100 people to cut CO2 emissions by 10% is to murder 10 people. They need a sequel to show how to dispose of the gore they just created in a carbon neutral way.

  221. That was a bit too revealing view into the minds of those that thought that was going to convince people to support them. Are the masses really beaten down that much anywhere in the world outside of North Korea where that would not have the opposite of its desired effect. It portrays alarmists as dangerous psychopaths. That isn’t funny! It is incredibly stupid, even for them.

  222. The promoters of this little gem call it a spoof. The sad reality is, there are vast numbers of Globalwarmists (most of them politicians, ‘progressive’ bureaucrats, and well-placed climatologists) who secretly, or not so secretly, wish they could eliminate opposition so easily. After all, any who dare question them or their motives deserve such treatment. It’s the way it has always been with authoritarian, repressive religions.

  223. Anthony – I was born and brought up in England, and I find the video rather funny, and well made. It is clearly intended as a satire by its makers. It is labelled at many points as a satire (for example the teacher’s lisp, her oversized glasses, the mention of scout troops).

    I am not familiar with 10:10, whether they are a serious organisation, and whether they think the video will help their cause. But if they think the video is anything but satire, they have been hoodwinked.

    I do not share the concerns expressed on this thread. The video is a boon for non-believers in CAGW, is it not?

    All the best.

  224. Exactly right, David.

    Like you, that video brought me to recall a screening of the pre-WWII movies made in Germany, showing Polish toughs attacking pretty blond German women. This psychologically prepared the population for the September 1939 attack on Poland. ala’ David Gould, but that was only fiction, for god’s sake, and drama!

    It’s psychological propaganda, preparing minds; just one more innocent little step on the road to violence. We’ll probably never get there, but that doesn’t excuse disguising the violent fantasies of environmental ideologues as a morality tale. All brought to you by Gaia’s Leni Riefenstahl.

    And don’t believe the children participating were not hurt. They were brutalized by that exposure.

  225. Been back at the Grauniad, and more than ever convinced that Curtis’ tongue is firmly in his cheek. He has comprehensively “had” the commissioners of the film by producing for them a piece of pure poison. He seems correctly to have predicted that the 10:10 loonies would be too blinded by their own sense of rectitude to notice.

    Here’s another snippet (with added asterisks) from the G’s comments:

    “Actually, I have to say something stronger,
    this film is f*ing ridiculous.
    I am a local Greenpeace coordinator, and a Board member of Friends of the Earth and I just can’t believe that you have produced a film that is so f*ing stupid.
    There, I’ve sworn on the Guardian.
    Jesus, where is your common sense. We’re trying to win hearts and minds.
    This is just ludicrous.”

    And carbondave – who approves of 10:10, opines “Maybe Richard Curtis isn’t as on-side as people hoped.” Indeed…

    To a sceptic, this is all heart-warming stuff. I ask all of you who are proclaiming your outraged decency – when a film is doing the heads of the warmies in as this is, can’t we all just sit back and enjoy the fun?

  226. Most of the people who find this funny seem to work for the government.

    And they aren’t laughing at a joke…they are laughing in agreement.

  227. Smokey,

    I have actually tried to have a civil conversation about this. To be continually accused by you and others that because I find this video funny I “advocate the murder of children as social policy” is wearisome. I am amazed, actually, that not one person here has come to my defence on that particular issue, regardless of how they feel about the video.

    And now you accuse me of being a liar, a psychopath and of having a ‘twisted mentality’. The last I fully accept – I think very differently to the vast majority of people. The first two I reject.

    I again state that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the making of this video, know no-one associated with the making of it (to the best of of my knowledge) and only heard about the 10:10 campaign and the video on this website today.

  228. Mr Gould,

    I believe the type of British humor that this video tries to channel is along the lines of Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”… as shocking a bit of early British satire you will find. But it works because Swift was lampooning the British and their general mistreatment of Ireland. If Swift had actually NOT been compassionate toward the plight of the Irish or had he felt that the Irish were the source of their own problems, then the whole piece turns out to be ghoulish and cruel.

    Now, if you could convince me that the real intent of this video is an exercise in self-deprecation – an effort to poke a little fun at oneself by pointing out how over-the-top the rhetoric and emotions have become – then perhaps you might convince me that this is an acceptable line of humor. Until then, I’ll take this video at face value: a slickly produced and highly polished load of tripe.

  229. Daniel M,

    Excellent. That is how I see the video, and that is why I find it funny. I do not think that I can convince you that that is what the video is doing, because I am not good at that sort of thing. But at least you understand why I am amused by it, even if you disagree that that is its intent.

  230. I get this feeling from time to time, usually seeing or reading of people doing savage acts with total disregard for the sanctity of life. After seeing this depiction of carnage my ‘feeling’ has just evolved into a conviction: there is an asteroid or comet out there with our name on it, 10km * 10km and traveling at 2,000km/sec.

    Wow…what were these guys thinking? There’s no justification for this, there’s no benefit for any “side” or whatever. It is ONLY a testament as to how low humans can stoop. This is just savagery in the guise of comedy, there’s nothing funny about it. Monty Python made this type of effect funny, these guys took it over the edge…way, way, way, way over the edge.

    Pathetic

  231. Daniel M,

    To clarify, I believe that it is satirising two things: the irrational fear that is sometimes expressed by a few sceptics on this very website that those on my side want to (and are planning to) kill then all and the irrational and wild statements made sometimes by warmists about sceptics.

  232. I have to snip myself to avoid being snipped by the moderators…

    snip, snip and re-snip!

    [snip - just for good measure. ~ Evan]

  233. David Gould,

    Sorry, but gore is not funny. Neither is this video. Nothing about it is funny. If it makes you laugh, you need to work on your sense of humor. Or join the Army and go out and get some good laughs in person. Nazi propoganda? No. Extremely dumb and distasteful? Yes. In fact, you have no respect from me because you think this garbage is funny. You must be a moron. I can’t think of anything higher on the IQ scale than Beavis and Butthead that would laugh at this crap.

  234. It is straight out of the poker-faced-irony comedy tradition that runs back to Monty Python.

    I served with Monty Python, I knew Monty Python, Monty Python was a friend of mine. Senator, this ain’t no Monty Python!

  235. Wow, just wow, and this is from an organisation that want to raise awareness on the CO2 “issue”? I have trouble believing it, as I could not have made a better movie to discredit the CAGW movement myself even if I tryed for a thousand years.

    I hope this movie will get the largest audience possible, hopefully get broadcast on TV (although it is unlikely given it’s graphic nature). It depict CAGW crowds able to casually blow people that do not share their ideas, something that is not really openly proclamed by many organisation (the only one that come to mind are extremist muslims groupuscules).

    Given the universal love that such terrorist organisations gather in everypart of the world (hint: not much among mainstream muslims, and they have badly tainted islam for all outsiders), I am sure that this small movie can make more to discredit CAGW thesis than a thousand scientific papers…

  236. Scarlet Pumpernickel says: “Click flag – disgusting content.”

    Thanks – done.

    Can also give it a thumbs down on YT. Presently stands at 29 “likes” and 82 “dislikes”. Might also send a sobering message to the organiser.

    Looks like quite some money spent on this “mini-movie”. As an attempt at humour, it is a bad mis-calculation. People cooly wiping-out those who disagree with them has far too much in common with suicide bombers..

  237. I think it is time everyone took a holiday – it is a spoof for goodness sakes! Anyway, we have aliens and ufos to worry about now. Our national broadcaster in Australia, the ABC, recently played this (transcript) on their flagship current affairs programme: http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2010/s3023532.htm. Combine that with the UN’s recent on/off alien ambassador report and I think you will find the dog whistle implies it is time to shift from global warming to ufos, aliens etc – manbearpig is dead – as the next big scary thing! Well done Anthony and everyone else, we have them on the run. But please do not lose your senses of humour.

  238. The video is bizarre beyond belief. So are many of the comments.
    As a supporter of the Canadian Armed Forces, I endorse the blowing up of real people by real people. For me, that is a real dilemma.

  239. It’s alaways Marcia, Marcia says:
    September 30, 2010 at 7:00 pm
    …….with music donated by Radiohead…….

    ===========================================================

    This shocking and nauseating video is ‘Coercive Persuasion’.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercive_persuasion

    But global warming has always been about alarmism to try to make people change their lives. So this falls perfectly to who they are.

    And strangely Radiohead has a song that has an anti-coercion message in it. The song is “How To Disappear Completely”. It’s a song I like.

    Now, I have to wonder if the members of Radiohead realize what hypocrites they are.

    The song is actually “Weird Fishes/Arpeggi’. Thom Yorke, despite how much i love his music, he’s an uninformed environut

  240. I’m speechless…

    Ok, now I’m back.

    Hey, I admit I was born with a detuned set funny bones, but, THIS is not actually funny!!! …unless you happen to think laughing at the mentally retarded is a form of humor. I grew up watching Monty Python, Monty Python this is not. There was no genuine comedic setup in any of the video. What is it supposed to be? the tension from the momentary burst of fear, shock and adrenalin released upon seeing two children vaporized by their school teacher in a shower of blood getting released as laughter? Not in my brain. I would refer you to any Monty Python clip on YouTube to refresh your brain about how REAL humor is created – even black and biting humor.

    There are SO many ways to slice through this stack of S**T, but it’s worth SO little time – here are ten.

    1. It’s a JOKE – unlikely, but in the interest of exhaustive thoroughness it has to be mentioned.
    2. It’s just in BAD TASTE – again in the interest of exhaustive thoroughness – the producers simply lack the Good Taste and Decorum normally expected of well educated, and intelligent people in an advanced civilization. Of course the bad taste could also mean the bilious flavor left over in your mouth after having watched the video
    3. It’s a HOAX – 10:10 is secretly financed by Exxon/Mobil, the Bavarian Illuminati and the Cult of Cthulhu in a bold bid to falsely portray the anthropogenic global warming saviors of the planet as a pack of homicidal, paranoid schizophrenics – well done!
    4. It’s BAIT – very expensive bait with high production values, but bait none the less designed to make the intended victims of their unbridled animosity look like deranged lunatics when they respond. “It’s HUMOR, can’t you tell? Lighten up Francis! you deniers are wrapped WAY too tight! Can’t you tell we do but jest? murder in jest? No offense i’ th’ world.”
    5. It’s REALLY Bait – They are making a list of all of the people who comment negatively on popular climate blogs for later detonation. [Sorry, this was my buddy Phi's über paranoid suggestion]
    6. It’s Masturbatory Schadenfreude – IMAGINING the misfortune of other people whom you don’t like and taking immense pleasure in it.
    7. It’s that they are IDOTS and IGNORAMUSES – Quote from producer Franny Armstrong: “Because we have got about four years to stabilize global emissions and we are not anywhere near doing that. All our lives are at threat and if that’s not worth jumping up and down about, I don’t know what is.” If these people SERIOUSLY believe this scare story, or that any of the ‘solutions’ they proposed in the video would actually WORK to achieve their stated CO2 reduction targets any better than Gillian Anderson’s voice-over effort I don’t know what to say… I’ll let Lubos take a shot at calculating their collective IQ, [I'm not a string theorist, those really big negative exponents frighten me]
    8. It’s that they are HOMICIDALLY HIP – See how clever we are!? We can depict murdering YOU as a rational solution to our AGW problem and because we are hip and clever and can couch our propaganda all in a form that can be defended as Humor, Art, and Freedom of Expression, any effort you make to critique our work will be used against you in such a way as to make YOU look like the evil doer for trampling OUR rights! – Thus rational critique is automatically thwarted – It’s Humor, its’ Art! there are NO FACTS so how can you CRITIQUE our facts? [you have noticed that trend too lately - no facts - 100% narrative]
    9. It’s PSYCHOSIS – The producers have strayed so deeply into their paranoid delusion, and they have become so convinced of the immanence, and immensity of the danger [four years? really? completely delusional] that systematically murdering your ideological opponents becomes THINKABLE. Not everyone NATURALLY thinks this way. The fact that this video was produced demonstrates positively that SOMEBODY in that group, had the homicidal thought first, SOMEBODY has had the paranoid fantasy of summarily killing AGW skeptics, which was then later ratified with SOMEBODY’S money as the best way to produce their video. It MAY have originated as a subconscious impulse, but somebody DECIDED to turn it into media.
    10. It’s that they are COMPLETELY SERIOUS – I’m speechless again.
    11. It’s All of the Above

    My buddy Phi observed a number of years ago, “INFORMATION IN THE SERVICE OF IDEOLOGY IS PROPAGANDA,” and this maxim applies to art as much as any other form of information; whenever an artist strays too far from the truth he has gained from inner experience, propaganda is what you get. It seems to me that 10:10 and the producers of No-Pressure maxxed out on this one.

    Whatever this group of people’s actual motivations, [who knows? who's to judge?] they ARE propagating that meme, the idea of ‘kill dissenting AGW skeptics, to minds that would otherwise never entertain the thought, and that is evil, and not some trivial ‘kind of’ evil’, but it the ‘ding an sich’ the thing in itself, infecting the human mind-space with another reason to kill one another without conscience.

    Say what you will about my trifling missive – bland? humorless? over the top? – whatever- but you will have to admit that it has more literary merit than Richard Curtis’s effort in the case of No-Pressure.

  241. The video is laughably stupid. I think everyone needs to calm down about it. The subtext within the video are not very subtle – “Authority figures are right and they have the power to personally harm you”, “Conform to what everyone else thinks…or else” etc.

    It’s a work of genius for the marketing company whose brief I would love to have read. It’s as close to demonising a group as you can get without falling foul of the law. So close in fact that if the persecuted group were Jews or homosexuals (or mexican immigrant – for the US readers) then I’m sure it would be banned.

    But it only works if deniers/AGW sceptics see them selves as oppressed victims of tyranny. I for one do not feel that way. I see the anti AGW movement as a bastion of scientific truth which is prevailing over spin and bluster.

    If you really object to the spin and childishly obvious coercion exhibited in the video, go to 1010 page, look up the “Partners” link and email the companies who are supporting them with your views. I am doing just that. The best way to “hurt” 1010 is in their wallet. In the UK O2 and Sony are sponsors amongst others. These organisations will not want to be associated with this kind of publicity.

  242. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 9:05 pm

    It is not advocating for the murder of sceptics. To find the humour, step back for a moment from the struggle between sceptics and warmists. Think about the over-the-top rhetoric used on occasions by both sides.

    You may not be as smart as you think you are David. Nothing on this level of disgust has even been done by ‘skeptics’. On the other hand, it is not the first time an obscene video has been made by believers.

    What you need to take a step back from is your hard left bias—you have been blinded by it.

  243. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 9:36 pm
    Smokey,
    I have actually tried to have a civil conversation about this. To be continually accused by you and others that because I find this video funny I “advocate the murder of children as social policy” is wearisome. I am amazed, actually, that not one person here has come to my defence on that particular issue, regardless of how they feel about the video.>>

    Mr Gould,
    I recall no one accusing you of advocating murder as a social policy. I do recall a host of people trying to exlain to you that humour of this type, with a strong message behind it, is the first step on a slippery slope that ends with murder as a social policy if it is not confronted and defeated early.

    But I would not expect someone who by his own (unprompted) admission, advises that he does no believe in the concept of evil to recognize the seeds of social policy that incorporates murder being sewn in a propoganda film where no ones is “really” killed, but the concept of killing certain people for what they believe is presented as humour.

    You said in a comment earlier that you learn from engaging with those whose opinion differs from yours. I do as well. I’ve learned that there are people incapable of seeing why making fun of murdering children is evil, that they don’t understand that once it is OK to make fun of an identifiable group, it is one short step to doing things to them that, having been dehumanized, once would not consider doing to any other group. Most frightening of all however, I’ve learned that some of these people claim to work for governments of first world countries.

    Free speech sir I shall always defend. But free speech has limits. One may not shout “fire” in a crouded theater unless there is a fire. One may not present the muder of children for what they believe as humour, for there is nothing funny about mudering anyone for their beliefs. If you find humour in this then you keep company with names like Hitler, Stalin, Kruschev, Pol Pot, Attila the Hun. If you cannot understand the connection, then your assertion that you do not believe in the concept of evil is proven by your own arguments, and no discussion that might get the moderators scissors excited is required to provide proof.

  244. I haven’t scrolled through all 318 comments so I don’t know if anyone has already said this. I haven’t watched the video – I’ve exercised my right not to watch it. But I do wonder about the merits of giving it wider play on this site if it’s as horrible as described.

  245. This video is not funny. It is vile and it is disturbing on many levels. It is an (attempted) comic version of propaganda, reminiscent of the Nazis and Communists behavior to those who disagreed with their politics, and we know where that led.
    When comic genius John Cleese was interviewed about the use of violence in comedy he pointed out that one has to be careful not to display graphic violence, only implied violence, otherwise the sometimes fine line between comedy to horror is overstepped.

