WUWT recently covered the lexicon shift at the White House: Lexicon Shift Alert: global warming gets another name change.
This seems generally harmless, but wait until you see the source of one of the names on that list: “Climate Disruption”.
We find out who thinks up new memes and names, it’s the University of Oregon. No, really, they sponsor this strange document that reads like a B movie script. And, they have reasons for thinking up such names.
They even have a “trick” for talking to the “UnGreen” people. Apparently, even though I have solar power on my home, own an electric car, and have other green tendencies, because I tend to look at natural variation explanations as a portion of the global warming puzzle, and because I do it (solar power) mostly for avoiding high energy prices, I’m apparently one of the “UnGreen”.
Here is the report:
![CCBC%20Guide[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/ccbc20guide1.jpg?resize=428%2C557)
(h/t to reader Steve in Oregon)
Like with “Mike’s Nature Trick”, they have a language “trick” on page 37:
Translation: make people tense and fearful by tapping into their base fears.
Like most liberal enterprises, they have a strong need to label and bin everyone so they can be managed. Here’s their table of labels for people on the same page. I found last one “UnGreens” to be laughable, almost like its a joke to them, like calling people the “undead” aka zombies.
Here is how they say you should talk to “UnGreens”:
So after all the labeling, binning, and handwringing over people that don’t think as they do, they come up with the lexicon to combat the problem. From page 11:
All of this is done with government grants, your tax dollars at work.
In our recent poll, “Irritable Climate Syndrome” took the top spot.
Given the “UnGreen” labeling and the feeling of this being nothing more than a bad horror movie script, I propose this for the next cover page of their work:
In case you don’t recognize the image, see this.
Green newspeak. George Orwell must be so proud.
The solution to the ungreen is obviously a new paint job.
I liked that movie. It was a lot more realistic than these people.
Did someone at the University of Oregon resurrect Joseph Goebbels?
We all know what this is called and it’s not new. This is call propaganda. From Hitler, Stalin, a politician or your local used car sales man, they all attempt to use a weakness in your character to move you in their direction. Effective propaganda will use a common weak point or fear but an attack in several areas will work as well.
What people need to understand is that this is an attack on emotion and not on logic. If you can override your emotions and see it with logic, you will see the truth.
LOL climate failure! Wonder what a failed climate looks like…
How about the Soylent Greens?
Huh? Do I have to enjoy spending time outdoors even if I hate the environment? It’s not fair.
OH, I’m sorry, that was a good try, dry and windy, but you’ve FAILED! Cool and cloudy has taken over! Maybe next time you can study harder and get some more sleep and you’ll make the cut. Ra ha ha ha ha ha!
Love the new cover! 😉 So, I can’t find my category; where does this group sort “realists”?
Who knew Manbearpig was actually a zombie?
Ungreen is as close as they can get to UNCLEAN and that iswhat they mean.
Serious question: can anyone think of any example of another scientific topic that has ever required such linguistic and political gymnastics in order to ensure public understanding? I’m sure no-one ever felt they had to get people to start referring to genetic engineering as ‘cell fiddling’.
If only this much attention was given to the science by these people rather than the propaganda. Zealots, one and all. They compartmentalize us to make us less than human so that their ground troops don’t feel bad about opposing skeptics in general (notice the condescension in the phrasing “scientists and highly educated people” – they confuse education with intelligence all too often ) . Now, I am not saying this is on the menu, but many have used this cruel method to get what they want – like in Rwanda, it was important to know who the “cockroaches” are in your village, in Germany it was “untermensch”, in the wild west it was “savages”, etc. Today, I am honestly worried about the “zombie” fascination and even “zombie invasion” disaster planning. Seems like the historical way to prepare the masses for the ugly work to come, because if “they” (us) don’t want to save the planet, do they deserve to even be here?
“More work is needed to determine which of these terms has the greatest potential to build proper understanding of the issue.”
The term that had the greatest potential to build PROPER understanding of the issue was this:
“GLOBAL WARMING IS SETTLED SCIENCE.”
Warmism does, indeed, stand or fall on whether or not mankind is causing catastrophic global warming – NOT on whether or not mankind is causing the climate to change.
The hockey stick was designed to support the claim that “GLOBAL WARMING IS SETTLED SCIENCE”.
Wonderful post, Anthony. What strikes me is that their classification system is so much a product of their own fevered imaginations that their suggestions inhibit communication rather than supporting it. No great communicators among these people.
“Ungreen”? How “green” are wind turbines that kill millions of birds, including endangered whooping cranes and California condors, and destroy habitats around them by their noise, wind currents and vibrations and their own set of nasty pollutants? How “green” are intermittent, unreliable “renewables” that actually result in more fossil fuels being burned, and burned more dirtily, than if there were no “renewables”? How “green” is it to waste hundreds of billions of dollars chasing the CO2 bogeyman when those monies could have been used to clean up real pollution and take positive measures to protect the environment?
This is some of the worst. most mendacious guilt tripping I have ever seen. The University of Oregon is reminiscent of the Ministry of Truth in Orwell’s 1984. It’s a joke as an educational institution, a purveyor of ignorance, not learning. And it reminds one of the two San Jose State profs who burned Steve Goreham’s book, The Mad Mad Mad World if Climatism.
If you really want to be “green,” do this:
(1) Rip out all the wind turbines and large solar arrays and restore the landscapes and habitats ruined by them, and limit solar to rooftops. (Make the investors in these “renewables” pay for this work.)
(2) Take “green energy” investors’ assets and use the proceeds thereof to install scrubbers and precipitators on coal-fired power plants, and clean up other sources of pollution.
(3) Start teaching economic literacy in the education system from preschool through graduate school. Why this? Farmers and properly educated businesspeople appreciate the importance of stewardship of land and resources. So-called “greens” haven’t a clue.
Hummm. Let’s see… I tend to believe in the interconnectedness of all things, but I have no time for the CAGW swindlers, con-artists and climatic ambulance chasers. I believe Nature gives no thought to freezing, drowning, burning, burying, crushing, starving or poisoning anyone or anything in Its way, so humanity must constantly protect itself against the dangers of Nature. We need economic prosperity to survive, and we can use Nature for that without leaving a huge mess.
I’m not sure into which bin these Very Caring People would drop me, but since I don’t bow down to their particular brand of eco-theisim I would no doubt end up with the UnGreen masses. ;->
Who the heck did their US world view poll, Cook?
Ya, like those numbers used really exist. Even if accurate, it seems 88% would tell them to shove off. LOL
I suppose I will have to download the PDF to check their references.
Pitiful really.
I’m so greene it takes 3 e’s. I tend to look down on the ungreene green’s, if you aren’t even a green, well..
Social Capital Project of the Climate Leadership Initiative for a Sustainable Environment? Give me a break. I’m willing to bet those hot-house babies have never done much more than write high sounding words and think great thoughts. It’s always funny to watch them try to be experts.
“”””””……“More work is needed to determine which of these terms has the greatest potential to build proper understanding of the issue.”…….”””””””
Well I would have thought they might suggest that ‘More work is needed to determine which of the several scientific studies has the greatest potential to build proper understanding of the facts.’
They left out the category of people who attempt to somehow follow the science and are amazed at the ridiculous stuff coming from universities.
That’d be my category.
cn
J Abbot, I think you’d be surprised at how much some scientific disciplines need savvy marketing. Biotechnology (genetic engineering) is but one. Marketing showed that genetic engineering was too scary, biotechnology neutral. Wactivists played up “genetic manipulation” to emphasize their much-feared “corporate control” angle. Unfortunately, the greens have mucked up lots of areas of science and society. They are a mental disease that is contagious.
As well intentioned as the commentators may be, all the the good science that is brought to bear against the propaganda of “Global Warming” or whatever term one chooses, the inroads will be insignificant until the fundamental fiction of “fossil fuel” is laid to rest!
Climate Failure is my preferred choice.
You know, it’s actually a pretty good ploy and both sides can play this game.
For instance, you could say that I am so UnGreen that:
I’d like to use food to feed people rather than power my car with distilled spirits.
I don’t like the large dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico that results from corn fertilization to make those distilled spirits.
I don’t like that the finite aquifer resources in the Midwest are being pumped at record rates to water the corn on marginal land to fill my tank with distilled spirits.
I don’ like that Brazil is cutting it’s rainforests and savanna to grow sugar cane so I can fill my tank with distilled spirits.
I don’t like that a large portion of the woodland marshes in the Carolinas are going to be harvested to make wood pellets to burn in power plants in the UK in the name of renewable energy.
I don’t like that Indonesian rainforests are being cut down to make room for palm oil plantation to satisfy European biodiesel requirements
I don’t like that orangutans are loosing their Indonesian rain forest habitat to palm oil plantations.
I don’t like that raptors are being killed so I can run my air conditioning guilt free on hot afternoons.
I don’t like that raising the price of energy with green mandates is going to make the poor in rural areas much poorer as they have to devote more of their income to energy purchases.
I don’t like that hourly laborers who make things in the US will be less competitive on the global market because power prices drive up costs.
I don’t like that it takes 3 years for a solar panel to recover the energy that went into its manufacture.
I don’t like that this solar panel is more likely to end up in a place with high subsidies as opposed to high sunlight because that’s the way these things really make money.
I don’t like that human rights are being trampled in this country and in third world countries because some Wall Street banker is making money on carbon credits.
I don’t like that the Chinese are making refrigerant bi-products that have consumed 46% of the carbon offsets to destroy.
I don’t like it that some people in academia think democracy must go because only a totalitarian government could takes the steps to control a perceived climate problems with solutions that will likely be ineffective.
I could go on and on but I hope you get my drift. There is a tremendous amount of environmental harm being done in the name of climate change mitigation and more onerous things may soon follow. It’s time to point out that their “solutions” have consequences on the things they care about as well.
That graphic with the percentages of Americans in each category is crap. By far the largest percentage of Americans are “boneheads” who believe almost every meme mouthed by green politicians but are too stupid to realize that it means they will ultimately freeze in the dark.
(Tip: when talking with boneheads, point them to the video of Obama pledging that electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket)
Some boneheads will buy a Prius and therefore be mistaken for the green segment in the graphic. But the couple will be typically be anything but green (the spouse drives a truck to work). Some will change out a lightbulb or two, but still take a hot shower until the hot water runs out.
A number of boneheads will even go as far to copy and paste Reality Drop or other astroturf talking points into forums identified as denialist (e.g. Jason Samenow at the Washington Post last week who is far from a denialist who had the gall to put up a story calling into question the theory of wacky weather caused by missing Arctic ice). That subtype of boneheads are mistakenly presumed to care about the environment. But they lack any knowledge of what they are cutting and pasting and along with any understanding of how green policy will affect them. They may care about polar bears as an abstraction, but still enjoy a steak.
Unfortunately many boneheads vote and they vote for politicians who promise the least pain and most real and abstract benefits. Thus they will vote to tax evil carbon-polluting corporations not realizing that it is their local pizza parlor.
This “un”-thing seems a bit like the “denier” label; intended to give unpleasant associations. In this case I suppose it would be the “Ungreen”-“Undead” connection, hey maybe we’ll soon be the proud owners of titles like “Environmental Zombie”, or “Un-recycled Fossil”. But it does not really roll off the tongue, sounds a bit heavy. Why not something simple like “Carbonist”, “Carbonator” or “Carbominable”?
Could be turned around, though. How about an “Un-UN” sticker?
I find the “ungreens” to be the true “greens”. We smart people understand that Co2 greens the planet. We also work to preserve the land and the animals (we eat) so that they will be around in the future. We also don’t try to fix what isn’t broken. We also understand that the future is in new technology. Not old tech (wind power) with a new coat of paint.
These fake “greens” believe in removing all technology in their attempt at taking us back to an agrarian existence that will result in their optimum goal of devolving the world of all human existence, because the earth is viewed as a living organism that has been made sick by a virus known as man.
We also know these people are all hypocrites. They all use this modern stuff they want everybody to give up. I myself will think about giving up the modern stuff after these people have lived a few years without it first. We’ll see how long they can survive without it.
“13% rank global warming as one of the most important issues”…”3% of adults” …..”83% very likely to vote”
Sounds like most of the 13% aren’t old enough to vote yet, but as good citizens plan on doing so in the future. Pushing the agenda on the mouldable youth is probable their biggest tactic. Maybe when the nonadult part of the 13% start paying their way they will change their mind on why they do what they do.
Sean says:
August 24, 2013 at 11:45 am
Sean, an excellent list. However, the slant should be the other way as it is in the ‘Oregon Othering’ – as examples from your statements:
What are ‘Greens’:
* Greens like to power their cars with distilled spirits from food rather than use that food to feed starving people .
* Greens do not care about the large dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico that results from corn fertilization to make the distilled spirits they like to put in their cars and insist everyone else uses too.
* Greens do not care that the finite aquifer resources in the Midwest are being pumped at record rates to water the corn on marginal land to fill their car fuel tanks with distilled spirits.
* Greens are glad that Brazil is cutting it’s rainforests and savanna to grow sugar cane so they can fill their cars’ tanks with distilled spirits.
Etc.
Perhaps if they were ‘othered’ in this way they might think for once about what they were doing.
Joseph Goebbels would be proud! when you have to use propaganda type tactics instead of facts you should realise you have lost the argument.
1 in 5 Americans are Traditionalists where:
.
Hmm.
So this is only a middling kind of person. They are not Christians then. Why don’t they make their objection to traditional religion more prominent?
Also, do you really think they would provide humans as food for rare species, like tigers?
If you do then do you think they are monsters.
If you don’t then do you think they are hypocrites.
Or what?
In the end it probably will come down to Ungreen vs. Unreal. I agree, though, we Ungreens will need to connect.
On a more serious note, this kind of overarching fatuousness does raise a lot of interesting questions. Like, how do you parameterize a human brain so that it produces all this crap?
“Daddy, can I to talk with you about saving the planet from carbon.”
“I think you mean co2, Pumpkin.”
“Whatever. We heard about it in school today.”
“From that idiot science teacher of yours, Mr Greenweenie?”
“It is heating up the planet and making it too warm and too cold and lots of stuff. And we watched a movie from Al Gore.”
“I knew we should have put you in a private school.”
“I get extra credit for talking to my ungreen parents about the climate, and you know how bad my grades are in math and science. ”
“Don’t remind me. ”
“So could I talk with you and mom about this? I’m serious: The oceans are boiling all over and everything. And the hot spot. ”
“The what?”
“Hot spot. It like moves around and stuff. ”
“Ok, later. Tell your sister dinner is ready…. Oh, and Pumpkin…”
“Yeah?”
“Maybe you could start by cleaning your room. That is a part of the planet too, you know. “
Not much new here. Self-important pompous fools have always attempted to attract media attention. (Usually fairly successfully).