  246. Amino Acids in Meteorites,

    Oh, I’m waaay smarter than I think I am, trust me on that. ;)

    As to being blinded, perhaps. Convince me. And try not to use the kinds of over-the-top comparisons and accusations that some others here are using – they are not the kinds of things likely to get me to pay attention to your arguments.

  247. davidmhoffer,

    Smokey said this: “Pedophiles are only incarcerated. But you advocate murder as social policy — the murder of children — simply because they don’t agree with your nutty eco-extremism. ”

    It was in the post that I was directly responding to.

  248. Amino Acids in Meteorites and others wishing to discuss this further with me,

    I am signing off for now. I should be able to respond more over the weekend.

  249. TomFP, Curtis has form for lead-footed brow-beating e.g. a TV film called The Girl in the Cafe set around a G8 conference. (Yes, it’s as exciting as it sounds)
    I love your idea that he’s some kind of double agent but I fear not.

    As for the people saying that it’s just British Humour, well I’m British and with British satire and irony running through my veins and this is just clumsy and wrong-headed, even from its own perspective.
    British humour, and especially the more sophisticated variety, is mainly about being anti-establishment, pricking pomposity and undermining authority figures and received wisdom. It has as it’s (anti-) heroes the non-conformist, the outsider, the underdog, the loser striving for dreams which will never be realised. If ever the protagonist has privilege and power then they are almost invariably a figure of fun.
    This film is completely the reverse. It appears to elevate the authority figures and approve of their ruthless suppression of even hesitent dissent. None of the victims are portrayed even as being particularly unpleasant or “deserving” of their fate except to the most deranged eco-fanatic. The British general public certainly are more likely to empathise with the victims than with the smug Stepford-types.

    I suspect, and hope, that it’s going to be a massive own goal, in the UK just as much as anywhere else. The British also hate overt propaganda and this is just too heavy handed to be anything else.

  250. Yes, I have come up with a “solution”.

    I rarely bulk Email, but I can do it. My AOL account has 450 Emails accumulated over the last 8 years. It has a BCC function, which I gladly use in respect for my friends, enemies, casual acquaintances. However, in light of what Andy Warhol once said, “There is no such thing as ‘bad’ publicity..” I have, in a spirit of enlightenment, decided to hit as many of the 450 as possible with this message:

    I found this interesting video.

    What do you think of it?

    [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UHN3zHoYA0&feature=player_embedded ]

    Now certainly, there will be some folks recognizing my Email, and asking me, “Are you INSANE?” I will politely reply, “No, I’m quite sane. But I think certain “enviromental groups” are NOT sane, and this is a good demonstration of that fact.

    I hope this goes VIRAL…in more ways than one. (For example, a little like the 1918 Spanish Flu, me thinks!)

    Max

  251. timheyes;
    But it only works if deniers/AGW sceptics see them selves as oppressed victims of tyranny. I for one do not feel that way. >>

    In the last few months there have been studies suggesting that skeptics are less intelligent than warmists, other studies claiming there is a correlation between skepticism and poor education, and still others suggesting that certain types of people are psychologically deficient and rationalize the rejection of AGW simply because it may negatively affect their personal life style. I’ve seen article after arcticle from skeptics, but no where have I seen warmists painted as lacking in intelligence, education, or having some deep rooted psychological deficiency.

    So yes, when I see a trail like that culminating in a video which finds humour in unexpectantly murdering children for being skeptics like it was no more than spanking a puppy for going pee in the house, yes I feel the cold tendrils of tyranny reaching out to grasp my way of life from me on a pretext that has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with a quest for power. Quests for power tha are successfull end, in fact, in tyranny.

  252. Eco-Fascist propaganda made by ‘Spanners’ with nothing else better to do.

    Get on their website and tell them so.

  253. Smokey says:

    “Alex Buddery says:

    “I LOLed”

    So did Herr P.J. Goebbels in similar circumstances”

    OK, you’re comparing a comedy video to the biggest genocide in history? Furthermore you’re likening me laughing at the video to laughing at the biggest genocide in history? What is more you do this from the comfort of remaining completely anonymous?

    Monty Python has blown people up in their flying circus sketch on how not to be seen. It’s a joke. If it offends you just don’t watch it. You don’t have to get angry and start likening people to those who perpetuated the worst atrocities of modern history.

    REPLY: The famous Monty Python “man and a bush” skit didn’t have children, limbs, blood, gore, and eyeballs flying around the screen and on the other actors. The other skit, “Mr Creosote”, was clearly slapstick, but did contain some gore. Again, no children involved, and people knew what to expect when watching the film. Visiting a group promoting carbon reduction, then having children that don’t go along with the idea exploded with gore over other children isn’t anywhere close to Monty Python. It’s simply not comedy, but disgusting political gore. – Anthony

  254. artwest – you may be right – I am a great admirer of Richard Curtis’ writing, and loth to believe such a mind capable of buying into CAGW. Perhaps I have a case of confirmatory bias…

    You rightly state that British humour is “anti-establishment, pricking pomposity and undermining authority figures and received wisdom……If ever the protagonist has privilege and power then they are almost invariably a figure of fun.” And I have to say these are exactly what I found in No Pressure. The CAGW mob ARE today’s establishment, they DO set themselves up as (and have achieved considerable real) authority and the holders of received wisdom, and the film (whether or not Curtis intended it) makes them look absurd. Even the title – “no pressure” is a colloquial shorthand used by the mealy-mouthed for “you must do as I say, but you will never be able to say that I forced you to” – reeks of parody to me.

    Where I slightly disagree is in ” It has as it’s (anti-) heroes the non-conformist, the outsider, the underdog, the loser striving for dreams which will never be realised.” This, IMO, is far more a hallmark of American, rather than British humour. In Blackadder, for instance, Baldrick is forever downtrodden, and while he gets the odd wry laugh at his master’s expense, he never actually triumphs. Incidentally, one Blackadder ep has an uncomplaining Baldrick’s groin area being used by Blackadder as a darts board – may I assure Smokey and others jumping down David Gould’s throat (give it up Dave, they just don’t get it) that the fact that I found the scene gloriously funny does not imply that I approve of people using their manservant’s groin areas as dart boards, still less that encourage the practice?

  255. My wife’s a teacher, she’d love one of those buttons. It’s shocking, but not as shocking as that old 70’s movie I Spit on Your Textbook though.

    It’s no worse than Hollywood has been pumping out for many a year in the pursuit of the mighty dollar, but now people seem to be getting very prudish all of a sudden.

    Andy

    REPLY: So, your wife would like to kill unruly children by exploding them? Class act there Andy. Movies are one thing, politically driven videos are yet another.

  256. Michael in Sydney says:
    September 30, 2010 at 7:32 pm

    “Not here in Australia or many other parts of the world. Inciting hate and violence doesn’t sound like any sort of freedom worth diddly-squat to me. Where is my freedom to live with the expectation of not being vilified and threatened because I don’t believe in a theory?”

    Sounds like the justification for hate-crime legislation, Mike. But really, is their hatred of you something you didn’t know about until today? You read it on their blogs and in their news articles. It’s clear that they hate, and have hated for some time now, anyone that doesn’t agree with them. So what do say about those milder (compared to the video) expressions that violate your “right” to not be hated?

    Face it. You found the images to be provactive, and that’s all it was: an emotional response. Speaking of which, has it occurred to you that maybe they’re trying to elicit that response from skeptics, to get them to adopt tactics against them that are less than principled? I think so. After all, they’ve had their butts handed back to ‘em ever since Climategate and have been nothing but desperate since.

  257. @TomFP

    Thankyou! I didn’t find the video disturbing but I sure found a lot of the comments here disturbing. I too think Richard Curtis has pulled a fast one, which in itself is hilarious. The video didn’t persecute me for being a skeptic but I’ve copped some persecution here for having a different view on the video including being likened to Goebbels. And poor David Gould. I don’t agree with the guys viewpoints but he expresses that he has a different interpretation of the video and all of a sudden he is a paedophile and wants murder as public policy.

    I think everyone needs to go for a walk and take some time out.

    REPLY: I’ll point out that skeptics have never produced videos like this, but the NGO’s have produced several. Polar Bears falling from the sky, planes swarming NYC with a promise of an event “bigger than 9/11″. Have been recent examples. There’s a pattern, and you either refuse to admit that or are incapable of seeing it.

    Do you have children? – Anthony

  258. David Gould,

    I laughed myself out of my theater seat when I saw the scene from “Meaning of Life” when the fat guy blew up from over eating. It was an obviously satirical bit of fun complete with hose volume projectile vomiting. So I don’t have any problem appreciating over the top gore humor despite my American up bringing.

    This video seemed flatly humorless to me. I didn’t find it overly offensive because of its “splatter factor”.

    I found it offensive because it was “preachy”.

    It was also redundant, never a good thing in a comedy bit. Did you actually not expect the “red button” in the following scenes after the school room scene gave away the gag?

    Oh, and if it was meant to be a darkly funny, but light hearted gag someone forgot to tell 10:10 founder Franny Armstrong.

    Here is what the ever dour Franny had to say when questioned about the video,

    But why take such a risk of upsetting or alienating people, I ask her: “Because we have got about four years to stabilise global emissions and we are not anywhere near doing that. All our lives are at threat and if that’s not worth jumping up and down about, I don’t know what is.”

    “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change,” she adds.

    Sounds like she is pretty serious about this to me.

    But I’m sure it’s just my inability to appreciate “British humour”.

    I’m sure you find her remarks about hundreds of thousands of deaths due to climate change to be hysterical.

    They certainly lack any factual basis so maybe they were meant in jest.

  259. Anyone who knows more about youtube than I do, is it possible to get a download of this to put up for ourselves for when they wake up to their own stupidity and pull the thing? We know they will, every totalitarian rewrites history when they make a blooper.

  260. IMHO,
    This opus appears to be an exposition of the kind of fantasies one might harbor if one felt that the cherished Utopian objectives…in this case a carbon-controlled society that would be forced to rely on the authority of a small but omnipotent elite in order to survive…a goal that just a short time ago seemed so close and attainable now shows signs of slipping out of reach.
    To illustrate: Imagine that instead of this being about convincing an increasingly skeptical world that CAGW was a real threat to planetary stability, apply the same thought process to a less global analogy. You are a union organizer. Your government is working at legislating card-check which you know will empower you with the ability to intimidate your bovine work force, thereby practically guaranteeing the success of your assigned responsibility.
    Suddenly, it looks like your government is chickening out. There will be no card-check. You know that the alternative…a secret ballot… will significantly emasculate your power to intimidate. Your mission will likely fail. But then, what if you had the power to divine who among the work force were willing to join your group and which others would offer the most resistance? Now all you have to do is blow those recalcitrant ingrates away, and voila! Success!
    Of course, in the real world there are severe penalties for that sort of behavior. But, hell, you’re now in fantasy land. It’s all “fiction” as poster Gould might say. And you know what? Maybe if you produce and circulate this fantasy you still might attract or intimidate enough mushy minds to your side and in the long run, come out a winner.

    This thought process may apply to the producers of this shock piece. What they can’t accomplish in real action they can explicate in this piece of sadistic pornography. And if the going gets too hot, they can…and will…claim; “Good lord man, don’t you know satire when you see it? It’s a craven response, but effective enough. Take the familiar aphorism, “Those who can, do; Those who can’t, teach”, and add “And those that can do neither, make films”.

  261. You have the wrong end of the stick. The No Pressure film is Richard Curtis film is his latest sit-com isn’t it?

    Lines such as:

    “Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age.

    and

    “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change,”

    are hilarious, but obviously not a patch on Blackadder

    /Mango

  262. Anthony – I still think there’s a better than sporting chance that this WAS produced by a sceptic. I would be very surprised, but I’ll grant that it’s possible, if Curtis was a CAGW proponent, but I would be truly astonished if in addition he thought this film was a benefit to the CAGW cause. And the fact that the warmies had already made the absurd and egregious pap you instance only meant that Curtis had to plumb even greater depths of absurdity to achieve his goal – hence the exploding kids. Just look at his oevre – the man has an uncanny grasp of subtext and the tendentious use of language. (Queenie, upon Blackadder courteously pointing out that the Earl of Essex had had his head chopped off at her behest, and was thus perhaps not the best example of the beloved men in her life: “Silly Edmund, he knew it was only little me!”)

    The 10:10 people have been “had” by Curtis – don’t join them! He might be wicked, but he’s damn’ clever, and (I think) he’s got their number. We already have a fine cartoonist, Josh, in our ranks. The possibility that we may have a humourist of Curtis’ calibre as well is not one to squander. Having said that, I doubt if he’ll get away with the same stunt twice, so enjoy this one while it lasts. And don’t worry about your kids – they are probably a lot better at telling fact from spoof than you give them credit for.

    REPLY: I’m open to the possibility, while at the same time condemn 10:10 for being blind and senseless to allow such a thing. Time will tell. – Anthony

  263. I’ve just been looking at the 10:10 website…… it seems that 90% of the people that are listed as ‘the team’ have the equivalent of ‘professional activist’ written as a description of their ‘day job’.

    Sheesh…… how do so many people get so brainwashed?

    GET A JOB!!!!!!!

  264. This is called ‘End of Empire’ humour, it will be better understood by those resident in our former colonies in x years time.

  265. davidmhoffer says:
    September 30, 2010 at 10:34 pm

    “…yes I feel the cold tendrils of tyranny reaching out to grasp my way of life from me on a pretext that has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with a quest for power.”

    If this were produced by a political party I would be truly concerned. It’s produced by an advocacy group although I don’t know if 1010 or any affiliate have an associated political party.

    Much more worrisome was Gordon Brown’s comments about “flat-earthers”. Part of the skill of the video is to polarise even people who regard themselves as part of a continuum/spectrum of opinion. The subtext of “stand up and be counted” forces this artificial polarisation. Like Dubya’s “you’re either with us of against us” comment.

    There will be some who feel that they are tyrannically oppressed, however, I submit that this is an afront to those who are actually being oppressed. The AGW debate is being reawakened from its “settled” state – even within the Royal Society. But movement to a more sensible position has to overcome the intertia od large organisations. This video is and will be seen by many on the pro-AGW camp as devisive and not serving their “Noble Cause”.

    It smacks of desperation to get as many people to join a band-waggon which has already lost several wheels. What the anti-AGW contingent should do is laugh it off and the shoddy spectacle that is and not give it any credence.

    Write to the sponsors of 1010 and ask them if they endorse the video’s message. I’ve done so and will publish the responses.

  266. Just imagine how the meeting to devise this went:

    Richard Curtis “hang on, I have a cunning plan, it’s a plan so devious and cunning you could draw a little moustache on it and call it Adolf”

  267. You have to watch the content to comment. It is immediately apparent that Richard Curtis/Guardian/Radiohead/Armstrong have long passed their sell-by date and need to be put out to pasture.

    This material is going to save the planet?

    Only a psychotic would think this is ‘trick’ stuff.

  268. gosh you got no humour.

    I am a sceptic and think this is hillarious stuff. There are people who get outraged about all sorts of things, like the new Machete movie, etc, etc, etc where, again, I beg to differ and think it’s awesome (must be so, or else there wouldn’t be movies like that in the first place).

    It is even all the more awesome knowing that there are people who freak out over stuff like this. You people definitely add to the fun ! CO2 reduction got to be the most bland und boring subject for a “cool” clip – so this is a really unexpectedly good idea.

    It even turned out to be non B-movie style… there go our carbon TAX Euros haha.

    “vile” – lol, how can you confuse vile with funny..? Anyway, thanks for the link, this will make many people laugh today.

  269. What absolute garbage, can you imagine the outcry if something similar was made blowing up the icons of warming.
    Al Gore blowing up after consuming more than his fair share at the table.
    MM beaten to a pulp by a Hockey team for ridiculing the stick…
    Just goes to show what we are dealing with here, IDIOTS pure and simple

  270. Well, Hannah Arendt’s verdict on Adolf Eichmann fits nicely the button-pushing people depicted in this movie.

    “The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal. From the viewpoint of our legal institutions and of our moral standards of judgment, this normality was much more terrifying than all the atrocities put together, for it implied — as had been said at Nuremberg over and over again by the defendants and their counsels — that this new type of criminal, who is in actual fact hostis generis humani, commits his crimes under circumstances that make it well-nigh impossible for him to know or to feel that he is doing wrong. “

    Terribly and terrifyingly normal, even sweet, indeed.

  271. Excellent video. It’ll be raved about in 2 ways:

    1. It’s obviously a joke
    2. If that’s what they think of free choice, it’s disgusting

    It’ll put a dent in their campaign IMO. Sends the wrong message: “no pressure” and “backstabbing liars” will become synonymous.