Obama, why carbon pollution?
Ban coal is no real solution.
CO2, it is clean,
Makes our earth much more green.
Now that is the green revolution.
With a twist at what levels it could be considered “carbon pollution at
http://lenbilen.com/2013/08/15/co2-is-it-carbon-pollution-a-limerick/
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! says:
LOL climate failure! Wonder what a failed climate looks like…
Obvious. One that doesn’t change. That would really screw-up most eco-systems.
This crap is ubiquitous in liberal circles. Apparently they’ve come to the conclusion that no one actually changes opinions using logical arguments. They now believe that they have to find emotional connections to the people they’re supposed to try to convince and use those links to change minds. Kind of like Hare Krishnas.
It’s just a sign of the decline of Western Civilization. When you lack a critical mass of people capable of the self-discipline inherent in actual logic, the problem is stated as logic doesn’t work.
The greens can’t do science. The greens can’t do math. Now the greens can’t do logic. They’re going with green makes you feel good. Unfortunately no one has told them that liberals are usually more depressed than conservatives, and no one is more depressing to talk to than greens.
Credited are two “Directors” and one “Project Coordinator”. How many deputy directors, assistant deputy directors, senior managers, operation managers, office managers, department liaisons, IT project coordinators, systems analysts, etc, are also employed by the CLI? And who pays for them?
Is Meredith the one in the red shirt?
It would be interesting to see just how they arrived at their numbers. Was it from polls? What percentage of people didn’t answer the things? What group were they pigeon holed into?
Start with the massive personal data collection that is being performed by both government agencies and private corporations. Pair with the ability to target individualized messaging on all addressable media (including media such as TV, which once were broadcast, and still appear to be even though now they are not), at infinitessimal cost.
The means and methods of absolutely pervasive yet effectively invisible social manipulation are here. They are being used, and your life is being changed in ways of which you are not even aware, whether you personally are being manipulated or not.
And you very likely are.
Gunga Din says:
August 24, 2013 at 12:18 pm
It would be interesting to see just how they arrived at their numbers. Was it from polls? What percentage of people didn’t answer the things? What group were they pigeon holed into?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
I’d also want to know how they arrived at categories that add up to 101%.
I wonder what group the people in these belong in?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlXAbi7RSBU
=====================================================================
That’s easy. “It’s worse than we thought!”
Gunga Din;
That’s easy. “It’s worse than we thought!”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think we need to start a list of possibilities:
o It’s worse than we thought
o positive feedbacks
o polarized view amplification
o math skill corruption
o math skill disruption
o precautionary principle math
o post normal math
o spinal tap amplified math
o facts, we don’t need no stinkin’ facts
o we’re making it up as we go along
How exactly does a climate fail? It may change and drastically, but there will still be a climate. I suppose if the earth were to suddenly disintegrate it would be hard for there to be a climate. Even Pluto and Mercury have climates.
What might be most amusing is that the last line is identical to that of every other junk science paper we see. A plea for more money to study the matter further.
CO2, it’s what’s for dinner.
I’m an ungreen, bitter, clinging denier?
No I’m an un-red free American.
An american who’s been taught and understands the “Scientific Method”
I’m a free American who smells a rat and has for some time
Never trust the government. or anybody beholden to the Government.
NEVER!
I don’t fit any of their “Segment” categories, and suspect that most or all WUWT skeptics don’t either.
Those categories reflect the poverty of the UoO Climate Communicators’ own outlook. They’ve created a fantasy world of allies, enemies, and the mass of the ignorant. Allies to hold, enemies to hate (and neutralize), and the ignorant to frighten into dues-payers.
And all of that, really, is done to merely give meaning to their lives. All the great horrors of human history devolve to that same banal impulse: false meaning through self-delusion. The more frantic the delusion, the more urgent the impulse, the greater the meaning. It’s a recipe for successful reality avoidance (until reality asserts itself). How can that be the life-strategy of a well-constructed human mind? Diversion from reality must be a basal need for an inadequate personality. The amazing thing is that there are so many of them.
They use lots of tricks. A big one is to conflate “environmental degradation and pollution” with climate. They are trying to paint Skeptics as people who don’t care about the environment, but it is just another lie they like to tell. They desperately need people to see “carbon”, the basis for life on our planet as a pollutant, but that is the biggest, most destructive lie in our history.
I’m an ungreen, bitter, clinging deny-er?
No I’m an un-red free American.
An american who’s been taught and understands the “Scientific Method”
I’m a free American who smells a rat and has for some time
Never trust the government. or anybody beholden to the Government.
NEVER!
When Warmists launched the Great Global Warming crusade they knew that playing it straight would be difficult due to great uncertainties in the science. So they had to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period and start a propaganda campaign.
This is their problem. Why couldn’t they simply present and the research and explain the evidence? Why be concerned about media coverage? Who asked scientists to campaign, exaggerate, manipulate and even lie?
The end result is Dr. Peter Gleick. The end result is Climategate. The end result is ‘Baby survives parents’ global warming suicide pact’ – Telegraph, and so on. Climate scientists and their enablers have done a huge amount of damage to science and people.
In the general scheme of things the site is thoroughly irrelevant. Nobody is bothering to comment on their blog http://www.climateaccess.org/blog ( but then who would want to?).
* August 13, 2013 “Talking Climate Change ” zero comments
* June 13, 2013 1 comment
* May 30, 2013 zero comments
* May 10, 2013 THREE whole comments! (the highest number I found though I skipped some pages…)
* December 18, 2012, 2 comments
* October 19, 2011 (first blog entry), 2 comments
Perhaps these bloggers are thrilled enough just to see stuff they wrote appear on a web page?
The “social capital project” appears to be the fantasy of Cara Pike who has a masters of science degree (science?) in, (get this): “Environmental Communications” from California State University, (your tax dollars at work!). Is that anything like freshman grammar for engineers?
Apparently they don’t bother teaching pesky communication basics at the masters degree level, ones like – communication requires an … audience! Good luck Cara! .. you’re gonna need it.
Unbelievable codswallop. They even managed to get their falsified 97% BS in there. How convenient for them that we so called ungreens total 3%…
Anthony, you could dye your skin green and these morons would still not think you “green” enough.
As for me, I’ve had quite enough. I’m going to my shack in the mountains to burn wood and eat deer, black bear and brook trout until I die. Screw them all.
This from the current DOD training manual:
In a section drawing inspiration from a 1992 book titled “Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in America,” the manual also lists “Doomsday thinking” under “traits or behaviors that tend to represent the extremist style.”
Extremists often predict dire or catastrophic consequences from a situation or from a failure to follow a specific course, and they tend to exhibit a kind of crisis-mindedness. It can be a Communist takeover, a Nazi revival, nuclear war, earthquakes, floods, or the wrath of God. Whatever it is, it is just around the corner unless we follow their program and listen to their special insight and wisdom, to which only the truly enlightened have access. For extremists, any setback or defeat is the beginning of the end.
Yes, they are Holier than thou.
Different lipstick. Same old pig.
This style of “trick” talking, for lack of a word that I can think of to describe it. is now being taught in public schools at early grades.
Check out the Common Core curriculum. You might even be shocked at what you find kids are being taught to “nudge” others to their way of thinking!
It’s exactly as U of O describes it.
Wait now, I think the word I was looking for is “propaganda”.
I think it might be a good thing if the percentage of “UnGreens” was higher.
Envy and/or greed are a couple of the main strings pulled by our would-be puppeteers.
Oh wait. That’s not what they mean by “green” is it?
They missed the most important group, people educated and motivated enough to actually look at the science to see whether it’s working.
It is fairly apparent that when they speak of a “proper understanding” it has nothing to do with building a better understanding of what insights can be gleaned from the cumulative empirical observations of human scientific endeavors, but the propriety they seek is complete and unchallenged agreement with their “understanding” of the issue. It is equally apparent that the evidentiary reality doesn’t ever actually enter into their manipulative scaremongering.
The sad truth is that this type of targeted manipulation is successful more often than we would like to believe and to my mind this work casts an interesting light on recent revelations about the numerous efforts of the government to amass ever larger files of seemingly trivial interactions and transactions for all of us. With Google, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, et al exponentially honing their skills at extracting personal preferences and triggers from our computer bread crumb trails, with the government likely pursuing similar plans, with Obamacare requiring the the centralizing of all the personal information that the government, in all of its agencies, insurance companies, the entire medical system, and numerous other sources, has on each of us in a single file at the IRS, the opportunity for chicanery starts to look fairly ominous. I know most here will probably argue that they are immune to this kind of manipulation, but if any of you have ever been married I think you will have to admit that once someone knows about you beyond a certain point, the ability to push your personal buttons is easily available. The danger of a not so benevolent government coming to know about you as well as a spouse, or even more tellingly, an ex-spouse, raises a spector far more threatening than “Big Brother”
This is just more of the old 10:10 sanctimony but without the exploding people.
Pat Frank says:
August 24, 2013 at 1:08 pm
=====
Dude. 1000 uptwinkles.
Truly horrifying! Brainwashing for Dummies. Always, with the Leftists, a fact-free emotional appeal and manipulation.
Having seen the picture at the very top of the piece I am worried that these people are giving cyclists a bad name!
Wonderful the people and politics on the receiving end of billions upon billions of tax dollars need to use tricks to keep the funding rolling, instead of accomplishments.. This is why I detest the greens..
Liberal doesn’t mean alarmist, I’m actually a pure socialist-anarchist and am arguably more disgusted than most by supposedly left-wing groups and individuals pushing what amounts to a global pyramid scheme.
Monetizing CO2 is a way to profit from letting people breathe, that is as pure a capitalist motive as it gets, isn’t it?
Reading through it all was starting to make blood boil until I saw AW’s excellent alternative title page. It made me laugh out loud. I’m going to print it off and stick it on my garage wall whilst I work on my bicycle (I’m a sceptic who doesn’t own a car. I suppose that makes me ‘un-green’)
Having just mentioned my cycling, one thing occurred to me:
Every week I manically pedal my fixie bicycle around the crazy streets of London, and there isn’t a single journey where I haven’t had a near-death experience with a car, bus, taxi, pedestrian, dog, etc.
It can be a dangerous thing cycling, but that’s my personal choice. However, the little child strapped rather unsafely to that woman’s bicycle on the front cover of the document doesn’t have a choice. Obviously the woman is prepared to unnecessarily risk her child’s life whilst she pursues her eco nirvana. Disgusting.
davidmhoffer says:
August 24, 2013 at 12:26 pm
> I’d also want to know how they arrived at categories that add up to 101%.
Just round-off error. If there were three even sized groups, each would round to 33%, for a total of 99%.
That description of un-green doesn’t sound too bad. I guess I’ll join them. Just as long as they don’t talk to me.
BTW, is that a safe way to carry a kid on a bicycle? If someone pulls out in front of her or if she crosses a railroad grade that makes an oblique angle, the result could be a squished kid. Oh well, squished kids are very green and don’t consume resources after the funeral.
For some of us, real evidence trumps scary labels every time.
I didn’t see the mention of the biggest group of all the true believers …. watermelons.
I see a bit of irony on the cover picture with the 2 bicyclists. Give the width of the bikelane, they should be riding one in front of the other. She is arguably near the edge of the bikelane, closer to traffic, putting junior at increased risk. She is also blocking hubby in, if he needs to avoid a car door opening. They are both taking avoidable risks. I say this as a kind of bicycle advocate with in traffic riding experience. Bikelanes are quite an extensive topic but they are not the issue I am raising. A rider works with the lanes they have, and tries to be as safe as possible.
ungreen = ungood. Next, double plus ungreen.
Reading this analysis leaves me with a sense of unreality.
Why manipulate people when you have that power and funding, when you haven’t grasped the environmental problem itself.
Comrade Gillard, Oz’s last Prime Minister called it ‘carbon pollution’ here in 2010, now she is past history. http://www.news.com.au/features/federal-election/julia-gillard-my-carbon-price-promise/story-fn5tar6a-1225907552000
My congratulations to RichardG for the most succinct and penetrating comment of the day.
“CO2 it’s what’s for dinner” What a great T shirt or bumper sticker!
Now this is the sort of thing that gets the ordinary citizen angry because this shows very clearly that the alarmist objective is to manipulate and control. People don’t like being controlled, but they especially don’t like being manipulated, which is akin to being lied to and used.
If the doom-mongers have to bring manipulation into the game, it’s because there isn’t enough reason or science to sway the people. Their arguments have failed, there is only force left. That should tell people something.
Thank you for publishing this – it’s important that people see this for what it is.
What kind of questions could they ask?
What ‘person’ ends up as:
“Cruel Worlders ….. Resentment and isolation leave no room for environmental concerns”?
Who answers giving the impression of “Little can be done to protect the environment, so why not get a piece of the pie”?
What the hell is a “Murky Middle” “Indifferent to most everything…”?
“Greenspeak” is the word someone used.
This is truly “1984”.
Did ol’ Lew and Johnny get a hold of this survey?
cn
It isn’t easy being ungreen.
I would like to propose “Klimate Twitterpation” for the new name for the climate con, both to show its communist roots and to give it a fresh new identity.
Quite a few got the “unpeople” reference. There’s nothing funny about 1984 being used as a textbook (as it has been in Oz).
Incidentally, the “Ungreens” seemed pretty green to me – ecotourism, worried about energy security, reducing consumption, fitting solar. So these grubs are saying there’s an even more unpeople class below them. (An example might be hyperemitters like Qatari billionaire al-Gore.)
Theo Goodwin says:
August 24, 2013 at 10:57 am
…. What strikes me is that their classification system is so much a product of their own fevered imaginations that their suggestions inhibit communication rather than supporting it…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>
It has nothing to do with communication. It is all about “Building Consensus.” US farmers went through that crap a few years ago. Despite 90% being opposed to Animal ID (and the new farm regs) we got ‘Delphi’d’ worn down and finally tricked. (Ain’t lame duck congressional sessions great)
Please notice in this case “Green Americans” are only 9% of the population with another 24% to 27% who are sheep following the ‘In thing” This means they most certainly do not have a ‘Majority’ and have to create the illusion of having one. That is where the Delphi technique comes in.
Farmers got a taste of this method of manipulation. USDA employing Delphi Technique: Prepare to be Delphi’d!
Now people are noticing what is happening in their town meetings:
The Delphi Technique. Have you ever been Delphied …
(Interesting that the information has spread from the farming community)
Sound familiar?
Re: “Traditionalists” 20% “Religion and morality dictate actions in a world where humans are superior to nature.”