  272. re: Ron House says: September 30, 2010 at 11:31 pm

    Anyone who knows more about youtube than I do, is it possible to get a download of this to put up for ourselves for when they wake up to their own stupidity and pull the thing? We know they will, every totalitarian rewrites history when they make a blooper.

    Hi Ron,

    There are a number of different free programs which will allow you to download copies of youtube (and/or other site) videos to your computer. Obviously I can’t vouch for the various programs out there, and you have to be careful to not get one(s) from disreputable sites/authors that open you up to malware – but I can tell you the one I use. Unfortunately I don’t know of ANY way to be sure that add-on’s or various software is really ‘safe’ – you just have to do a bit of research and then trust some and be sure you are also using good practices wrt virus/malware protection on your computer.

    That said, I most often use firefox for my browser, and a free “add-on” called downloadhelper. I haven’t had any problems with it or gotten any malware from using it that I know of. It works with MANY different video sites, not just youtube, and its pretty simple to use. I’m not sure if there’s a version of it for explorer or not.

    If you use firefox, and aren’t familiar with add-on’s, you just select the menu item “tools” and then “add-ons.” Then either search for downloadhelper (if you want to go with that option). Then you just click on download and go from there. If you want to see what other options are available, search add-ons using keywords such as “video download.” Then you can sort thru the various options to decide which (if any) you want to go with. Explorer has a similar system where you can find either add-ons or plug-ins or extensions with similar functions.

    There are also a few different video players that give you similar function if you’d rather go that route. The one that comes to mind offhand is real player (I’m sure there are others, but you’d have to research a little to see which).

    I find that having the ability to copy video to my drive is quite useful. I just wish that downloadhelper would allow one to grab video from EVERY site – but it seems to have more sites it functions on than the majority of other options. If anyone knows of a really good program or add-on (etc.) that really works on virtually ANY streaming video regardless of what site that video is on, I’d sure appreciate if you post the name of the program or plug-in/add-on, etc!!!

    Anyhow, Ron, I hope this info helps you out – there are some really nifty and useful plug-ins/add-ons/extensions/software out there for free this way, so I hope you’ll dig into it a little if nothing else just so you get an idea of what sort of stuff is available to you this way, and how easy it is to try them out. One word of warning – its usually best to only add ONE new one at a time. That way if you find out shortly after installing one that you start having any browser function conflicts/problems, you know its almost certainly being caused by that one you just added, and you can uninstall it. If the problem is then resolved, you know it was that particular add-on – or better put, typically its a conflict between that particular add-on and some other add-on you’ve already got installed – so sometimes if the new one is one you REALLY want, then you go thru the hassle of figure out which other add-on its conflicting with and delete that older one so you can use the newer one. If you add a ton of new ones all at once, however, it can be a pain trying to figure out which is the problem and which are just fine.

    Have fun!

  273. I think it’s funny.

    Written by the same screenwriter than Blackadder. For sure he is sceptic of every religion, and just took the opportunity of take the piss of extreme environmentalism.

    Let’s not be prudish here, you get more people blown out at any other action film and nobody cares. Lack of humor is a sign of the religious zealot. Most people have more common sense than we like to admit. And most people will just laugh with a bit of disgust and will think that those Carbonators are just from an alien film or so, not to be taken seriously. Shame they didn’t include Rowan Atkinson in the crew.

  274. Holy moly (and that isn’t the quasi-religious epithet first appearing in my mind). Did the [/snip] ever produce actual propaganda videos this blatantly graphic?

    Yes, their actions were worse. But as far as video propaganda itself goes, I think this is the worst I’ve ever seen.

    It’s terrible. I’ve only watched one and they blew up friggin’ children in class for not conforming (after being told they didn’t have to, not that that matters).

    [REPLY: Lets leave the Nazi references out of the conversation. Employing it diminishes the Holocaust and the evil of Hitler / the Nazi. .. bl57~mod]

  275. Now this is a much comedy better clip of killing cyclists/pedestrians and of course hedgehogs. Don’t make them like they used to.

    I’m quite surprised at the level of hostility to the blowing up children video. Most sceptics already knew that this is what the ‘New world order’ had in mind for us dissenters if we lose. As to whether it will really influence children I don’t know, it certainly would not influence my own. If the teacher had pulled a pistol and shot the child in the chest, it would have been an entirely different video but with the same message. The comments above about the path to genocide are of course correct and this is the underlying message. Still, it made me laugh so that makes about three of us so far and that is almost a consensus nowadays.

    Phil

  276. I got involved in the 10:10 in my local village, trying to encourage them to have an open debate. It got cancelled and I was sad. Now I look back and remeber sitting in that room with them all and just feel glad that I got out alive!

  277. Re inversesquare

    …have the equivalent of ‘professional activist’ written as a description of their ‘day job’.
    Sheesh…… how do so many people get so brainwashed?
    GET A JOB!!!!!!!

    They have a job, but as you say they’re professional activists who’s job is to collected donations and brainwash people into donating more. As their leader ‘jokes’ in the Guardian-

    Clearly we don’t really think they should be blown up, that’s just a joke for the mini-movie, but maybe a little amputating would be a good place to start?” jokes 10:10 founder and Age of Stupid film maker Franny Armstrong.

    Ah, so they were just kidding about blowing people up, crippling people who disagree with them is ok to joke about. I wonder what some of 10:10’s supporters will make of this ‘edgy’ attempt at humour, like “Karen Wickstead, Cheshire Constabulary’s environment officer said that 10:10 was a “small step towards making a big difference”

    I’m sure a police force supporting an organisation that advocates blowing up non-believers will go down well. But they’re just kidding, it’s not like James Lee’s already tried to do this for real after having been deluded by similar PR stunts. 10:10 has a long list of corporate, government and NGO sponsors/supporters who may also think blowing up non-believers might be a little too edgy for their brand image.

    Ms Armstrong and Mr Curtis, I thank you for providing this lavish piece of PR. As the Spurs people may say, bit of an own goal really.

  278. Finally, a video that gives not only the full breadth of AGW science but also a clear view of the warmists’ strategy.

    BWD

  279. Well that was different! Go AGW marketing campaign – get cracking on the next complete FAIL and do our job for us in protecting us from the rabid economy-destroyers.

    Here’s my idea of a parody of this FUBAR advert:

    Same kind of scene, but people standing / sitting around talking about the FACTS, a la Monckton, reeling off actual facts, and deciding there is nothing to panic about, nothing will happen that we cannot deal with.

    Cue rabid AGW alarmists, waving arms about, shrilly spreading doom and fear (or maybe ‘Fear & Loathing’), spittle flying etc. People start looking worried, frowning etc.

    Someone bring out THE BUTTON. Presses it and we’re all expecting the AGW alarmists to explode.

    But they don’t! They just go silent! Everybody goes back to what they were doing with a look of relief.

    Alternatively, the alarmists stop the shrill yelling and start listening to what they are being told. They start realising there is nothing to panic about. Everybody goes back to what they were doing with a look of relief.

  280. The funny thing is hjow the 10:10 youtube video is linked to whacky conspiracy videos about contrails and pesticides.

  281. Believe in The Church of Climate Alarmism or it’s the Big Red Button of No Pressure for you.

    Here is my stock reply to crap like this. Just two words and one of them is “off”. No prizes for guessing what the other word is.

  282. Read the comments Anthony, both on The Guardian and Youtube.
    This film has boomeranged badly – Everybody, including warmists and greenies hate the film and think it will do more harm than good.
    So keep the “moral outrage” to a minimum. Joking about it will have the best effect on Joe Piblic.

  283. My son thought this was funny.

    Then the ‘serious’ bit about the 1010 org started. He was gobsmacked that this was actually meant, and not a spoof…..

  284. re: Ron House says: September 30, 2010 at 11:31 pm

    Anyone who knows more about youtube than I do, is it possible to get a download of this to put up for ourselves for when they wake up to their own stupidity and pull the thing? We know they will, every totalitarian rewrites history when they make a blooper.

    If you aren’t using IE, can’t help you, but here’s a programmers way to do it. On WUWT show the entire video but don’t touch it when it’s over. Pull up Windows Explorer, not Internet Explorer. Go to Tools\File Options\View and temporarily uncheck Hide Protected OS Files. Hit OK to close. Goto Documents & Settings under your account to Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files and sort by Last Accessed date. You should see a huge file of about 16.5 megs. If Windows Explorer is maximized, double-click title to restore to a normal window so you can see the desktop. Just drag that huge file to the desktop. Accept any warnings. It’s extension should be ‘.flv’, and name something like VideoPlayback [n].flv. Open Properties on that file and the file type should read Flash Video. If not, you’re out of luck, do NOT run it and delete it. If so rename and move where ever. Go back as above and click to re-hide protected files. Now you’ve got it. — cheers.
    BTW: On IE8 I had captured it, as above, in about 30 seconds and it runs fine. Don’t mess with untrusted utilities.

  285. As a student of and participant in the global-warming discussion, I find this film way over the top and completely unhelpful.

    It is an “own goal” for the 10:10 folks. Way beyond stupid.

  286. I prefer the following subtitled (in a snappy [/snip] font) reworking of the “greenpeace angry kid” advert by the “jollygreenwatchman”, myself.

    Around about the same amount of truth but with far less blood.

    regarDS

    [REPLY: Lets leave the Nazi references out of the conversation. Employing it diminishes the Holocaust and the evil of Hitler / the Nazi. .. bl57~mod]

  287. Contrary to most people here, I think the video is effective in that it validates and encourages viewers (i.e., potential recruits) to simply ignore any opposing viewpoint. It identifies their enemy, characterizes them as idiotic and lazy, and dispenses graphic violence which (importantly) is shown in the video to be met with equanimity by the witnesses. Additionally, it will doubtless have an impact because the violence makes it unforgettable and resonates on the level the makers are aiming for: the sub-rational.

    As far as sceptics are concerned, I wouldn’t get too het up about it, but merely point out that it shows the warmists have abandoned the intellectual battlefield. The mention of glaciers and volcanoes was particularly amusing, although I imagine the humour of that was lost on Mr. Curtis.

  288. It will not take long for Utube to be inundated with counter spoofs about this disgraceful ad campaign. Much comes to mind The save a tree, burn a greenie. Would be excellent but tame. Perhaps a farming video, Take one hundred greenies and process through your grain hammer mill, ensuring to capture all blood as this is high in nitrogen. Dry until 5-10% moisture content and run through your pelletiser. This is ample fertiliser for 500 acres of wheat, saving at least 150, 000 tons of co2 by terminating the O2 thieves and not requiring commercial fertiliser. This is a win win for farmers and the planet.

  289. The essential point of the video is to label a minority group as a danger to the majority and then ‘recommend’ elimination for the greater good.

    I recall having previously seen a piece of propaganda with exactly the same message.

    It was a prewar item from Germany in which the stereotypical facial features of a person of semitic background were gradually transformed into the features of a rodent. It was made clear that as vermin they were a threat to the racial purity of the majority such that elimination was proposed.

    I’m sure the makers thought it quite a lark at the time and I can imagine the scenes in the production studio being identical during the creation of both that item and now this one.

    The trouble is that with the benefit of hindsight we see that it truly was a precursor and represented something deep, dark and evil in the psyche of that society.

    It is recognised within revolutionary circles that it only needs a small number of determined individuals (10,000 or so I believe) supported by lots of useful fools to overturn an entire nation and up to 1933 Germany was essentially democratic.

    It is also recognised that a big lie if repeated often enough will prevail.

    We need very few to be ‘inspired’ or ‘turned’ by the belief in a threat to society at large from so called ‘deniers’ for enough of a groundswell to develop for us to go down the same track as many past tyrannies.

    The evidence is that the producer is already under the delusion that deniers present a clear and present danger to others. How many others have already formed that view and may be willing to group together to present a serious threat of widespread violence or political manipulation.

    Amusing or not, this video is not a trivial phenomenon.

  290. It’s been said before above but this has all the elements of [snip] propaganda against [snip]. The enemy within that need to be exterminated to keep the [snip] of the true believers. [snip] I showed this to my 16 year old son. He said it was “beyond sick”. And to the posters here who seem to regard it aas humorous – start asking your self why you find it so amusing. Vile and disgusting.

    [blog policy to avoid such comparisons ~jove, mod]

  291. Wow, this is amazing. This must have been sponsored by the Koch brothers to show that all climate alarmists are inhuman killers, and to speed up the process of putting them into jail.

  292. I don’t see the “funny side” of this anywhere.

    It’s basically saying that if someone has doubts about someone else’s beliefs, they can be blown up. Rather like suicide bombers blowing up infidels then?

    Nope… Nope… Not laughing yet….

    So how to top that? Maybe… maybe fly planes into buildings?? Perhaps that will make them change their minds and start believing PROPERLY??
    And what a great film that would be?

    And Spurs is my team. Love Blackadder. Radiohead fan…

    Richard Curtis – what the hell were you thinking, man?

  293. H’mm

    Not up to Mr. Curtis’s usual standards of humour at all. But not, I submit, something to get quite so worked up about. In fact I suggest that it is rather weak and more likely to be laughed at rather than with.

    I guess in North America you have rather more prurient tastes and less appreciation of irony than we do in UK. Which, given the number of gruesome ways to kill people we see in TV imports like CSI (various) is slightly surprising. British crimes are depicted with far more taste…eg Midsomer Murders :-).

    Suggest a deep breath all round and worry about something more important.

  294. Anthony – thanks for the reply. time will, as you say, tell. But I think you’re on the right track with the 10:10 loonies – they undoubtedly DID/DO think it’s a cool way to promote their cause – but that’s because they are ecoloonies convinced that they are not merely correct, but virtuous. They are pompous, smug and pharisaical – ideal Curtis targets. What he has done (whether or not I’m right about his motives) is to give them enough rope to hang themselves – and for that I salute him.

    Does anyone know of Curtis’ involvement in earlier ecolunacy? I can’t recall any. I can’t deny that I’d be terribly disappointed if the man turned out to be a warmista, because I hate enjoying the work of people I disapprove of, but as a genuine sceptic I’d kinda like to know.

  295. It’s a pleasure to see that Jihad’s Shahid style explosions are a more than acceptable funny joke, from the ecologistic point of view… the important is to kill only the infidels of the ecoreligion instead of the infidels of the islamic religion.
    Ecologism has to be violent, finally the mask is falling. We only have to hope that idiots don’t try to do what other idiots joke about.

  296. And another thing, Anthony. I happen to believe that anything that successfully (this excludes cheap slanging-off) lampoons ecolunacy is a Good Thing. Parody is one of the most potent forms of humour. Assuming that most here agree – how WOULD you parody the warmies, given that by their grotesque behaviour they place themselves practically beyond parody? I can honestly say that, had I been asked this question before No Pressure, I would have replied “send for Curtis, this is a job for a master”.

    Now someone’s going to ruin my day by showing me that he’s been a prominent member of Greenpeace for decades – but like I say, I’m a true sceptic, I can take it…

  297. Alex Buddery says:
    September 30, 2010 at 11:20 pm

    I may be misunderstanding, but as I read the comments by Mr. Gould and yourself,you both seem to be suggesting that these lovely people, who have for many years been pillars of self satisfied sanctimoniousness, decided to produce this opus as an over the top bit of self satire. That would only make sense if the message they were trying to convey was, pay no attention to us because we’re really just a bunch of sociopathic hysterics. If that was their actual intent I would say they’ve succeeded beyond their wildest hopes.

    You objected to someone’s invocation of the spector of Dr. Goebbels, because after all we’re not talking about mass genocide, but by the time the real killing started Dr. Goebbels had fulfilled his function of scapegoating and dehumanizing the “enemy” and for the duration mass propaganda was replaced by a wall of silence. It would be comforting to assume that this is just a case of drug enhanced enthusiasm going off the rails, but although these folks have never evidenced much sophistication when it comes to the scientific method, the one area in which they have always displayed total focus is in the manipulation of language and images, and their manipulations have never been notably subtle. Given that it seems quite likely that the message that most here took from the video was exactly the one they intended to send and that the exploding Gillian at the end was added just to provide plausible deniability.

    I also have to wonder if SPPI, Heartland, And Cato had produced videos showing airliners zeroing in on the CRU, polar bears snapping the necks of treehugging greens as they sorted their recyclables, and Gore, Hansen, Mann, and Jones exploding in a miasma of blood, if you and Mr. Gould would be quite as sanguine about it and would be straining credulity to the breaking point to try to find the humor in their efforts.