These “greens” appear to worship nature, sacrificing massive resources to prevent humans for changing it. They show no understanding or recognition that the USA was founded by the Declaration of Independence which acknowledges that we are “endowed by [our] Creator with certain unalienable Rights”, entitled by “the laws of nature and of nature’s God”, rely on “the protection of Divine Providence”, and appeal to the “Supreme Judge of all the world for the rectitude of our intentions”.
For example, consider what the Cornwall Alliance actually holds based on objective evidence:
Those “greens” appear to be both anti-American and anti-religious.
This PDF from the same site is even funnier. It’s all about how to talk to sceptics:
http://www.climateaccess.org/sites/default/files/T&T_Best%20Practices%20for%20Talking%20with%20Climate%20Skeptics.pdf
It advises the eco-minions that “if you’re not a scientist, don’t argue the fine points of science” with sceptics.
They’ve basically admitted in one sentence that most tree-huggers haven’t got a clue about the science behind the Earth’s climate, so a sceptic would kick their butts when it came to a proper technical discussion about gorebull warmuning
These people are so offensive it’s staggering.
They are not seeking to persuade people.
They are conniving to train, infect, corrupt, deceive and manipulate people into behaving as they demand.
At the same time this propaganda is being spread communities are being invaded with public policies to assist in altering behaviors.
Just look at this local crap. Nobody asked for this or voted for this.
http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=36945
CLIMATE SMART COMMUNITIES SCENARIOS PROJECT: JPACT
Gail: Delphi Crowd Manipulation:
Or, of 7 groups, those opposing will be broken out into only 2 or 4 of the total groups – NEVER a majority – where their statements get “outvoted” against the majority of manipulated groups. the manipulated groups then produce the “consensus ‘ that the town hall or planning meeting is designed to produce.
Alt: the outspoken critics are spread out into every one of the groups, but not allowed to voice their scientific or traffic control plans or sidewalk expansion and walkway objections or “mandatory” park-and-bike path-garden space objections so that “everybody” can speak. Thus, the easily manipulated and “consensus” views drown them out on a 4 to 1 or 2 to 1 basis.
tax funded GREEN CATECHISM…..unbelievable.
psst….don’t mention the science… (they don’t).
For anyone with a mind this sort of stuff should lay bare the whole twisted ideology.
I am speechless, for once.
RACookPE1978 says:
August 24, 2013 at 7:07 pm
> Gail: Delphi Crowd Manipulation:
> Or, of 7 groups, those opposing will be broken out into only 2 or 4 of the total groups – NEVER a majority….
2 or 3 perhaps?
“Ungreen and proud”
Add a suitable cartoon by Josh. Start selling those mugs and T-shirts…….
Doubleplusungreen.
RobRoy says:
August 24, 2013 at 1:01 pm
I’m an ungreen, bitter, clinging denier?
No I’m an un-red free American.
An american who’s been taught and understands the “Scientific Method”
I’m a free American who smells a rat and has for some time
Never trust the government. or anybody beholden to the Government.
NEVER!
_—–_———————-
Me 2 !
Just remember to vote next year. Help that low information voter every chance you get!
It matters,,,,,,,,, just look at what you got………
What on earth can they mean by this: “‘Global Warming’ sounds serious and something that could be caused by human activities, yet it leads to the warming problem mentioned above”? Are they admitting that “global warming” has stopped, and are thus trying to change the song and dance?
And I wonder how they recommend talking to that huge chunk of “Traditionalists” in their list? With a pitchfork and torch in hand?
They are correct about one thing and will understand this one thing only as the noose tightens.
A constant barrage of propaganda does indeed increase tension in the target group.
Trust in government officials, government funded organisms and the institutions of government is at an all time low. The activists see no ethical problem with dishonesty, corrupt practises as long as the cause is served, yet insist that the public must trust authority.(Meaning themselves)
So we become aware that our government officials are lying to us, acting against the interests of civil society, while sneering from an assurance of immunity.
Tension will grow into anger and then action.
Having no education in human history, no understanding of human nature and trapped in the cult mentality, they have no idea of the whirlwind they are sowing.
ROTFLMAO! You owe me a monitor.
Absolutely classic. Well done sir!
@george h –
Your skit reminds one of how the children were the worst sort of spies and snitches on their parents in Orwell’s 1984.
The “Common Core” curriculum actually calls for kids to do what you describe in your piece.
It’s a good thing I don’t have kids in school, because if I did and they brought this slop home to me I’d be right in the face of their teacher and their school board and be quite loud about it.
Telling kids Global warming is going to kill the planet and, by extension, them is CHILD ABUSE.
“””””……Ric Werme says:
August 24, 2013 at 3:56 pm
BTW, is that a safe way to carry a kid on a bicycle? If someone pulls out in front of her or if she crosses a railroad grade that makes an oblique angle, the result could be a squished kid. Oh well, squished kids are very green and don’t consume resources after the funeral…….””””””
Ric, it’s probably at least as safe as putting the kid in a trundler, that is dragged along behind the bike, with a tall flexible rod that has a flag on it to inform nearby drivers;
“Hey, I’m too careless to put my kid in an Underwriters approved car safety seat, like you do with your kid in your car. But then, your car is a much more dangerous place for a kid, than down on the street behind my bike.”
“But hey, it’s ok, because when my kid is not in his bike trundle, I let him play out in the road, in an old washing machine cardboard box, so that he gets used to the sound of the cars swishing around him !”
Proud to be an “Ungreen American” versus a “Green Slave” on the Obama Government Plantation.
But deeply saddened by the numbers of people who are going to swallow this pure unadulterated propaganda, hook, line, and sinker.
No word for this but PROPOGANDA, clear and simple. Another would be PROFILING of people smart enough to not buy into this “Anthropogenic Global Warming” movement by what ever words they want to use to describe it on a given day.
“Proper understanding” really sounds like the Maoist rhetoric about being a good citizen with correct thoughts.
Regarding the Delphi Method: there is a strategy that is a bit more difficult but would be more honest: plan for dissenting opinions. The Supreme Court decisions are a leading example.
In July 2011, an ad hoc committee of the Institute of Medicine released a report, “Clinical Preventive Services for Women.” This committee reviewed evidence regarding potential benefits of various health practices such as screening for gestational diabetes. They developed a set of recommendations. For the scope of the project, it was quite impressive that the work was done in six months.
About five minutes after its release, HHS Secretary Sebelius decided that Obamacare would include those services recommended at no cost/no copay in Obamacare.
Do you think the fix was in, or what? A quick comprehensive review never happens. And govt is slow to adopt pronouncements coming out of expert panels. This was, I believe orchestrated.
I paid attention since I am concerned with another totalitarian love affair: the desire to control everyone’s fertility, rather than leaving it up to us individual lovers (and test tubes, I guess). I believe a family is generally fine in deciding how many children to have, and that major planetary programs are not needed to convince nations and individual families what the “proper” number, and timing, of children is. But call me crazy.
The committee’s final recommendation was: “The full range of Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity.” Paid for my me and my tax dollars. Curious how they place it as the final one, after all the obvious stuff.
http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2011/Clinical-Preventive-Services-for-Women-Closing-the-Gaps/Preventive%20Services%20Women%202011%20Report%20Brief.pdf
Now, what disease is prevented or cured by birth control? Why must it be covered by “health” insurance?
Pregnancy is a normal part of life. They were not talking about controlling acne or excessive menstrual flow. They were talking about preventing pregnancy. They crossed the line from healthcare to social engineering: controlling who gets born when. Especially among those of low SES.