  298. Call me provincial, but I have no intention of watching the No Pressure video. With that caveat in mind, I’ll venture the opinion that the Climate Change Extremists who put it together are every bit as evil, in their own way, as Pastor Fred Phelps, whose followers disrupt military funerals, because the military is supposedly too tolerant of gays and lesbians.

    The only good thing about this and the Climate Change Extremists’ other recent acts of desperation is that they are showing their true colors. I’d describe this political movement as Khmer Rouge Communism, with a dash of Fascism added, in order to avoid offending the billionaire Climate Change Extremists. In the new Ecotopia, the billionaires would still be “saving the planet”, by flying in their biofuel-powered corporate jets to environmental conferences in exotic locales.

    Moderators: Snip all or part of my comments if you must. At the moment, it’s not possible for me to express my opinion about this in a polite way. Sorry about that.

  299. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 9:53 pm

    Daniel M,

    To clarify, I believe that it is satirising two things: the irrational fear that is sometimes expressed by a few sceptics on this very website that those on my side want to (and are planning to) kill then all and the irrational and wild statements made sometimes by warmists about sceptics.

    David
    You might be the worlds greatest spin doctor skilled at reframing debates and changing public perceptions, but there comes a time that you have to live in the real world. I’ve actually seen and witnessed worse horrors than depicted, so someones perverted attempt to recreate reaction for their own amusement or whatever agenda they have is not something I would endorse or aclaim. I do know the desensitising effect of this type of cunning propaganda and the type of mind that appeals to. That is why I find your attempt to reframe on this issue actually worse than the video itself a classic disassociation from the reality and its effect on vulnerable minds. You obviously live in that “Bankworld” where it is funny to illtreat others. Either you are late in coming into the world of climate debate and have somehow missed the years of taunts from so called intellectuals that those that deny CAGW should have been strangled at birth, or put down like the dogs they are, comments that were all too frequent in the early stages of the “scientific certainty” of warmist beliefs, or the rabid cries of the earth people who want to rid the world of humans as the scourge of the planet.
    I guess that you like Clive Hamilton, on the ABC Drum will now bleat that it is unfair that you have been attacked for your beliefs by terrible people who don’t get what you are trying to promote. Lick your wounds and limp off to Bankworld where you can display your contempt of all of us, and of course those you consider less superior, the dumb voters that you can manipulate with artful conniving.

    I have a contempt for your ilk.

  300. What is this, 10:10 and their supporters documenting their nocturnal emissions about the Discovery Channel bomber?

    Sorry, there’s no humour here. The humour expressed in violence against those who disagree with the creators’ point of view only furthers the semblance of sociopathy.

    Eco-terror is real and eco-terror is here. This ranks right up there with the Palestinian Sesame Street knock off show used to teach violent hatred to children.

    One has to wonder if Gould’s ‘government’ would share his amusement in this publicy in the presence of victims and family members of the Bali bombing or an abortion clinic attack. Ha ha ha, Ghoul – you’re not funny!

    This is extremist propaganda that supports ongoing violence and terrorism that gets exercised across the political spectrum and that all sane minds must stand in solidarity against even if we differ on the issues.

  301. Some have argued that this is effective advertising since it showed up on WUWT. Well, the whole point of this site is the open discussion of climate science — contrary opinions are the staple here. I’ve seen many pro-AGW sites that will not tolerate dissent. Like the 10:10 ad, that is brainwashing and coercion, not debate.

  302. David Gould, you seem to be beset by people with an irony bypass, determined to burnish their own sense of rectitude at your expense. Give it away, mate, they just won’t get it.

    But I am intrigued – you and I seem to agree that No Pressure is a spoof, and rather a good one – or have I got you wrong? And yet I understand that your sympathies lie with the CAGW cause? That being the case, do you contend that the film helps or hinders your cause?

    If nothing else, this disconfirms my theory that CAGWers have no sense of humour!

  303. Some seem to be trying to rationalize this repulsive piece by suggesting that Richard Curtis may be a ‘crypto-denialist’.

    Even if this is so (unlikely), “…Funny how? What’s funny about it?…” (thanks Joe Pesci).

  304. Hilarious :)
    Great satire in classic Monthy Python vein. Can’t believe that anyone actually thinks that this little movie is anything but a joke.
    May not be everybody’s cup of tea, of course, just like early Peter Jackson movies.

  305. Long post I am afraid, but this essay is a good summary of the start of the process towards nacht und nebel:

    Mr Gould , please bear in mind that the Jews were dehumanised in cartoons and films long before the Wansee Conference.

    The Psychology of Dehumanization
    Dehumanization is actually an extension of a less intense process of developing an “enemy image” of the opponent. During the course of protracted conflict, feelings of anger, fear, and distrust shape the way that the parties perceive each other. Adversarial attitudes and perceptions develop and parties begin to attribute negative traits to their opponent. They may come to view the opponent as an evil enemy, deficient in moral virtue, or as a dangerous, warlike monster.
    An enemy image is a negative stereotype through which the opposing group is viewed as evil, in contrast to one’s own side, which is seen as good. Such images can stem from a desire for group identity and a need to contrast the distinctive attributes and virtues of one’s own group with the vices of the “outside” group.[4] In some cases, evil-ruler enemy images form. While ordinary group members are regarded as neutral, or perhaps even innocent, their leaders are viewed as hideous monsters.[5]
    Enemy images are usually black and white. The negative actions of one’s opponent are thought to reflect their fundamental evil nature, traits, or motives.[6] One’s own faults, as well as the values and motivations behind the actions of one’s opponent, are usually discounted, denied, or ignored. It becomes difficult to empathize or see where one’s opponent is coming from. Meaningful communication is unlikely, and it becomes difficult to perceive any common ground.
    Once formed, enemy images tend to resist change, and serve to perpetuate and intensify the conflict. Because the adversary has come to be viewed as a “diabolical enemy,” the conflict is framed as a war between good and evil.[7] Once the parties have framed the conflict in this way, their positions become more rigid. In some cases, zero-sum thinking develops as parties come to believe that they must either secure their own victory, or face defeat. New goals to punish or destroy the opponent arise, and in some cases more militant leadership comes into power.
    Enemy images are accentuated, according to psychologists, by the process of “projection,” in which people “project” their own faults onto their opponents. This means that people or groups who tend to be aggressive or selfish are likely to attribute those traits to their opponents, but not to themselves. This improves one’s own self-image and increases group cohesion, but it also escalates the conflict and makes it easier to dehumanize the other side.
    Deindividuation facilitates dehumanization as well. This is the psychological process whereby a person is seen as a member of a category or group rather than as an individual. Because people who are deindividuated seem less than fully human, they are viewed as less protected by social norms against aggression than those who are individuated.[8] It then becomes easier to rationalize contentious moves or severe actions taken against one’s opponents.

    Mr Gould, you know exactly what you are doing with this video. It is not a joke. It is not humour. But it does show your lack of moral fibre.

    yours etc

    Dropstone

  306. If this video was intended to garner support for the failing AGW hoax, then I am stunned by the stupidity of those involved. On first viewing it does indeed read as a murder fantasy for the cult believers who are just realising the extent of their loss. The release of this execrable material so close to the Discovery channel eco-terrorism incident is unforgivable.

    I will admit to producing material of this nature. When I was still working hands on in the film industry, I simulated a woman being killed by a hand grenade for a Russian war film being filmed in Morocco. The result was somewhat more graphic. Ribcage, internal organs, fractured spine and a blast of skin fragments and blood. The footage was eventually cut from the final R rated movie. The point I would make is that the cut scene was a recreation of an actual incident of the Taliban murdering a woman accused of adultery. The similarities between religious extremists and AGW believers are only increased by videos of this nature.

    On a more positive note, offensive as this video may be, it is one more herald of the collapse of the hoax and the bitterness of those on the losing side. The good news is that the fellow travellers do not yet know how badly they have lost. They have stupidly awoken an army of sceptics who will go on to defeat their Bio-crisis and their Energy crisis. No more climate/bio/energy debt to be paid to Hugo Chavez, no more UN global governance. And these idiots only have themselves to blame! Bwahahahah! (evil laugh- Basso Profondo )

  307. Spiny Norman said:

    Here is what the ever dour Franny had to say when questioned about the video,

    But why take such a risk of upsetting or alienating people, I ask her: “Because we have got about four years to stabilise global emissions and we are not anywhere near doing that. All our lives are at threat and if that’s not worth jumping up and down about, I don’t know what is.”

    ‘About four years’. Has anyone told the 100 month-ers that things are worse than they thought?

  308. “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change.”
    I take it that this garbage-spewing woman is completely unaware that TEN times that number of people are going to die in the next four years from entirely preventable causes? AIDS, malaria, cholera, starvation, etc. etc.
    Why is she not doing something about THOSE killers rather than tilting at the windmill of AGW?

  309. The closest that Monty Python ever came to this production was in a skit where an architect who was commissioned to design an apartment seems instead to have designed a slaughterhouse. It was funny when the Monty Python gang did it but adding in graphic imagery would have removed it from the realm of humor. To me this production represents a glimpse into the AGW fanatics subconscious; I don’t find it particularly funny. OTOH, I disagree with the posters who propose banning it for various reasons; I see it as a very public display of 10:10’s ultimate goals.

    After reviewing the 10:10 website I noticed they have a section on “low carbon lunches”. Perhaps it may have had something to do with the clip I’d just viewed, but it suddenly occurred to me to create a short video production of people competing to come up with the lowest carbon lunch. I’ve often gotten blank stares when my reply to people asking me if I eat organic food is “No, as a silicon based lifeform I never touch the stuff”. Thus, in order to explore the full comedic potential of low carbon dining, a graphic representation would regrettably be necessary to reach a chemically challenged audience.

    A dish of arsenic coated elemental sulfur crackers washed down with mercury could be an appetizer. I’m sure that the response of the diners bodies to the white phosphorus with bromine chaser would be the source of great amusement to viewers. The “carbon free” menu is extremely varied with post-prandial alterations in diner physiologic function representing a vast, previously untapped store of hilarity. Regrettably most explosives have a significant carbon component and hence the post-nitroglycerine ingestion bungee jumping, for all the laughs associated with effects of acceleration/deceleration on a nitroglycerine filled digestive tract, would lose out to a more natural meal of obsidian wafers which have much less carbon and a lower carbon footprint (assuming the obsidian was from an ancient volcanic eruption).

    A complex scoring system could be developed in which the energy production used to produce sewing needles and razor blades would make eating them a higher carbon lunch than just washing down asbestos with seawater. With the tens of millions of dollars that the oil companies are pumping into WUWT, it should be easy to hire the necessary production staff to produce a spoof on the 10:10 low carbon lunch program.

  310. Please spoof this video someone please. This Video may be linked with Comic Relief, the UK event that uses humour to raise money for the starving children etc.

    Change the script/dialogue to one denying the developing world power stations, disease control clean water etc for fear of global warming, and blowing up those EcoFascists who want people to keep dying of poverty etc. Then see who is laughing

  311. Thanks Rational and Wayne for those suggestions for saving this video. (Should have thought of looking in firefox plugins!) In general I think we should be saving things we refer as well as linking to the source, because (seriously) they will delete the source as soon as it becomes an embarrassment – just like last year’s opinion of last century’s temperatures!

  312. I feel like I’ve been slapped in the face. Apart from family etc, my 2 biggest passions are weather & climate/exposing the AGW scam and Tottenham Hotspur football club. I knew that Spurs were involved in 10:10 but seeing the legend that is Ledley King in the video feels awful. I feel like sending an email rant to daniel Levy. Pity i cannot turn off 30 years of love for the team.
    Regarding Richard Curtis – yes he does satirical comedy (blackadder my favourite of all time) but I do not think he is a sceptic. He co-wrote that with Ben Elton who is it seems abit of a greenie. He was on BBC breakfast news the other week rattling on about global warming and has cosied up to Prince Charles.
    10:10 is a real organisation and I do believe Richard Curtis believes in AGW and is on the greenie bandwagon.

  313. Metryq says:
    October 1, 2010 at 2:00 am
    Interesting that the ad shows AGW believers as the majority…

    Yes, this is really lowbrow manipulation. Almost as if
    they’re trying to convince themselves they have power.
    They must be truly demoralized.

  314. I got through a 1:39 of the video and had seen enough.

    All I could think of were suicide bombers—is that what’s next from the eco-[/snip]?

    /Mr Lynn

    [REPLY: Lets leave the Nazi references out of the conversation. Employing it diminishes the Holocaust and the evil of Hitler / the Nazi. .. bl57~mod]

  315. @ tryfan says:
    October 1, 2010 at 2:41 am

    Hilarious :)
    Great satire in classic Monthy Python vein. Can’t believe that anyone actually thinks that this little movie is anything but a joke.
    May not be everybody’s cup of tea, of course, just like early Peter Jackson movies.

    Sorry – but you don’t seem to understand Python very well.
    This is not satire.
    And how could it be a “joke”? Were planes flying into buildings funny? Or London buses with dented roofs and people with bits missing?

    There are plenty of things that have me rolling around the floor laughing.
    And there are some things that couldn’t raise a smile.
    And there are other things that make me quite angry.

    It’s good to be able to spot which is which, IMHO.

  316. In the times of Monty Python there were no Westerns fanatical enough to kill over environmental issues. Now there are, like Volkert van der Graaf who assassinated a leading Dutch politician over animal rights. In the East there is now a thriving sub-culture of Islamists ready to blow themselves and others up for their own ideology.
    In the 1970’s- 80’s showing exploding people was absurd comedy: now it is almost daily reality in selected parts of the world.

  317. Leave this on thje FRONT PAGE of Watts up for a few days……

    Serioulsy, leave it there, tell everyone about it…

    Tolerance of other views, not even bothered either way..
    Kabbom,

    It is NOT the blood and gore, that is the problem (I laughed at Mr Creosote)

    It is the casual indifference,

    the You Choose, NO Pressure.

    The People in Positions of Authority, een those who went along, looked nervous, cowed, and GENUINELY shocked….

    What stands out, is this is a big budget, high profile campaing and group.

    Hundreds of people were involved no doubt…

    Such is the mindset, did NO one person, think hang about, is this REALLY a good idea…

    But of, course, NO Pressure, to speak out, to question whether this was a good idea. would get you sacked…

    Even in the Guardain, who scooped this..

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

    By and large all the recommends, and at least two thirds of the comments think it a spectaculary stupid failure, and that is just the environmentalists talking, let alone the sceptics, who by personal experience (and in this articel) just get deleted….

  318. We should see this as an opportunity, people: do you remember the “Downfall” videos in which subtitles made [/snip] rant at just about anything? This video should be used the same way!

    Just imagine: leave the video as it is, but add subtitles (or dub the voice, if you have the acting skills) when the teacher/employer/football-player talks about a “…10% carbon reduction by…” saying “or how about kill 10 “. This would show that this is nothing but promotion of violence against minorities, and should make people realize the evil the authors represent.

    [REPLY: Lets leave the Hitler / Nazi references out of the conversation. Employing it diminishes the Holocaust and the evil of Hitler / the Nazi. .. bl57~mod]

  319. This video is not something that is even on the continuum of things humorous, although I suspect it probably would appeal to GM’s more rabid sycophants that metaphorically tear sceptics apart in the Guardian’s CiF blog, but this film must be abhorent to anyone with a functioning sense of morality and a knowledge of the history of Man’s inhumanity to Man during the last century. I have been around a long time and have seen a fair amount of material that induces personal disgust over the years, but this little gem actually made me feel physically queasy until my anger at the makers’ inhumanity kicked in. To use a group of no doubt carefully selected children in this way is beyond vile.
    And yes, I do have a sense of humour, but this is a different ballgame alltogether.

  320. From the Guardian comments (I’ve put some asterisks in….)

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

    JohnHalladay
    1 October 2010 1:33AM

    Actually, I have to say something stronger,
    this film is ****ing ridiculous.
    I am a local Greenpeace coordinator, and a Board member of Friends of the Earth and I just can’t believe that you have produced a film that is so ****ing stupid.
    There, I’ve sworn on the Guardian.
    Jesus, where is your common sense. We’re trying to win hearts and minds.
    This is just ludicrous.

    Presumably this is John….. And I salute him!!!!!

    http://www.foe.co.uk/what_we_do/about_us/board/board_members.html

    John Halladay
    Friends of the Earth Trust and Limited Elected Board member for South Central
    Member of: Engagement Committee
    Elected: 2008
    Due for re-election: 2011
    John’s particular interests in the environmental field include recycling, the concept of individual carbon allowances and the effect of increasing world population on the environment. He works as a Human Resources consultant greening the employment practices in UK companies and is also the joint co-ordinator of Bracknell & District Friends of the Earth.

    Best comment is just a link to this: (josh might appreciate it)

  321. followed Update 3

    in that web pages comments is this, and its good!