This is why their report title was ‘clinical preventive services,’ and not ‘clinical preventive healthcare services.’
They knew what they were doing.
In the long report, they have a convoluted justification for this birth control coverage – it is about as elegant as this Green verbal gymnastics stuff.
So, when I heard there was a dissenting opinion in the report, I thought it would address this, exactly – that birth control is a matter of lifestyle choice or of population control, not a matter of disease prevention or cure.
Strangely, it was not the topic of the dissenting opinion. The dissenting opinion was a member who said they could not get behind the report because it was completed in too hasty a manner – six months was not enough to decently complete the task.
I think this was a great example of how to have an expert consensus development.
Yes, the Delphi process tends to favor the most politically connected, or most common view, over and above accuracy. A weak but politically favored view can prevail – if some idea is weak, there often will be two-three leading critiques/alternatives, and so you can split those opponents out into weak groups, unless they somehow rally together.
That is just the nature of it.
I believe these Delphi processes should, at the outset, plan on discovering and sharing dissenting / minority opinions. A process can be developed in advance to identify who will write the dissent.
It is possible that in some Delphi-type reports, the dissents might take more pages than the consensus. This is all fine and good, as far as I can see.
So, if any of you end up in some position of leadership in developing any consensus view by a Delphi-type process, please suggest or plan on deliberate detection and reporting of minority opinions.
Right, as expected, the evil UnGreens like “natural causes”. But wait, are those widdle ringy bells which the apparently brain dead Greenists each have on their left handle bar? Man, that framing sh** must be able to hypnotize us marks so well that we might do just about anything they want us to!
All the above Fantasy Science Cult’s literature is amusing.
@ Envirostalinist Infantry
(a message from the friendly folks at American Psy-ops)
Yo! Listen up. In the tiny little hashish-filled tent that is your world, what you say appears to you to be of great significance. It’s not.
The average American either:
1) Doesn’t give a rip about Climate Anything — OR
2) Is laughing at you.
And those who print your literature?
They own your mind.
Don’t like that? Then, get real.
Protesting is sooo, like 20th century. DANCIN’ in the streets,
now, THAT is cool.
eeeeeeeooooOOOWWW! Go, Dave!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lies are not cool.
TRUTH ROCKS.
***************************************************
Want to escape the cult? GO TO wattsupwiththat.com and step into reality or call our toll free number at: 1-CO2-GET-REAL.**
.
.
.
**If this is a real number, lol, I had no idea it was!
Uh, the disease which is prevented by birth control is children, it is one of the most common STD’s, and the effects it has on young people can be severe.
We don’t need kids having more kids, don’t get me wrong, I’m well aware that the overpopulation and Malthusian arguments are a load of crap… I’ve simply had to raise kids at a young age, and it is not something anyone should take lightly.
Though, at least if you’re going to rant about being anti-birth control, you should just be honest and admit you hate women, as there is no reason beyond misogyny to argue that while men can have sex without major consequences, any woman who has sex should have to deal with whatever happens, even if it takes the next 20 years of her life to do so.
American Psy-ops is not responsible for the typos (LOL!) in the above video.
Whoa, what in the world is that Max guy going on about THAT for???
That is why, Janice.
Agenda 21 news speak is poison for your mind. The brainwasher change agents don’t seem to understand we’re on to their psychological operations.
[OFF TOPIC WARNING]
Hi, Max,
Well, even though it’s off-topic, I felt I must say something in support of you (esp. given my rather rude remark above, sorry). While I agree with The Last Democrat (IF ONLY!), that children are not a “disease,” but a blessing, I AGREE WITH YOU, Max. Birth control is a VERY GOOD THING. (I don’t count the “morning-after pill” as “birth control,” btw — it is homicide.)
Glad you are here, Max. And I’m glad those hard days are behind you. WAY TO GO, not running out on those kids. That took so much courage and love. No one will ever know how much, huh? Single-parenting is so hard. I get tired of conservatives (with whom I largely agree on most issues) thoughtlessly bashing “single parents” in toto as IF they all wanted it to be that way. ALL of the single moms and dads I’ve known personally (and I realize there are deadbeat welfare check creep moms, i.e., they intentionally have children to get more welfare $$) would much have preferred to have a loving husband (or wife) and father (or mother) in the home. Alas, that just can’t be for many. And they daily fight the battle of going to getting their kids to school, going to work, and coming home to keep right on working until they fall into bed exhausted (often, falling asleep in their chair before they can get there).
Take care, real life hero,
Janice
Please forgive me, m-o-d-er-a-tor, for accidentally using [ ] above — that habit is so hard to break. I really am trying to heed your request to not use them.
Notice this about their report:
“This guide was made possible thanks to a grant from the Quixote Foundation.”
They left this out –
“This guide was made possible thanks to a grant from the Quixote Foundation, with inspiration from George Orwell, Paul Joseph Goebbels and Mao Tse-tung .”
The Quixote Foundation plans to be spent up and gone by 2017.
Good one, Sasha, lol (or NOT laughing, hm).
I’m more optimistic; I think the Quixote Foundation will joust at one windmill too many by the end of 2013. Bwah, ha, ha, ha, haaaaaaaaaaa!
LOSERS!
It shows low much has been learnt from the PC world; control of the terms of the debate is everything.
For instance, their list of categories will appear to their readers to be complete. It doesn’t include my position though.
Rationalist: Believes that the power of scientific/technological progress leaves people free to make the correct moral decisions. The more humanity is freed from want the fewer children it has and more it appreciates and protects the environment.
I see the cycling family in your heading picture are using petrochemical helmets, backpacks, child’s braces (suspenders?) etc.How ”green” are they?
charles nelson says:
August 24, 2013 at 3:19 pm
Having seen the picture at the very top of the piece I am worried that these people are giving cyclists a bad name!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are closer to the target than you think. Cyclists are being used to push the agenda.
These people are very very serious and are doing there darnest to get their AGENDA 21 implemented in a number of ways. Psyching out who is the opposition is just one of the ways.
The only way to make sense of gobblygook such as this, is to put yourself in their frame of mind, and to also, praise and thank big brother for the increase in the chocolate ration. Brain washed nutters all of them.
Max™ says:
August 24, 2013 at 3:32 pm
Liberal doesn’t mean alarmist, I’m actually a pure socialist-anarchist and am arguably more disgusted than most by supposedly left-wing groups and individuals pushing what amounts to a global pyramid scheme.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The liberal/socialist vs conservative/capitalist divide is artificial and just another means of manipulation. The quote above comes from Rosa Koire who would be classed as very’Liberal/Socialist’ in the USA but she sees the rot Behind the Green Mask heck she wrote the BOOK!
Green also has the meaning of raw, niave, inexperienced, lacking practical knowledge.
However rather than tagging those of opposing opinion with pejorative terms how about discussing the subject with objective, empirical evidence? To do otherwise is to lower the level of arguement to a slanging match.
In the meantime I am more pre-occupied with the latest “Climate Acne”, with random hotspots, coldspots, dry spots and wetspots dotting the face of the plant. Does the Earth need cleaning, mosturing and toning?
The guide is to keep believers in line, pleased with a fictitious (and delusional) sense of superiority. Let’s not forget that these “liberals” don’t even know what the word liberal actually means, politically or otherwise.
It is a small step from “Ungreen” to “Undead”. Once one is a member of the undead. that person is a zombie. It is OK to shoot zombies to stop them.