    Steve Wrathall October 1, 2010 at 6:08 pm

    Seems to be a recurring theme of warmist sickoism:

    http://mises.org/daily/2997

    Teaching Kids about the Environment, (Australian) Government Style
    ” On the basis of these answers the calculator determines the person’s CO2 consumption, which is depicted by making the cartoon “greenhouse pig” look bigger, fatter, dirtier and angrier.**** When the child has answered the questions they are instructed to click on a skull and cross-bones symbol to find out when the person should die,**** depicted by having the pig explode in a bloody cartoon mess leaving only a pool of blood and a curly tail.

  322. “From the YouTube “Making of the Video”…..”My name is Drew Barnard and I think it is fine to explode children for a good cause”!!!!!!

    The young boy in question appears to be from an educated background. Now I would ask any sane adult what they would say to this child for making a statement like that!
    There seems to be no difference to me between this and a “Snuff” video! Simply green porn involving children. (The footballers involved, to be fair, are educationally sub-normal so I will excuse them but trust me, Spurs will get hell next match day from the opposite team supporters!)

    It simply shows me the degree of indoctrination that the green movement has been allowed to get away with and the damage that has been done to environmental protection movement that I once supported.

  323. JohnHalladay
    1 October 2010 1:27AM

    God knows I’m on your side but this just panders to the morons who think we’re ‘Eco-fascists’ – own goal, guys.
    Kill it and do something better.
    Disturbing!

  324. Aunty Freeze,

    Yes, the Ben Elton connection did make me think… Anyone got any more concrete evidence of Curtis warmism? If I have to accept that a humourist whose work I greatly admire is a stranger to reason (and an associate of people who are strangers to humour), I’d like to get it over quickly, if you please.

  325. wayne says:
    October 1, 2010 at 1:30 am

    Part way through you say:

    “Goto Documents & Settings under your account to Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files and sort by Last Accessed date.”

    Sorry to be a pain in the ass, but where do I find “Documents & Settings under your account”?

  326. Boris Gimbarzevsky says:
    October 1, 2010 at 3:22 am

    The closest that Monty Python ever came….
    888
    Boris, very funny:-) you ought to be in the business. I liked your scenario:-)
    and the careful consideration of the Carbon output of explosives, my thought was we’d use far less removing the AGwarmist, believers, as 40 countries of a possible? 140+
    is pretty low representation.

  327. I wonder….

    “We are 10:10, a company registered in England and Wales under registration number 6958799. Our registered address is 10:10 UK, 7th Floor, 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6XX.

    7.2 We are registered as a data controller for the purposes of the Data Protection Act 1998. Our registration number on the register of data controllers maintained by the Information Commissioner is Z1891365.”

    I wonder what is in the data protectioin act, and I wonder if the IC would be interested in this blatant waste of electons and energy.

  328. This is as subtle as the Nazis trying to boost their image with Kristallnacht and the gas chambers. Agree with us or we kill you. Some people on the Guardian site call this humour and think it is hilarious. That scares me. Wonder what they are like. But we know what human nature is like. I urge you to read Koestler’s “Ghost in the Machine”. This is just the next episode of Nazism, Stalinism, Pol Pot, Rwanda.

  329. Disgusting! Typical leftisit thinking, “If you are with us, you should be eliminated.” Of course, none of them stops to consider how little what they suggest could matter.

  330. In Canada for sure and I believe in Britain and the USA this type of work is covered under “Hate Crime” legislation. We will have to see how it plays out.

  331. Surely this is akin to “A Modest Proposal”. Even the worst CAGW must know what the take is going to be on this piece-o-crap.

  332. I reread that twice, and clicked Post, then noticed I forgot the negative within the quotes. I intended to write, “If you are NOT with us, you should be eliminated.” (or exploded all over everyone else to keep them in line in this instance)

  333. My name is Adolf Hitler and I approve of this message.

    Just to introduce myself, I lead an organisation of like minded indviduals called the National Socialist German Workers Party (yes, we really are socialists, I know its hilarious!). We also believe in a brighter, better future for those of a like mind and we too believe that in extreme times extreme measures must be put in place to realise our dream of a cleaner, greener future. On this, we agree with the 10:10 organisation.

    http://www.1010global.org/uk/about

    As some of you may be aware we have suffered some bad publicity due to our campaign, known as the Final Solution. As such we sympathise with the 10:10 organisation as they will undoubtably suffer criticism due to the content of their film.

    But you are not alone! We too believe in the execution of those children who stand in the way of out socialist dream (remember, I did say we are sociallists!). Not only do we agree with your suggested course of action we actually stand in awe of your vision, we salute the strength of character it takes to, not only execute children, but to do it publicy and without trial or recourse to an appeal process. We can only marvel at the power of persuasion such a course of action must have on those children who stand witness to this calculated act of barbarism!

    Of course the public execution of adults who disagree with our program of societal improvement has long been a traditional method of educating others. But, even we with our secret police organisation, felt the need to execute our children in complete secrecy and to destroy as much evidence of these acts as we possibly can.

    Since there is so much on which we agree I would like to publicly invite the 10:10 to our Global Climate event next year. In June, 1941, i mean 2011, we shall be launching a drive into the heart of Russia (tentatively called Operation Barbarossa) in which we will seek to make the world a better place. We would ask that the 10:10 organisation work with us, behind the lines and out of danger, to help eradicate the pestilence of carbon misuse.

    As a mark of our utmost respect we would assign you the top position as Einsatzgruppen 1, the premier league if you will, of our educational organisation.

    Now, it is regrettable that during our Global Climate meeting we will be accused of hypocrisy since we will, in fact, emit quite a lot of carbon through our operations. Well, you cant run a Panzer Division on hot air! However it is our earnest belief that this carbon jackbootprint will be more than offset by the reduction in carbon users (or abusers I should say!) at the end of our operation. You cant make an omlette without executing millions of others as the old saying goes!

    So I hope to see you all on the Russian steppe next year!

    Warmest Regards

    A. Hilter,

    Leader (or Fuhrer if you will) of the National Socialist German Workers Party.

  334. greenies don’t think this is bad at all. In fact many of them believe that killing off a good portion of mankind is a very good idea that should be pursued with fervour.

  335. Brownedoff says:
    October 1, 2010 at 4:44 am
    Sorry to be a pain in the ass, but where do I find “Documents & Settings under your account”?

    open “my computer”, then “users”, then your account name.

  336. TomFP says:
    September 30, 2010 at 11:47 pm

    “Anthony – I still think there’s a better than sporting chance that this WAS produced by a sceptic. I would be very surprised, but I’ll grant that it’s possible, if Curtis was a CAGW proponent, but I would be truly astonished if in addition he thought this film was a benefit to the CAGW cause. And the fact that the warmies had already made the absurd and egregious pap you instance only meant that Curtis had to plumb even greater depths of absurdity to achieve his goal – hence the exploding kids. Just look at his oevre – the man has an uncanny grasp of subtext and the tendentious use of language. (Queenie, upon Blackadder ”
    ===========
    The more I think about it, the more it looks like you may be right. The video looks funny only as mockery of the very mindset it supposedly tries to promote. Finding it funny from the other side requires, in my opinion, extraordinary amounts of silliness. How Curtis managed to fool these people into believing they were producing something good to their cause (if that’s what he did) is not only a tribute to his cleverness, but an indicator of the hopeless stupidity of those who agreed to finance such a mordant parody of themselves.
    There are many ways to look at this, but in general I agree with you that, no matter how you look at it, the end result will be a huge gift to skeptics.

  337. A few points:

    1. I use a reliable downloading add-on for Firefox called “Video Downloader Toolbar” – I’ve been using it for months with no problems.

    2. The video as displayed here:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/The1010Campaign#p/a/u/1/3UHN3zHoYA0

    begins with overlaid text:

    “Warning: If you don’t like gore, then this film isn’t for you.

    “There is a shrinking time frame for action on climate change. We hope this mini-movie will get you talking, get you fired up, but most of all inspire you.”

    3. I’m a Brit, and am with TomFP on this. Whoever made this has pulled off a fantastic sabotage job, whether he did it intentionally or no. When I first viewed it, not having ploughed through any of the comments yet, I felt sure it must have been produced as a wicked anti-AGW skit. I still can’t quite believe it isn’t.

    It’s a monumental own goal. And the fact that many Americans here are outraged is (forgive me) okay. Why? because whichever reaction one has, either incredulity at the stupidity of anyone who could think this was good publicity (and associated schadenfreude), or moral outrage, it only goes to prove that a major clanger has been dropped. Even more pleasing to have read that David Cameron seems to have backed the 10:10 group, and if this goes viral, he’ll have a lot of explaining to do.

    One thing about this whole mess is that no one in the establishment ever seems to have to explain very much.

  338. Gareth says:
    October 1, 2010 at 4:33 am
    Barry Woods said: “Even in the Guardain, who scooped this..”

    Scooped? Not in the slightest. The Guardian are one of 10:10′s ‘media partners‘.

    I know, sorry, being ironic…….

    Guardian said this:
    “Here’s a highly explosive short film, written by Richard Curtis, from our friends at the 10:10 climate change campaign”

    Nice friends…..

  339. To quote one of the ‘sceptic’ commenters on the Guardian thread on this subject: “When your enemy is committing suicide, don’t get in his way.” This is a massive own-goal for 10-10, as the comments on the Guardian’s website prove – and they are nearly all from ‘warmists’

  340. Djozar says:
    October 1, 2010 at 5:09 am
    “Surely this is akin to “A Modest Proposal”.
    ==============
    Yes, and to the extent it is, it makes me agree with TomFP that the 10:10 people may have been had by a skeptic.

    Here is a modern Modest Proposal, written by skeptics and based on the (actual) fact that breathing by humans and their domestic animals produces a similar amount of CO2 as fossil fuel emissions.

    http://climateguy.blogspot.com/search/label/1%20-%20Taking%20CO2%20Seriously

    Taking CO2 Seriously
    by David F. Noble and Denis G. Rancourt
    The Swift Institute on Global Warming
    May, 2007

    Life is deadly. All living things that breathe oxygen burn their food and emit poisonous CO2 as a pollutant. With every breath they contribute to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, and, hence, to global warming. And yet, for all the frantic formulas floating around aimed at the reduction of CO2 emissions, particularly through limitations on the burning of fossils fuels (dead living things), little attention has been paid to this obvious other source (still living things). Rough calculations suggest that CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are dwarfed by the emissions from these living things, including human beings. Emissions from human metabolism alone, assuming a world population of six billion people and an averaging of their state of activity, are estimated to be equivalent to approximately half of 1990 fossil fuel emissions. Add to these human sources the CO2 emissions from all other creatures on the planet, including plants which respire as well as photosynthesize, and the total amount of emissions from living things is staggering.

    To forestall the forecasted calamities of global warming, there must be a reduction of “living things emissions” (LTE’s). This can be approached in two ways, by reducing the number of living things, through their humane or not so humane elimination, and by reducing the amount of respiration of each living thing, through enforceable limits on exertion. With regard to the first, we appear to be well on our way. The loss of habitat through development, deforestation, and agribusiness has contributed greatly to loss of life and species extinction. Warfare will continue to contribute significantly as well, along with genocide. Human and animal population control and sterilization further limit LTE’s. All of this is a good start, but just a start. It’s time to let go of our pets. The number of livestock on farms, which has swelled enormously, could be cut back substantially with the elimination of meat from our diet. We must also begin to give serious consideration to euthanizing expendable members of our family and community. With regard to worklife and lifestyle, we must work hard at not working hard, thereby lowering our metabolism, respiring less, and reducing our CO2 emissions. The impulse to exercise must be exorcised, along with fitness clubs, marathons, and organized sports. Caffeine, which speeds up metabolism, must be banned. The work ethic must be replaced by yoga and meditation. Only by minimizing all effort will we survive. If we are serious about reducing CO2 emissions, we must all do our part, as little as possible.

  341. I suggest a public burning of the works of Richard Curtis, that should produce enough CO2 to stave off the next ice age

  342. Hey,

    I blogged the 10:10 video this morning (http://actoncampus.org.nz/blog/no-pressure-its-your-choice-boom), and it has since gone around New Zealand after being picked up by our biggest blog: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz.

    But the video is gone now – they’ve set it to private.

    A friend tells me that before it when private, they added a note to the start saying it was just a parody. I guess they decided that wasn’t enough!

    I hope someone has a copy somewhere.

  343. Looks like the video has been edited by someone, inserting a warning. Might it have been Youtube? I just can’t imagine a child seeing this film…
    Can’t these guys be prosecuted?

    Ecotretas

  344. It looks to me like the funding which kept the environmental train moving with everybody on board is getting derailed, questions are finally being asked and the infighting amongs believers is stepping up a pace. This is the froth that documentaries 10 years from now will be showing and asking how we got here. If it was presented by a government it would be a major issue, but as it is will be putting judiciaries in a rather uncomfortable position. Videos like this tend to be produced by the disaffected – not those with the support of the establishment.

  345. David Wendt – you do misunderstand me. I mean that 10:10 decided to produce a sanctimonious video, and commissioned Curtis to do it. Curtis accepted, stuck his tongue in his cheek, and produced a video he knew was poisonous to their cause.

    At least that’s my best guess, but I’d still be open to the admittedly uncongenial idea that Curtis is a card-carrying warmie, if anyone can point me to his form. In an effort to determine whether his warming is unprecedented, or part of a rising trend, I have attempted to find instances of prior Curtis ecobabble. Further research is of course vital (grant, please?), but so far while I’ve found that he’s made a film that says potentially silly things about African poverty, I could find nothing that fingers him definitely as a warmie. He’s enough of a sleb that I would have thought the usual suspects (leaving aside, of course, his present patron) would have prominently recruited him to the Cause.

  346. Anyone know how to spread this video without having to sign up as one of 10:10’s friends?
    The video now appears to be blocked except for the politburo, and “friends”.

  347. Here’s the silver lining. This may be cover for some politicians to have a Sister Soulja moment about climate and energy.
    ===============

  348. Looks like they noticed the unwanted attention the video was getting, and took it private to avoid negative PR. When covering potentially-controversial videos, it’s good to download a copy first, so that if the video gets taken down, it can be put back up.

  349. They have withdrawn the video in the last 10 minutes or so – they were getting a *lot* of very negative comments!!

  350. The film is very funny. It really is very well made, which is not surprising when you see the talent involved. Watch it more than once, I guarantee you will laugh – well, I did.

    It is fiction, not reality, and does not advocate the killing of children, or anyone.

    It plays to a common fantasy, whereby we imagine killing people we do not like (who, for instance, walk too slowly in front of us.)

    Most teachers would indeed love such a red button. We all would. There was (is?) a device marketed for drivers which enabled you to aim at the car in front before pushing the machine gun button, which would then make a nice “dacka-dacka-dacka” noise.

    The corporate scene is very reminiscent of Kill Bill Vol 1 where the top Japanese gangster tells the boardroom that their input is welcome, before she beheads a dissident.

    The film is not designed to convert anyone. It clearly will not do this. It is to raise awareness and suggest to people who might be sympathetic to 10:10 but have not done anything about it, to do something about it. For this it needs to be memorable, which it is.

    It is unsuitable for young children who might find the thought of their teacher killing them very distressing. I guess this is probably age limit 15, maybe 12 (UK classifications). So, aimed at household decision-makers, not kids.

    I find the vituperation and questioning of motives which has been directed at David Gould to be below the high standards normally prevailing WUWT.

    But this is a funny film.

  351. I hope someone’s got a copy of that vileness and can post it somewhere – people should be aware of the true nature of these greenazis.

  352. @TomFP

    “Anthony
    Sorry, but this is a case of America and Britain being two very similar cultures divided by the use of a common language. It is straight out of the poker-faced-irony comedy tradition that runs back to Monty Python. Trust me, it is lethally effective and, I think, hilarious.”

    Not for this Brit it isn’t. And I speak as a long time fan of Monty Python, Blackadder etc.

    It is despicable, enabling propaganda. As others have already noted, it starts the process of “dehumanising” opponents and normalising the dismissal of their opinions, if not simply outright violence (how long before we hear of the first cases of bullying at school based on this video?). Others have already flirted with potentially Godwinning the discussion here so I’ll come right out and say it – this belongs in the category of “weltanschauungskrieg”.

  353. This is pure propaganda and it is not aimed at those who are sceptical. It is a dog-whistle to the believers to stay in line and do not even consider stepping out of line.

    I have studied subliminal advertising techniques for years and this is one of the most insidious examples of the art I have seen in some time.

    The not-quite subliminal is portrayed in the faces of those who are horrified to have their colleagues sprayed all over them. This is purely to put a sub-conscious instruction in THEIR minds to follow or face being killed. This is meant to resonate with people who see themselves as being like those horrified people.