Someone else on this thread already said this is 10:10 without blowing up the children. This is in a way worse than 10:10. It connect skeptics to the most popular metaphor in pop culture that justifies whole sale slaughter of those who are different.
Notice also that once again AGW fanatics have to rely on de-legitimizing those who disagree with their apocalyptic clap trap not by offering evidence of their apocalypse but instead by making them bad people.
AGW is a shallow reactionary secularized religion, and its fanatics/fundies/true believers are working themselves up to the worst sorts of fanatic actions on the unbelievers.
And I bet that tax payer money helped to write this bit of trash.
Moderator,
There are some severely off topic, thread destroying posts up thread you might want to review.
Reply; Please identify the posts you are referring to, Thanks, — mod,]
@ Sean says: August 24, 2013 at 11:45 am
Sean,
You have pegged it well: Specific points, fact based. AGW policies are not only failing to do anything at all about the climate, they are hurting people and the environment. Your list is great:
“You know, it’s actually a pretty good ploy and both sides can play this game.
For instance, you could say that I am so UnGreen that:
I’d like to use food to feed people rather than power my car with distilled spirits.
I don’t like the large dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico that results from corn fertilization to make those distilled spirits.
I don’t like that the finite aquifer resources in the Midwest are being pumped at record rates to water the corn on marginal land to fill my tank with distilled spirits.
I don’ like that Brazil is cutting it’s rainforests and savanna to grow sugar cane so I can fill my tank with distilled spirits.
I don’t like that a large portion of the woodland marshes in the Carolinas are going to be harvested to make wood pellets to burn in power plants in the UK in the name of renewable energy.
I don’t like that Indonesian rainforests are being cut down to make room for palm oil plantation to satisfy European biodiesel requirements
I don’t like that orangutans are loosing their Indonesian rain forest habitat to palm oil plantations.
I don’t like that raptors are being killed so I can run my air conditioning guilt free on hot afternoons.
I don’t like that raising the price of energy with green mandates is going to make the poor in rural areas much poorer as they have to devote more of their income to energy purchases.
I don’t like that hourly laborers who make things in the US will be less competitive on the global market because power prices drive up costs.
I don’t like that it takes 3 years for a solar panel to recover the energy that went into its manufacture.
I don’t like that this solar panel is more likely to end up in a place with high subsidies as opposed to high sunlight because that’s the way these things really make money.
I don’t like that human rights are being trampled in this country and in third world countries because some Wall Street banker is making money on carbon credits.
I don’t like that the Chinese are making refrigerant bi-products that have consumed 46% of the carbon offsets to destroy.
I don’t like it that some people in academia think democracy must go because only a totalitarian government could takes the steps to control a perceived climate problems with solutions that will likely be ineffective.
I could go on and on but I hope you get my drift. There is a tremendous amount of environmental harm being done in the name of climate change mitigation and more onerous things may soon follow. It’s time to point out that their “solutions” have consequences on the things they care about as well.”
Add to your excellent list the increase in food prices caused by the wasteful AGW policy of mandating that food be turned into fuel helped cause the chaos in the Middle East that has killed thousands so far and threatens much worse.
Nevertheless, I love their football team. I am sure a few in the Fan flock are actually quaking ducks.
Reblogged this on Johnsono ne'Blog'as and commented:
More govt. newspeak on same BS
I like to think that The Onion and SyFy Channel are broadcasts from the future rather than fiction. So, what climate calamities are those two telling us about today, and you can determine what the alarmist community will be on about tomorrow.
North America and the EU have some of the cleanest and healthiest environments on the planet. Travel to a poor country and you will see garbage everywhere. If it is warm there will also be flies everywhere. In the cities of the poor countries air pollution is terrible.
Yet these poor countries typically have very low CO2 pollution per capita, so why is their overall pollution so high?
customer segmentation is standard marketing practice. you cluster your customers by attributes, then test market a sample to discover what works against each segment, then expand the program based on the results.
All very pithy comments, indeed… more than just preaching to the choir because so many come to this site.
But remember that we are not the real target audience of these lies. Our children are being taught this stuff as we all so pithily speak in our Cone of Silence.
Yes, more and more are coming to the realization of this attempt to brainwash, but at the same time our young children are coming to believe that we’re just dinosaurs. Just like White Privilege is taught as a matter of routine to our youngest. No, we don’t teach opportunity for all, we teach “fairness” as if it’s a mutually exclusive idea.
What does it matter what we say or know? We fail our children.
Andy Wilkins says:
It advises the eco-minions that “if you’re not a scientist, don’t argue the fine points of science” with sceptics.
They’ve basically admitted in one sentence that most tree-huggers haven’t got a clue about the science behind the Earth’s climate, so a sceptic would kick their butts when it came to a proper technical discussion about gorebull warmuning
Is this also a backhanded way of admitting that “sceptics” often are [knowledgeable] about science?
george e. smith says:
August 24, 2013 at 10:02 pm
“””””……Ric Werme says:
August 24, 2013 at 3:56 pm
Like this? http://wermenh.com/images/han_in_bk_trailer.jpg I think we did have a helmet for her then, at least she was wearing one on the day I discovered the trailer could flip over readily. She wasn’t too pleased about that.
http://wermenh.com/rstevew.html has more related to a preserved USENET flame war and “… morons who tend to do things with their wives and children that they’d NEVER xxxxing try with delicate machinery!”
lurker, passing through laughing says:
August 25, 2013 at 4:06 am
> There are some severely off topic, thread destroying posts up thread
How could this post possibly get destroyed?
This has clearly become a new age religion. These people appear to be true believing, eco-evangelists, wanting to save the masses, preparing to go on a crusade. And its not good enough that people behave in compliance to the green religious values — they have to BELIEVE in them. “Green” is nothing but a cult.
So it seems these clowns categorize from the top that one is either Green or Ungreen.
Fair enough. The Green category could well be referred to as the Gangrene group. There minds clearly seem to be rotting.
Now that would place the Ungreens in the category as those who have been cured of the rotting issue. Climategate and the rise of skeptical blogs were quite a disinfectant that led to my cure. I have recovered and am now Ungreen. Life is good!
I agree with several posters here on that photo with the baby on the bicycle.
A child is a child and may make a sudden movement which would come at an unexpected moment, just when the lady tries to signal she wants to drive to the left and maybe there is also a bump on the road.
I guess the probability for her to fall down with the child is much higher then the probability their models to be right.
Insanity, green is thy name.
Sean says:
August 24, 2013 at 11:45 am
… It’s time to point out that their “solutions” have consequences on the things they care about as well.
Sean what makes you think they care about nature or about poverty?
The disguise of “climate protection” as “environmentalism” And justify all the environmental damage done by the higher “climate target”. Only accepting this substitution can all the damages done by “green energy” be accepted.
I guess it is not so much only to scare people but also to build in them the new code of ethics according to the new religion. Moving from absolute to relative. Honesty is no longer an absolute value. It has value only relative to the religion – which explains their way of acting.
Some elements of the new religion are here: “everything is connected”. The Gaya religion club knocks at the door.
Interesting times we are living in.
Big Don says:
August 25, 2013 at 8:32 am
This has clearly become a new age religion.
Exactly
This weeks “economist” has a nice book review about the new book by Mark Liebovich about Washington Politics, “This Town: Two parties and a funeral – plus plenty of valet parking! – in America’s gilded capital”
Check it out here
I like the final comment of the review: “Washington’s narcissism has reached the point where it is narcissistic even about its own ghastliness”.