    It tells them, they are in a massive majority, they are doing the right thing, they must NOT EVER question the reality of the CO2 scam and that if they step out of line, there will be horrific consequences.

    Those who are sceptical will already see this for the offensive rubbish it is, but it is not really aimed at them. This is aimed squarely at the sub-conscious of those who are gullible enough to be taken in by the CAGW nonsense and aimed at keeping them even more firmly entrenched in that camp through using their own deepest fears and their own sub-conscious mind against them.

    It is sick!

  354. Pleione, I am receiving the same message–video is private, I must accept “friend request” to view.

    Allow me to put on my tinfoil hat, and conclude that all of those who flagged the video had an effect, and it is currently only available via social media networking to those “trusted friends” who can be verified as such?

    Every bit as creepy as the video, and the “public servant” trolling here from Australia.

    Used to work in government here in the US (an appointed position) and had any employee or appointee used government time and facilities to politically advocate personal viewpoints on a blog, heads would have rolled. Figuratively, of course.

    Just as I fervently hope heads will figuratively roll off of the public payroll this November.

    Vote.

    Vote.

    Vote.

  355. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 9:05 pm

    James Sexton,

    It is not advocating for the murder of sceptics. To find the humour,………
    =========================================================
    David, you just might be right. In fact, I can see one day when you and I can share a few beers and laughs about things such as this and maybe the Snowtown murders and even the Ash Wednesday fires. What a hoot that could be!! A down right knee slapper……….sick sob.

  356. The greens shot themselves in the foot (again). It is a shame that greens are sullying the good name of conservation with their never ending campaign of hate and breaking the law. The video dehumanizes skeptics and makes it OK to treat them as the other. This kind of hostility is common in the entertainment industry (eg: James Cameron wanting to shoot skeptics) and creates a hostile environment for skeptics.

    Of course skeptics should be outraged and voice this outrage. It also incrementally helps brand CAGWers as intolerant radicals who will do anything (another example: ClimateGate) to accomplish their goals.

    You have to wonder if Richard Curtis is actually a saboteur who is working to sabotage the CAGW cause.

  357. Well, it’s been pulled. What’s the betting it isn’t going to be shown in cinemas now? They’ll have to lose their deposits on the cinema advertising bill, of course. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of people……

  358. I must be the only one here who can’t access this video. When I click play, the frame just says something about having to accept the sender’s friend. Don’t understand this, as there’s no button to press to accept it.

  359. “…just a parody” LOL. So the backpedaling and spin begin. All but the most rabid of True Believers found it even remotely humorous. The question I would have for those Believers in the CAGW/CC/CD orthodoxy is, what does this video, which has now been pulled apparently due to overwhelming objections to it tell you about your own movement? Only the most cognitive dissonance-impaired can honestly say that that video has nothing to do with them, and their own belief system. Perhaps a little soul searching and dot-connecting is in order here.

  360. WOW! That video has been pulled from the site. I did e-mail them when I saw this thread on WUWT.

    “Sorry, we’ve taken this video down for now. More info coming very soon.”

    More “info” coming very soon….LOL. I wonder if anyone d/l a copy?

  361. The video is now not publicly available anywhere (as far as I can see). I guess they figured out what a massive own goal they’d scored.

    Perhaps the phone calls I made this morning to O2, Sony, and Kyocera (10:1o sponsors) made a small contributory impact after all.

    Down the memory hole it goes. I hope someone, somewhere, had copied it and gets it back up.

    Yes, it’s a terrible video in extremely poor taste, but it DOES need to be seen far and wide to expose the eco-loony mindset for what it is.

  362. The logical conclusion of AGW fanaticism?

    Nope, if anything it downplays it. The logical conclusion to AGW fanaticism would be only two members of the class surviving and the rest being blown up, even those who have reduced their personal carbon footprints.

    It matters not if you do reduce that pesky carbon footprint, because the environmental elites want to reduce the earth’s human population down to below a billion. That means a lot of conscientious climate alarmists who have taken the time and effort to radically reduce their own carbon footprint will also be killed.

  363. I took a BA flight from LA to London a few weeks back. First Class. Sitting two rows in front of me was ….. Richard Curtis. Quite the regular traveller according to the cabin staff. I had a look at the 10:10 website but there’s no mention of how regularly travelling thousands of miles in First Class cuts your carbon use by 10%. Perhaps he used to do it more often than he does now. I hope someone keeps a record somewhere.

    However, Fanny will have no problem with Richard’s frequent flying and multiple ownership of (seriously) prime real estate. Provided you are “actively tackling climate change” like Richard – or at least making movies about how other people should – you get your special exemption. Sometimes, if you want to save the planet, you just have to accept the fact that you have a gigantic carbon footprint. As long as you are a believer, that’s all that matters.

  364. Many a true word is spoken in jest

    Meaning

    A literal meaning; that the truth is often found in comic utterances.

    Origin

    The first author to express this thought in English was probably Geoffrey Chaucer. He included it in The Cook’s Tale, 1390:

    But yet I pray thee be not wroth for game; [don't be angry with my jesting]
    A man may say full sooth [the truth] in game and play.

    Shakespeare later came closer to our contemporary version of the expression, in King Lear, 1605:

    Jesters do oft prove prophets.

  365. It seems the 10:10 lot are already rethinking this little work of art as it has been removed from their site too.

    http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure

    “Sorry, we’ve taken this video down for now. More info coming very soon.”

    For those of you who are linking the genius of Blackadder to this tripe.

    The first series of Blackadder was written by Richard Curtis and Rowan Atkinson, while subsequent episodes were written by Curtis and Ben Elton. The first series was seriously unfunny and almost killed the chance of the others being made. I’ll let you make your own conclusions about the main writer.

    I was joking earlier when I suggested that this was the work of sabotage. Sadly they really did think that this would help their cause.

  366. From Graeme on September 30, 2010 at 8:49 pm:

    So what was the wholesale slaughter of millions of people in the death camps of Nazi europe in the 1940s – if not evil?

    If you are of the Malthusian bent, you may consider it to have been an interesting start. The war did reveal many limits on resources that were previously considered plentiful. Yes, since then we have discovered more sources, developed increased reserves, located alternate resources while increasing efficiencies. But the time element was strongly revealed, resources that will be developed and made available in ten years are worthless when the demand must be met within a month. Thus the crisis capacity of the supply system needs be considered, how much is available right when it is needed. Our society is currently very vulnerable to crisis-based shortages, both immediate and prolonged.

    It can also be seen that perhaps an improper metric is being applied. Energy Returned On Energy Invested (EROEI) does not properly reveal the whole picture. A better gauge is Resources Returned On Resources Invested (RRORI). For each life, relatively little resources were invested in the removal, with far greater resources returned to the Common Pool for use by society, in time frames ranging from those were being consumed in the short term during the crisis to those they would have consumed over their lifetime. In this way, society had benefited. However, the selection process was flawed. Some were saved for labor, for which more efficient and less troublesome machines were available. While strong backs may be considered a resource, strong minds also deserve consideration. Large quantities of intellectual resources were discarded based on an agenda. But still, with greater resources on hand there can be greater investments in education which will yield greater intellectual resources, and there were sufficient amounts for the crisis of the moment therefore it was acceptable to allow for the development time.

    Likewise, we should consider Waste Saved Over Waste Produced (WSOWP). Think about the pollution one generates over a lifetime, including greenhouse gas emissions, and the conversion of resources from forms that may be readily used by society into less desirable forms. For example, steel suitable for producing vehicles for mass transportation that instead becomes old cans in a landfill. It is not hard to imagine such examples. Think of all such waste that could be saved.

    The current crises we face, both real and soon-to-be-realized potential ones, demand consideration. We have many “Peaks” coming to a head at once. The Climate Crisis is also extremely important, as there is a very short time frame in which to act to avert catastrophe of a very disruptive chaotic nature. It has become clear that the standard response of the common people is sloth, they find it too bothersome to act and prefer to do nothing and wait, assuming the situation will either resolve itself without any personal impacts or the results will be a mere nuisance of less personal cost than that of active prevention. Therefore, the time of decisive action is upon us. Those who are both intellectually capable and can achieve sufficient emotional detachment to accept the science, to think logically about the issues involved, can consider and accept the solutions that will need to be pursued. It is now manifestly clear we cannot wait for the education of the young to bring about the required acceptance, as there are many not receiving the materials and many more refusing to accept enlightenment, and the time to act is short. Thus there shall be those who are enlightened who will willingly be part of the solution, and those who will be made part of the solution.

    As to this video, yes it is humorous, not meant to taken seriously. Such work does serve a purpose. For example, during WWII Warner Brothers was doing their share of war propaganda. There were funny cartoons produced that are considered shocking and offensive by modern sensibilities. Yet think of the great benefit they provided. Children could see Bugs Bunny hurl grenades at those Japs, and laugh while imagining their fathers and brothers doing the same, fighting with Bugs against the yellow menace, and not have to face the reality of the dirty work. Those critical of this video should consider how it might serve the same useful purpose.

    For those who have read this far and found this to be a refreshing discourse, a reasoned and logical examination of circumstances that must be addressed is a dispassionate manner, perhaps even find that it has intellectual merit, congratulations, you have made the list. Perhaps someday you will find out what that means. And remember, there is no evil, but there is necessity.

  367. Maybe I’ve been in Europe too long. B
    ut it seems Americans do not recognise dark morbid humour, eben when it’s plain. Sure the clip is bad taste. But I’d like to remind people here that those are not real exploding people. Looking at the comments here, you’d think readers think they are.
    The clip will backfire of course, but it will not cause so much damage.

    I posted the following not long ago and the indignation was a small fraction of what I see now, even though the Greenpeace film is serious, and has nothing to do with any humour. IT’S THE REAL THING.

    http://notrickszone.com/2010/09/03/greenpeace-violence-is-escalating-the-lines-are-drawn/

  368. As I said above:

    “I think 10 – 10 should ask for it’s money back because they have been well and truly shafted.”

  369. Now it’s been completely withdrawn, and there is just a banner message which reads

    “Sorry, we’ve taken this video down for now. More info coming very soon.”

    That would be ‘…more info coming as soon as our damage limitation people think of a way to get us out of this mess…’ . An interesting diplomatic problem. Perhaps WUWT readers could come up with some ideas to help them out? I would like to kick off by suggesting they use one of the famous five ‘Yes Minister’ excuses:

    1 The Anthony Blunt excuse – There is a perfectly satisfactory explanation for everything, but security prevents its disclosure
    2 The Comprehensive Schools excuse – It’s only gone wrong because of heavy cuts in staff and budget which have stretched supervisory resources beyond the limit
    3 The Concorde excuse- It was a worthwhile experiment now abandoned, but not before it provided much valuable data and considerable employment
    4 The Munich Agreement excuse – It occurred before important facts were known, and cannot happen again (The important facts in question were that Hitler wanted to conquer Europe. This was actually known; but not to the Foreign Office, of course)
    5 The Charge of the Light Brigade excuse -It was an unfortunate lapse by an individual which has now been dealt with under internal disciplinary procedures..

    In the meantime, never fear – this one will go viral. I found a copy at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSTLDel-G9k – but just google ’10:10 No Pressure’ – it will soon be everywhere…

  370. People seem to be re-posting. I thought it was a bit longer than this before it was taken down. Could be wrong though!

  371. I found it funny. The writer got away with selling this to that campaign group? Unbelievable – as it shows AGW promoters as smug psychopathic murderers.
    BTW, they noticed already that they’ve been had and took down the video, i had to find a copy on youtube…

  372. As a guide for them on how to mix (sorta) funny and serious they should have studied this advert for WaterAid.

  373. From the website 1010global.org

    “No Pressure
    Sorry, we’ve taken this video down for now. More info coming very soon.”

  374. SH says:
    October 1, 2010 at 6:21 am
    “Most teachers would indeed love such a red button. We all would.”

    No; only the psychopathic amongst us. The others have a capability called “empathy”. Read up on it – you’ll be surprised!

  375. The essential point of the video is to label a minority group as a danger to the majority and then ‘recommend’ elimination for the greater good.

    I recall having previously seen a piece of propaganda with exactly the same message.

    It was a prewar item from Germany in which the stereotypical facial features of a person of semitic background were gradually transformed into the features of a rodent. It was made clear that as vermin they were a threat to the racial purity of the majority such that elimination was proposed.

    I’m sure the makers thought it quite a lark at the time and I can imagine the scenes in the production studio being identical during the creation of both that item and now this one.

    The trouble is that with the benefit of hindsight we see that it truly was a precursor and represented something deep, dark and evil in the psyche of that society.

    It is recognised within revolutionary circles that it only needs a small number of determined individuals (10,000 or so I believe) supported by lots of useful fools to overturn an entire nation and up to 1933 Germany was essentially democratic.

    It is also recognised that a big lie if repeated often enough will prevail.

    We need very few to be ‘inspired’ or ‘turned’ by the belief in a threat to society at large from so called ‘deniers’ for enough of a groundswell to develop for us to go down the same track as many past tyrannies.

    The evidence is that the producer is already under the delusion that deniers present a clear and present danger to others. How many others have already formed that view and may be willing to group together to present a serious threat of widespread violence or political manipulation.

    Amusing or not, this video is not a trivial phenomenon.

  376. TomFP says:
    October 1, 2010 at 6:02 am
    “David Wendt – you do misunderstand me. I mean that 10:10 decided to produce a sanctimonious video, and commissioned Curtis to do it. Curtis accepted, stuck his tongue in his cheek, and produced a video he knew was poisonous to their cause. ”

    Exactly what i’m thinking. Man, he pulled a real stunt there and probably even got paid for it!

  377. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 8:27 pm
    savethesharks,

    I always try to help those having trouble with logic. Everyone can learn – even someone like me. :)

    ================

    That’s good to know.

    You said yourself you don’t believe in the concept of evil.

    But using your logic, knowing how you think by what you have just said, if evil does not exist, then who is to say “sceptics” are indeed not at the same level “vicious paedophiles.”

    In your world, as DavidMHoffer so succinctly pointed out, it all just doesn’t matter.

    But I am heartened to see that you are violating your own system of belief and showing some signs of an actual conscience.

    You want to talk about this more offline I will be happy to. My email is sharkhearted@gmail.com.

    -Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  378. Anyone trying to liken this video to a Monty Python sketch is missing the big point – it stops being funny the moment it’s linked to some agenda. And it becomes positively dangerous when it targets an identifiable group of people.

  379. David Gould says:
    September 30, 2010 at 10:32 pm

    For those wishing to discuss this further with me, I am signing off for now. I should be able to respond more over the weekend.

    —————–

    David Gould,

    Note: I also posted this same comment over on the Tom Fuller post ” Lower Than This They Cannot Stoop”.

    I appreciate your willingness to continue the dialog. Although, I admit it is a little surreal to be discussing this 10:10 video without discussing the fundamental beliefs of the ideological environmentalists pushing it. That is where I think the intellectual meat of the discussion is. But, instead let’s continue to discuss comedy as related to the 10:10 video and comparison to similar fiction.

    First, to answer your following question to me, I would like to ask you a question. Do you think that me finding this video funny mean that, as one person here has suggested, I advocate the murder of children as social policy? If you do not, then you surely agree that some of the reaction here has been over the top.” David, I do not think you are a troll who is jerking us around. I think you mean what you are saying. Based on what you have said, I have no idea about what moral system you adhere to. I do not know what you are advocating other than a very broad perspective on comedy that is something like anything can be funny in certain contexts. I think there is a logical connection between a person’s fundamental values/thoughts and what they find funny (and by the way what art they admire).

    REQUEST: When you get back, I would like to hear what context (you implied there might be one in a previous comment to me) you think would make comedic my following proposed fiction story from my previous comment to you:

    John Whitman says:
    September 30, 2010 at 8:44 pm

    David Gould,

    But I think you do see the point being made by commenters that if we were to write a fiction story about some future fascist government trying to push red buttons to eliminate Jews, it would not be funny except to someone who would be psychologically sick.

    If you were to agree that such a fiction story would not be funny, then you probably can see why we do not find the 10:10 video funny.

    John

    John

  380. AntonyIndia says:
    October 1, 2010 at 3:56 am
    “[...]In the East there is now a thriving sub-culture of Islamists ready to blow themselves and others up for their own ideology.”

    You’re living to the West of Hamburg?

  381. I have a copy, and I have uploaded it to an independent site. I’ll post back with the details if all the other copies get pulled from YouTube.

  382. You may like to read the comments about this at The Guardian – Uk’s premeir leftleaning and rabid greenie paper. Home of George Moonbat and the house journal of the AGW religion. Even they think it is a disaster

    LinkText Here

  383. If this is the current mentality of the global warmist community, then I would say that they need, and I mean it sincerely and honestly, psychiatric help. I cannot imagine such gory videos being shown to school kids. To me these videos are as bad, even worse than, a video produced by religious extremists showing their victims being beheaded, tortured etc. It is worse for the fact that while everyone would agree that the religious extremists are what they are, that is madmen, western kids would think that these Global Warmist videos, meant “to save the planet”, are mainstream and acceptable. We are turning our kids into global warmist extremist who, in a few years time will be beheading skeptics, blowing them (me) up and invoking the spirit of the godess Gaia to curse the skeptics. This IS global warmist religion.

  384. TomPF: “Where I slightly disagree is in ” It has as it’s (anti-) heroes the non-conformist, the outsider, the underdog, the loser striving for dreams which will never be realised.” This, IMO, is far more a hallmark of American, rather than British humour. In Blackadder, for instance, Baldrick is forever downtrodden,”

    —————————–
    There is a long list of (anti-) heroes of the type I described (not all, of course, having every single one of those traits): Tony Hancock, Harold Steptoe, Basil Fawlty, Reginald Perrin, and the protagonists of Peep Show, The IT Crowd, The Young Ones, The Office, Extras, Red Dwarf, Only Fools and Horses and, yes, Blackadder spring to mind.

    Baldrick isn’t the main protagonist but a subsidiary character of a familiar type, Manuel in Fawlty Towers and Piers in The New Statesman being other examples, where the anti-hero takes out their frustration on someone who is even more put upon. The audience also empathises with that whipping boy at those moments and I would suggest that this is a sign of a certain sophistication. The audience is being credited with the ability to empathise with an anti-hero with major flaws and recognise the fact that they can sometimes be as bad as the people who are oppressing them.
    It is this aspect, I would suggest, which often leads to the failure of US translations of UK series such as Men Behaving Badly and Red Dwarf. The US versions try to clean up the anti-heroes, cast more conventionally attractive actors, smooth out their more unpleasant traits and generally try to make them more “loveable” and less of an obvious failure – thus losing the edge, the reality and much of the source of the humour.

    To drag this back on topic.
    Curtis seems to me a prime example of the type who initially bought into the CAGW idea fairly unthinkingly, because it seemed to “feel right”and fit in with their world view. At first there were no voices at all raised in the UK media questioning the orthodoxy. It wasn’t until C4 showed “The Great Warming Swindle” that most people would have been exposed to any doubt at all. By then it was too late for many, and as all doubters since have been characterised as cynical right-wing idealogues funded by Big Oil once their Tobacco funding ran out, then you can see how hard it is to start again from square one with your thinking if you are anywhere to the left of right wing.

  385. Did anyone else notice how all the kids are dressed exactly alike–little clones? It’s like something out of Pink Floyd’s The Wall.

  386. Again and again I’m struck by the divorce from reality manifest by those who paid for and produced this video. Leaving aside whether or not it is funny, or whether or not Richard Curtis spoofed his clients, it is now obvious that the video is a disaster and is being pulled by its sponsors. But how on God’s Green Earth did they imagine that this would be effective video? I like Lucy Skywalker’s take: Florid Psychosis. And a marker for the desperation of the alarmists as the tide of their scientific hoax and political putsch steadily ebbs.

    Will it get worse, or will this be the opportunity for some politicians to have a ‘Sister Souljah’ moment about climate and energy? The time is ripe for it.
    ===================

  387. “Stephen Wilde says:
    October 1, 2010 at 7:10 am”

    Very true however, what created that situation in Germany was a direct result of the 1929 stockmarket crash. These days are different, 99% of people have access to vast sources of information, data, facts etc and only not propaganda.

    I am happy to see this video has been “captured” and will probably propagate around the interwebby. Thanks Al Gore for inventing the very technology that will bring about your downfall along with all your followers.

  388. I’ve emailed my MP (I’m in the UK), asking whether this group should continue to have charitable status, and stressing that this is a matter for the government as they are actively involved with (state run and funded) schools, hospitals and so on, and that this video, if the victims were other groups, is clearly “Hate Speech”. We should do whatever we can to stop them getting away with this. It’s utterly beyond the pale. The fact that their supporters think it “funny” is no different to any other fanatics thinking that their hate propaganda is funny.

  389. They have just demonstrated the real desires of the modern environmental movement. Its about time someone actually portrayed the reality of all the doublespeak. While video is idiotic, gross, vulgar, frightening and repulsive, it demonstrates the mindset of what we are up against.

  390. I agree that the useful idiots and fellow travellers will be purged in the Brave New World if it is realized, and that message is subliminally present in the video as well: obviously EVERYONE is embedded with the means to be eliminated, if a simple push of a button is all it takes to do it.

    I disagree that Mr. Gould is not engaged in a species of trolling: almost a variant of a concern troll, he is pushing the “but have you no sense of humor” meme through a relentless reasonableness. Still somewhat shocked he regards his efforts as a good use of government time and money.

    Many thanks to those who have embedded/copied/linked th atrocity. It needs to go viral, as well as the fact that if one needs to “friend” someone (who?) to still see it “legitimately”, it is perhaps validated as something considered a legitimate communication to the choir.

    Not funny either (as is NOT kadaka at 6:52 a.a.)

    More James Lees

  391. Will Homeland Security now tag climate “activists” as terrorists?
    Osama bin Laden criticised relief efforts in Pakistan and called for action against climate change in what appeared to be a new audio tape from the al Qaeda leader issued on Friday in an Islamist forum.

  392. The “minions in the media” are working overtime to bury this.

    Try doing some search engine work on it! Hard to find any links under 10:10 campaign, 10:10 Campaign offensive video, etc. Virtually nothing shows up.

    Continue my suggestion: Email the working links about. People need to see this!

  393. In the context of other AGW proponents promoting putting skeptics on death camp trains, this is scary. Zealots of any stripe are dangerous, and this type of propaganda appeals to them. Without those other comments, the video would just be crude and amusing in a sophomoric way.

  394. This is the most disturbed I have been during my involvement with the AGW story. That video – which I watched as a reposted Youtube copy – made me feel physically ill. It wasn’t funny – it was sick. It is linked to an agenda and as such represents a serious form of subversion of everything good in the modern world. Peversely it almost give the watcher a glimpse of what ‘evil’ might actually look like. The analogies (discussed above) with Holocaust propaganda during WW2 are extremely real.

  395. So if I announce my intention to cut my “carbon output” by 20%, am I now cool to blow up all those irresponsible 10 per-centers?

  396. Richard Sharpe 8:36
    Scroll back up to Joe at 7:43am. You can also reach it through “Global warming campaign fail” and “How to curb carbon emissions” on YouTube. Best wishes.

  397. Steve Koch says:
    October 1, 2010 at 6:31 am

    The greens shot themselves in the foot (again).

    i would have said higher up and more to the centreline!

    At least the video has been removed from the 10:10 website

  398. Nonegatives says:
    October 1, 2010 at 8:10 am

    Will Homeland Security now tag climate “activists” as terrorists?

    Probably…

    And it has been happening for a while here in Canada…

    http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2010/06/19/opp-calling-us-resisters-phone-calls-visits-background-checks-on-wco-members/

    It starts small then it grows if you tolerate the intrusions.

    As far as I am concerned people have a right to public protest and the right to state their opinion. I have trouble with Hate Speech and suppression of rights.

  399. Actually, if this were a satire against the Hansens & Holdrens of the world, it would be pretty effective!

    Based upon what I read in RealClimate comments, that is how the CAGW crowd feel…..put a gun to the head of us carbon-consuming bastards and force us to change, or else! We are not skeptics, we are heretics, so get ready for the inquisition!!

    The black-humor guy in me (I loved the movie “Scanners”!) had to grin at the “heads blew up real good” special effects, BUT involving children in the video is clearly abusive. Hopefully this will backlash….however, this crowd didn’t learn from the “polar bears plunging to their death” advert either, so don’t hold out any hope.

    I saw absolutely no humor in this one at all:

  400. Given the broad range condemnation of this, I suddenly feel sorry for the kids who acted in it. They were conned into thinking they were doing something honourable and this is certainly not the ‘going viral’ internet reception they would have been hoping for.

  401. TinyCO2 says:
    October 1, 2010 at 9:07 am
    Given the broad range condemnation of this, I suddenly feel sorry for the kids who acted in it. They were conned into thinking they were doing something honourable and this is certainly not the ‘going viral’ internet reception they would have been hoping for.

    Nah, the other kids will look up to them as heroes, if only for the sheer grossness of the advert! The underlying message & propaganda issues will be lost, kids just like gross stuff anyway.

    Halloween is coming up, I’d expect some kids to adopt exploding-head costumes!

    However, USING children in this manner pisses me off, these bastards should be sued for child abuse.

  402. When I tried to view the video, I was told that it’s private.

    Has anyone else encountered this problem?

  403. I wonder at what point will the “Do no evil” folks at Youtube start censoring stuff that does not agree with their trendy, Elite-conscious views?

  404. Now if you don’t go along you’ll die. So raise your hand and claim to be doing something then just carry on like always. I’ve seen my share of dumb adverts but this one takes the cake. This will just alienate all real environmentalists. You know those crazy people who want to stop mercury pollution etc and could care less about CO2.

    To all warmists. You’ve lost, get over it.

    Cheers

  405. “Tim says:
    October 1, 2010 at 9:29 am”

    Ah yes, REAL pollution. Mercury was the cause of many health issues and birth defects etc, in a fishing villiage (Don’t recall which one) in Japan in the 1950’s.

  406. From barbarausa on October 1, 2010 at 8:09 am:

    Not funny either (as is NOT kadaka at 6:52 a.a.)

    Why ever would one think my previous post was meant to be funny? It is hardly more than a compilation of serious intellectual thought I have encountered over the years, in writings and in discussions, some of it echoed recently by commenters here on this very site. This was done by very serious thinkers, who obviously had seriously considered what were the serious implications of their seriously thoughts and the serious actions that must logically follow the path of those serious thoughts.

    Perhaps one may consider them funny, assembled together for presentation as I did, the completed package laid bare. But I assure you, there are serious people giving this serious thought and preparing to execute the serious actions they find necessary to avert serious disasters. In addition to the actions they and/or others have already taken. Likely they will not find their actions humorous, as they find them to arise from grim necessity, and soon such work becomes boringly mundane. But perhaps it will cheer them up to see such things portrayed in a funny manner, that others can watch and laugh at with them, perhaps those others may want to join in on the fun. And look, there’s the first video, already done.

  407. Tom says:

    “Excellent! Good movie. Very well produced and made me laugh. What more should a movie do?”

    It should refrain from deliberately inciting violence against people whose only “crime” is having a different opinion, no?

    Andrew P,

    Thanks for posting the 10 – 10 admission that this video was intended to be serious. They write:

    “With climate change becoming increasingly threatening, and decreasingly talked about in the media…”

    The 10 – 10 producers are propagandists for a political cause, nothing more or less. The excuse that it was just a funny video is mendacious.

    Concerning their dishonest claim: “With climate change becoming increasingly threatening,” there is not one iota of evidence that the current climate is unusual, or that CO2 makes any difference at all. In fact, the current climate is more benign than during most of the preceding ten thousand years.

    Their [unstated] complaint is that the public is beginning to understand that the AGW scare is a political and financial power grab, which cannot stand on its scientific merits – something that WUWT readers have known all along.

  408. David Gould,

    If you had anything worthy to say, it would not be defense of tripe like this, so there is nowhere to elevate the discussion. I could sink to your level, but I will pass.

  409. David Gould

    Are you aware of the threat that GreenPeace posted on their website earlier this year, “We need to hit them where it hurts most, by any means necessary: through the power of our votes, our taxes, our wallets, and more.” … “We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work. And we be many, but you be few.”? The threat was rapidly retracted from here;

    http://weblog.greenpeace.org/climate/2010/04/will_the_real_climategate_plea_1.html

    primarily because of WUWT;

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/03/climate-craziness-of-the-week-greenpeace-posts-threats/

    but it can still be read in its entirety here:

    http://gp-bc7f8.posterous.com/

    Also, Anthony was confronted in his office by an off balance Warmist earlier this year:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/07/a-note-about-boundaries/

    The bloodbath video isn’t an abstraction, it is incitement. The Warmists are indoctrinating, riling up and desensitizing their rabble and, if any crime results from it, those responsible will be held to account.

  410. I’ve seen much of the green propaganda stuff

    Polar bears falling from the sky (the “hug” movie)
    The bedtime story sh*te which cost the British taxpayer £6m.
    Suicidal Mammals.
    The ridiculous Santa Claus movie from Greenp*sh.
    The hoodie greenie saying how mean they’ll be in the future.
    And the “we be many .. know where you live..” nonesense.

    But this one takes the bleeping biscuit. It’s been a few hours, I’ve read most of the comments and I’m still not sure what to make of it. I mean I’d say it is in very poor taste and will offend countless numbers of people – relatives of people killed or injured by IEDs/suicide bombers, for example. Hope someone asks Cameron about this at Prime Minister’s question time – if he is associated with this multi-corporate (and others?) front organisation. That’s all it is 10:10.

    But I don’t understand the intent of the movie. I am sure such movies are not made without the input of experienced PR people who know exactly what they are trying to do. It has become a science. I am leaning towards thinking it is trying to normalise (in people’s minds) the idea that dissenters will be dealt with in a merciless fashion.

    Clearly there is an attempt at humour and maybe that meme may persist, so that whenever there are gathered together two warmers and a realist, the warmers will joke “where’s the red button?”. Nothing like humour to acclimatise people to ideas that would otherwise cause revulsion.

    What I’m saying is I wonder why they would do something so obviously offensive and tasteless? Maybe it’s as simple as there’s no such thing as bad publicity.

    I must admit I find it troubling.

  411. tryfan says:
    October 1, 2010 at 2:41 am

    Hilarious :)
    Great satire in classic Monthy Python vein. Can’t believe that anyone actually thinks that this little movie is anything but a joke.
    May not be everybody’s cup of tea, of course, just like early Peter Jackson movies.
    ————-
    It’s only funny if you’re a believer in CAGW, though. I just figured that out: it’s an “in” joke. Only makes sense to the “in crowd”. i.e. the humour is only there if you have a loathing of “Climate den!£R$” and want to see them ‘sploded.

  412. I can’t believe they actually think this is good for their cause! As I watched, I was convinced that it was a parody sketch put out by the ‘skeptic’ side of the issue – they’re serious?

  413. Smokey says:
    October 1, 2010 at 10:24 am

    Their [unstated] complaint is that the public is beginning to understand that the AGW scare is a political and financial power grab, which cannot stand on its scientific merits – something that WUWT readers have known all along.

    Well said, Sir!

  414. Chris Ivey says:
    October 1, 2010 at 12:12 pm

    10:10.org has removed the video from their website, but are not taking legal action to remove it from YouTube. Yet. http://www.1010global.org/uk
    ———-
    YouTube removes what they like. They are beyond control.

  415. This scenario is very reminiscent of the Japanese movie called “Battle Royale,” in which school children were transported to an island, given all sorts of weapons, and pitted against each other to fight to death until only one was left. Each wore an exploding necklace and those that didn’t play along were terminated remotely. I was wondering when a similar scenario would appear somewhere prominent.

    Without the celebration and glorification of death as promoted over the decades through horror films on through Lady Gaga’s meat dress people wouldn’t be so easily accepting of others’ deaths. I can also foresee the agenda going beyond “carbon footprint” once such a concept is widely accepted and enforced, so that all other resources necessary to life, such as water, are assigned a “footprint.” This, my fellow goyim, is the “sustainability” agenda.

  416. I assume the movie puts ‘deniers’ with people who don’t know about the “dangers” of CO2, so they all die. Lots of thought went into making this movie.

  417. {Snippitty Snip! Snip snipping snip. Snippp!] Right, that’s out of the way, and saved Anthony the effort of actually excising it.
    A very disturbing video – the third or so that I stomached. I’m a Brit, and I see – whilst disagreeing with – the ‘It’s a British sense of humour’ defence.
    Like many of the hundreds of comments I have read, I do wonder whether this is a stitch-up by those who do not think the Sun shines out of some part of the [politely, post-cranial] anatomy of St Algore.

    Then I read that Call-me-Dave, described as a British Prime Minister, has endorsed the [apparent] source of this video.
    If this is from the Algoreithm’s camp, it’s very very sad that they think this will help, and sadder stil that the man charged with sorting out the ‘Tony B.Liar’s and Brown’s Bills’ mess thinks it may be goodish. Hard to be sure, as Cameron comes across as an heir to Blair, with no discernible principle.

    But – I’m nearer 70 than 40. I really do not know how the minds of kids today work on seeing this. I guess most of the posters here are over – what – thirty? And many in their forties or fifties, and – hat’s off – some sexagenarians or more, too. I am not sure that I would react as I did if I was a -reasonably intelligent – kid of seventeen.
    Our children and grandchildren have been – mostly – brought up on computer games, some of which – Grand Theft Auto [2, 3 - and more?]is allegedly an example – are violent – but plainly fantasy. And CGI is pretty good these days.

    I couldn’t finish this video – but it m i g h t get through as, apparently, intended, but to our teens. “Give me a child until he is seven . . . .” and all that.
    [And that may all reflect on our own parenting skills as a cohort.]
    Very disturbed by the video, and not much reassured by the many – doubtless heartfelt – comments.

  418. Well, I thought that the video was pathetic! If it was serious is was out of touch – failed!
    If it was meant to be funny al la Blackadder – all I can say waas that he (the producer)has lost his way. BTW watched a Blackadder re run on TV last night – still magic.

    Mic

  419. Greetings from Ireland. WOW so may comments today – a record maybe?? I enjoyed sending this to my friends who have gently chided me for years to being a climate change skeptic (they are civilized enough to not to call me a denier) – I dont think they are quite so comfortable now to be associated with genocidal fanatics !!! Ha ha !!

    Look folks – the best thing you can all do is facebook/twitter/email the video to all your friends …

    We dont need to debate it – its self explanatory

  420. TomFP ,

    I am giving it away. :)

    Regarding the satire, I think that the satire in this video points both ways: the extremist rhetoric of both sides (quite a lot of it evident on this threat …) is the target.

    As to whether it will work for my side, clearly not. I would not have expected such an over-the-top reaction to it by so many people, and I doubt the makers of it did, either. Maybe they should have done more research, and maybe I will have to, too.

  421. David, when considering whether the reaction is “Over the top”, ask yourself what the reaction would have been if this were made by advocates of some right-wing cause. Say, sexual abstinence and anti-abortion; imagine the class being quizzed on whether they will abstain from sex, and whether they might consider an abortion. Then, the two youngsters who say they might are promptly executed by the teacher. What message is being sent by that video, and what would the reaction be from the Left? Would you defend that advocacy group on the basis of “they didn’t expect people to be so upset”?

    I still haven’t heard from anybody defending it what the message of the executions is supposed to be, if “we” have interpreted it so wrongly, nor what precisely is being “satirised”. I’m not a stupid chap, I can do sums and everything, but I cannot discern any subtle satirical message in this, and I have really tried to, because I can’t quite believe my own eyes; I can’t quite believe anyone would have actually made this video. Nobody can be that tone deaf, can they?

    What am I supposed to think when watching this? What is the message of the executions?

  422. Ian B,

    I have said a number of times what I believe this to be satirising. In the case of the abortion video, I would assume that it would be satirising the extremists on both sides, as in this case – I actually think that the abortion video would work in that regard. But, yes, there would likely be an over-the-top reaction to it. However, I would hope that people would not be comparing a fictional video to the holocaust, or accusing those who found it funny of wanting to kill them. No doubt my hope would prove fruitless ..

  423. Anthony,

    Thanks for replying to my posts, I feel somewhat honoured that you have taken the time. I do not have children and maybe that is why I am not so offended by this video or maybe its because I haven’t put myself on the line as much as you have and aren’t as close to the battle lines. I am 25 and it wasn’t so long ago that I can’t remember being a child of the age in that video and would have laughed at something like that. I can completely understand that some people are threatened by this video but I can’t change that I was not and still do not believe that 10:10 were trying to incite people to blow up children who don’t want to get involved with their cause. I have grown up with comedy which uses controversy to illustrate a point. I think this video has illustrated a very valid point and is now spreading that point throughout the world.

    10:10 are subtly trying to be authoritarian in controlling people’s lifestyles. They say its a voluntary commitment but the way they talk about it is like their trying to institutionalise the whole thing. I think the video makes a good point that these people actually are trying to gain some sort power in getting people to do these things and that has been exposed. The whole concept of institutionalising voluntary lifestyle changes is contradictory. Why don’t they just make their tools available to people without having to provide details of themselves? It’s a slippery slope that they are starting on and I think that is what the video illustrates so well. It makes reasonable people realise that this is the wrong way to go about things.

    That’s just my interpretation of it and although I support their right to do so, I think a lot of people went a little bit overboard on their reaction to people who weren’t disgusted by this video and didn’t feel threatened by it.

    If you want to know what really offends me is the emotional blackmail in that video that shows the child being read a bedtime story.

    REPLY: When I was 25, I probably would have laughed at it too. Give yourself a few years, get married, have children, build a life- the things that matter, and perhaps then you’ll look back on your view at 25, and say to yourself (like I have) “How stupid I was back then”. ;-) Peace, Anthony

  424. kadaka, I understand that you did not mean to be funny, and I am overwhelmed at the compilation.

    The comment was not directed at you, but at the fact that yes, some people do discuss these things as if they are rational.

    As they did in the 30s and 40s, and are doing again, with balloons like this (and others) video.

  425. What’s all the fuss about? It’s possibly an adequate demonstration of how desperate the alarmists are, but I really don’t see this as something to be disgusted about. Possibly there’s a difference between how a Septic (American :)) takes it and an Aussie?

    For the record, I describe myself as an Heretic. Given that CAGW is a Religion, those who don’t believe it are such in the eyes of believers, are they not?

    Cheers,

    Tim

  426. “I have said a number of times what I believe this to be satirising. In the case of the abortion video, I would assume that it would be satirising the extremists on both sides, as in this case ”

    I cannot think of the right word for this type of blind acceptance.
    They are fanatics , David.
    Why on Earth would they make an advocacy video in support of the cause that they fanatically support that lampoons their own position on the matter.
    IF they have been duped by the producer, ( whose personal positions have yet tpo be revealed satisfactorily for a judgement), Then that would make them doubly fanatical for not noticing that they were being duped with an over-the-top video that makes them look evil.

    You should take a second look David, old dogs can still learn .

  427. Franny Batter herself says this about the video-

    “Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age. What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? Clearly we don’t really think they should be blown up, that’s just a joke for the mini-movie, but maybe a little amputating would be a good place to start?”

    I find it hard to interpret that in any other way than that the video is an expression of “who will rid us of these turbulent sceptics?” She says quite clearly “What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet?”. That reads to me like, “okay, killing them would be going too far, but we can dream can’t we?”. And what can she mean by “a little amputating”?

    There doesn’t seem to be any satirical intention. It just comes across as a w*nk fantasy. “If only we could do this”. Is the cold-blooded teacher meant to satirise Greens? Why would a devoted Green like Ms. Armstrong want to do that, when she baldly states that “these people [the reluctant children] are together threatening everybody’s existence on the planet”. That’s a profound statement of belief, and the whole explanatory statement by Armstrong does not suggest “satirising extremists” in any way. It suggests that the makers feel that the idea of literally destroying their enemies is a big giggle.

  428. J. Knight says:
    September 30, 2010 at 9:05 pm
    Graeme,

    Unfortunately – not me. Happy to take the comparison though.

  429. If you substituted Nazi Child molester for skeptic into the film, I think many people would argue that the magic killing button was humourous because this group is comprised of monsters who deserve to die. Killing monster can be viewed as funny, killing innocents cannot. The only way the film can be seen as humourous is for the viewer to believe the victims are unquestionably monsters. The fact that 1010 thought the film was funny, shows that even if they are not actually advocating killing skeptics, they really believe killing skeptic is ok. The fact that they thought that the public would find it funny shows not only that they are intolerant zealots, but they are out of touch with how radical and extreme their own belief system is.

  430. David Gould, now that you have wisely given up the attempt to parley with the pharisees, can I ask you – do you not think that, given that the film’s creator (you and I seem to agree) may have intended it as a subversive rebuke to the people who commissioned it, he did a pretty good job? That his barbs were well-aimed, that he revealed some essential truths about the CAGW movement? And doesn’t that kindle your scepticism, and lead you to question what it has been telling you to believe? If so, I ask you to disregard to the harrumphing you have been treated to on this thread, and visit other posts, on this and other blogs, where you will find much that is provocative, but usually debated less sanctimoniously.

  431. Jon Cherney says: The only way the film can be seen as humourous is for the viewer to believe the victims are unquestionably monsters.

    Well said. They certainly can’t think themselves as elite on their qualifications, so they need to dehumanize others. If those horrible others think incorrectly, then they’re gullible/ignorant/stupid/crazy/evil… It’s amazing what a desire to think of oneself as better than others can lead people into.

  432. I like to tell people that the film Silent Running was the first film to warn of the dangers of environmental extremism. After all, the demented protagonist blew up has coworkers with a nuclear device to save a bunch of trees. At least it was done in a very sterile way.

    As with many others, my first thought was that this HAD to be a spoof in stunningly bad taste OF environmentalists, not BY them. I was bracing for the inevitable barrage of e-mail from my Greenie friends. Now, I am readying my own.

  433. “Tregonsee says:
    October 2, 2010 at 5:45 am ”

    If memory serves, they were the ONLY trees of Earth left living (The plants were sent off-world because of war?), looked after by the crew and “Louey”, “Hughey” or “Duey”, I don’t recall which one survived. But through the movie, the plants were dying. The protagonist realises, I think with a reference to “a nice sunny day” on a video call, the plants needed “light” (The Sun. The creator of all life on Earth and it’s destroyer). But at least the protagonist did “off” himself in a spectaular way.

  434. “I like to tell people that the film Silent Running was the first film to warn of the dangers of environmental extremism. After all, the demented protagonist blew up has coworkers with a nuclear device to save a bunch of trees.”

    And if memory serves, he also blew up a ton of TREES along with them.

    Talk about counter-productive.

  435. I’m British. I have a British wife and son. We share a British sense of humour. This movie was absolutely disgusting and it’s insulting both to Britain and America to excuse it by appeals to the supposedly-opaque-to-dullard-yanks “British sense of humour”.

  436. Wow, this is like a chocolate cake baked especially for BP, the coal industry, and right-wingers.

    This is black humor that is understood by perhaps two percent of the population. Of course the makers of this video do not want to kill doubters of global warming. And the thinkers on the other side know this. But the masses have been trained to react, rather than think – so the thinkers on the pro-industry right-wing will play their constituents like a fiddle and rile them into a raging froth over this. And you know what? The fossil-fuel industry is having multiple orgasms right now. They could not have hoped for a self-immolation like this in a million years.

  437. “Of course the makers of this video do not want to kill doubters of global warming.”

    Maybe, but a lot of environmental campaigners really do and the producers well know it. In fact I suspect they were pandering to such people and congratulating themselves in the process. There is little more satisfying than delivering what one’s peer group likes to see but they forgot about the rest of us in their self indulgent spasm.

    Had it not been for the outrage they would have provided such people with support and succour and thereby encouraged them. Most likely that will happen anyway to some extent.

    As it is I’m sure some of the more unbalanced extremists will be encouraged and may well take action. Some already have committed serious violent acts even without this sort of idiotic suggestion.

    Isn’t ‘accessory before the act’ some sort of crime ?

    Most of us understand black humour. The radical Muslim version is black humour. The 10-10 version is not. The latter is a threat and call to arms whether so intended or not and therein lies the real issue.

  438. Mark Dudek-

    I keep seeing defenders saying that everybody is too stupid to understand it. But they never then explain what we’ve misunderstood, that is, what the message was supposed to be. Neither have the filmmakers done so.

    I’d be much obliged if you could please explain the real message- specifically the message of blowing up the reluctant- so that we can all understand our mistake.

  439. Okay, small point on the discussion:

    I know it’s bad form to assume an intrinsic link between AGW proponents and the left / far left, but I think we can stipulate that both the genesis of this film and its target audience are not properly categorized as either conservative or right-wing. Or moderate, centrist, or for that matter mainstream or accepted.

    And so I must point out that to make the argument that it must be satire because OF COURSE the left, bleeding hearts that they are, don’t want to kill dissenters – is about the LEAST well-supported contention of the last 100 years, and you have more than a hundred million prematurely-departed souls to convince before you run it up the flag pole to see who salutes.

    Oh, and OF COURSE it was a “joke,” the problem is the sickness of the joke itself, combined with the message the joke is there to support. I’m kind of aghast, again, at the sudden assertion from the usual circles that all jokes are harmless. Well, all of *their* jokes.

  440. Marx Dudek says:
    October 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm

    Wow, this is like a chocolate cake baked especially for BP, the coal industry, and right-wingers.

    Well, I call myself center-left, and I am disgusted with this vile video, so how could I see it as chocolate cake? Chocolate cake was what the producers thought they were producing.

    This is black humor that is understood by perhaps two percent of the population.
    I do not know the percentage of psychiatrists and psychiatric social workers in the population. I am sure they understand why some people get self satisfaction watching blood and gore.
    Of course the makers of this video do not want to kill doubters of global warming. And the thinkers on the other side know this. But the masses have been trained to react, rather than think – so the thinkers on the pro-industry right-wing will play their constituents like a fiddle and rile them into a raging froth over this.

    I am in a raging froth and have nothing to do, as a retired physicist, with any industry.
    Somebody in another thread posted the “cute things exploding” video, and I am in a frothing rage about that too. The pornography of snuff films and blood and gore.

    And you know what? The fossil-fuel industry is having multiple orgasms right now.

    The producers of this vile video were having multiple orgasms while making it, and were expecting more when it hit the schools. They must be [snip] to boot.

    They could not have hoped for a self-immolation like this in a million years.

    There is a greek proverb, “God loves the thief, and equally He loves the home owner”. He gives us equal chances. We got Climate gate didn’t we?

  441. anna v,
    I am very angry about it too. I really was so overwhelmed when I first watched it that I had to walk away – I could not even tease out what I was reacting to most so that I could formulate a proper response. I have been able to do that now and realise that while I had a strong negative reaction to the violence, the part that has made me really angry is the bully message contained within the film that suppresses expression of choice.

  442. Marx Dudek says:
    October 2, 2010 at 7:01 pm
    “[...] Of course the makers of this video do not want to kill doubters of global warming. ”

    I guess that’s the exact reason why they made a video showing the killing of said doubters.

  443. Verity Jones says:
    October 3, 2010 at 5:04 am

    the part that has made me really angry is the bully message contained within the film that suppresses expression of choice.

    Having lived under a junta for seven years, the act by a part of the population to take the freedom of choice from the rest is something I have lived through, it does not surprise me as much as the total lack of humaneness and empathy shown by this video. There is a minimum that separates humans from human monsters and this video crosses the line. ( in addition to doing a number of other undesirable things, like brain washing and coercion and familiarization with blood).

  444. TomFP ,

    Personally, I think it did a good job both ways.

    As to changing my opinion re AGW, not really – indeed, I have to say that the reaction by many sceptics here to my comments has tended to reduce any tendency I may have had to pay attention to what they are saying on other topics. That is, of course, a generalisation: a few silly comments on a blog do not really amount to evidence for or against a proposition. But it is my gut reaction.

    That has been counterbalanced, however, by the few like yourself who seem to accept that reasonable people can disagree on complex and controversial issues.

    In any case, I will keep examining the evidence and try to ignore the extremists on both sides.

  445. Wow! I can’t believe how fast this video was yanked. I watched it about 10 minutes ago and went back for a second look and it’s been yanked everywhere. Most links end up with the YouTube “This is a private video” message. If anyone has a live link, please post it!

  446. I love how these little skits show exactly how extremely stupid the left is and much they help promote the rights base. It is because of you people that produce and promote this kind of junk that the wonderful United States of America is going back to the truth of the right and I would personally like to thank you for expressing your stupidity so the whole world can finally see how you people think, believe, and what you really want for the world. Thankyou again for helping our nation get back on track so we can move foreward and put the left back where they belong, in the loony bins of our minds. Again Thankyou, Thankyou, Thankyou.

  447. Psychologists tell us that humor often tries to cover deeply anti-social emotions with a socially acceptable smiley face, and that the emotion is often unconscious to the humorist. The 10.10 film demonstrates that \”campaign to reduce carbon emissions\” (or whatever they are calling it this week) is a watermelon campaign — green on the outside and red on the inside. Like their explicitly communist brethren these people would not hesitate to make their hostile fantasy real.

  448. You don’t think my six year old daughter would sit up and listen to the global warming preachers…………………………………………………….. if she ever sees that video?
    Brainwashing by threats and intimidation.
    Pure and simple.

  449. JJJoseph says:
    If anyone has a live link, please post it!

    Try this.

    Jonah Golberg wrote:
    “That’s the outrage here: not that they thought normal people would find it funny, but that the producers and sponsors clearly did think it was funny.”
    Thanks to TIA Daily for finding these links.

Comments are closed.