Berényi Péter says:
August 24, 2013 at 11:35 am
Climate Failure is my preferred choice.
Oh yes, it gets my vote too.
To Lars P’
You posed the question, “Sean what makes you think they care about nature or about poverty?” The answer really has to do with who “they” are. If you meant the authoritarian in the environmental movement, I suspect they are more concerned about dictating how people should behave rather than outcomes. But most people who buy into the “save the planet” memo mostly want to live their lives and feel they’ve made a positive impact on the world for their effort. In other words, I assume their motives are honest. If you give them good reasons for why a solution may not be as simple or as easy as it first sounds, you’ll at least get people thinking and maybe they’ll start an honest debate about risks, rewards and consequences.
The list of “degrees of belief” is so ill-informed from an economics perspective that I can’t believe the author(s) attended college. The first degree “Everything is connected, and our daily actions have an impact on the environment” is a statement that I, as a conservative/libertarian, agree. The first part in my opinion is about markets and how cooperation emerges from markets making us connected with people all around the world every day through the products and services we choose to consume. The second “and our daily actions have an impact on the environment” is just a clever re-statement of the first where the emergent order of markets has an impact on the environment which is outside of a formal market. So, the greenest Americans like markets (whether they know it or not) and would prefer market solutions to externalities where common pool resources are used as if they were a pollution sink. Bringing negative externalities into markets through regulation or taxation has worked largely at minimal expense because clever people figure out how to do things better and cheaper.
The frame of these “degrees” of separation seem to be playing to hubris rather than really useful or informative classifications.
Sean says:
August 25, 2013 at 11:27 am
Yes Sean, that makes the point.
While they enjoy spending time outdoors, they reject the notion of environmentalism and environmentalists because of the political ideology associated with those concepts.
Well they got that bit right.
No, Eco Loons, I really don’t want to become a card carrying member of your £cuked up, green book waving, ‘movement’. We know exactly where such ‘movements’ end..
Hey Max …….
If you have a blog and nobody shows up, is it real or imaginary?
Folks,
I’m sure many of you realize this need not be used to fool the masses.
Just public officials.
Please be sure and take a look at this current official action …
http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=36945
…in order to better understand how those guidelines for communication and behavior change from 2010 have been used to implement what is happening today.
This thread is about something crafted 3 years ago. It has clearly been implemented to manipulate public officials into taking action most of the masses are not even aware of.
And while oregonmetro.gov is enacting phases of the “Climate Smart Communities Scenarios Project” all of this is going on
The Climate Leadership Initiative (2010)
Visit us online:
http://climlead.uoregon.edu
http://www.thesocialcapitalproject.org
wayne says:
August 24, 2013 at 10:52 pm
No word for this but PROPOGANDA, clear and simple. Another would be PROFILING of people smart enough to not buy into this “Anthropogenic Global Warming” movement by what ever words they want to use to describe it on a given day.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
YOu missed the last two steps, already in place.
1. Secret collection of data on American citizens.
2. SECRET COURTS
Put together those two issues do not sound good.
vtruchan says:
August 25, 2013 at 8:05 am
….But remember that we are not the real target audience of these lies. Our children are being taught this stuff as we all so pithily speak in our Cone of Silence.
……….What does it matter what we say or know? We fail our children.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
First, WUWT has a lot of ‘Lurkers’ so we are not just an echo chamber. Second there is a huge amount of information available at this site. That means parents who lurk are well ARMED with solid data to defend their children from the brain washing and to also give them a very good lesson in looking at ALL the information before making a decision. This inoculates the child against propaganda. Once your eyes are opened to the B.S. taught in school and found in the news media you will never ever trust those sources again.
As another commenter said the trust in the government and government agencies (including schools) is at an all time low. Propaganda only works well if the people it is aimed at do not know it is propaganda and do not have access to alternate information. WUWT provides alternate information.
It is up to us as individuals to acquaint others with the fact alternate information exists. I have been handing out business cards with selected websites/articles listed for years. I also ask those I talk to to pass the information on to ten others if they find it interesting.
eyesonu says:
August 25, 2013 at 9:55 am
…. The Green category could well be referred to as the Gangrene group. There minds clearly seem to be rotting…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oh MY, the visualization of the Gang Green Group with heads oozing…..
===========================================================
Welcome to Zombieland!
(Time to stock up on Twinkies.)
“reads like a B movie script” — Actually, it reads like a plan to set up a new call center to convert people to the Gaia religion. Why stop there? Why not try to convert everyone to be socialists too?
Funny, I don’t see that in print or on websites really anywhere, Janice. Perhaps more ‘perceived’ (OYP) than actual? Don’t mistake, BTW, what is purveyed on MSNBC or any other alphabet soup about the ‘opposition’ as having any validity … more than likely it is one more straw-man argument constructed for the purposes of ‘gaining mileage’ on certain issues …
.
It may be summed up easier than that: as one caller to a national talk-show put it (background info to put this into perspective):
“… today, my [elected] representative is coming to me as a representative of the government, not as my representative to the government.”
.
Bob Doppelt
Education
M.S. (Counseling Psychology), University of Oregon (1976)
M.S. (Recreation and Park Management) University of Oregon (1975)
B.S. (History) Lewis and Clark College, Portland, Oregon (1973)
And one bitchin’ combover
Ms. Pike has a Masters of Science in Environmental Communications from California State University-Fullerton and a Bachelor of Arts in Film and Communications and Environmental Science from McGill University. – See more at: http://www.changemakers.com/users/cara-pike#sthash.M6c5SgWY.dpuf
If you can’t learn science, learn to say Big Science Words in Science Communication Studies.
Meredith has a Bachelor of Arts in Urban Studies from Vassar College where she focused on the sociological impacts of the built environment, and a Masters of Public Administration in Public Policy Analysis from New York University’s Wagner Graduate School of Public Service.
I’m not sensing a lot Meteorology or Climatology in the above.
_Jim says: @ August 26, 2013 at 6:59 am
It may be summed up easier than that: as one caller to a national talk-show put it (background info to put this into perspective):
“… today, my [elected] representative is coming to me as a representative of the government, not as my representative to the government.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
… and as representative[s] OF the government it is their job to convince us it was the voters idea in the first place. (Don’t want the illusion that we have a representative government to become too tattered.)
Well, Jim (at 6:51AM today), perhaps you are right, for the conservative authors and talk show radio hosts’ usually DON’T use the term “single parents.” They call them “single moms.”
I’m an “UNGREEN”??? I was green and an environmentalist before a lot of these people were born and were absorbed by this religion. Mindless zombies the lot of them. I was concerned about the environment and into recycling before this got morphed into a money pit.
I have never commented before. I am now to give you two thumbs up, five stars, and 4 banana stickers for that Sutherland Meme. That is hilarious.
[The mods request the four bananas instead. Mods]
Okay, Moderators! Here — you — go…….
BANANAS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5YNlCxo43E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Tou8-Cz8is&list=PL5zeVuNd39nFOUDi5NM7X60ymTmjibczv
#(:))
Thanks for all your hard work to make WUWT the wonderful site it is.
Those second two worked! Second attempt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Tou8-Cz8is&list=PL5zeVuNd39nFOUDi5NM7X60ymTmjibczv
That is SO WEIRD. Please forgive my disgustingly inept video posting. I even TESTED those links (all four) and they worked from my e mail In box. It is really weird that they will work from Microsoft’s “Windows Live Mail” but not from this Word site.
Well, you missed: 1) cute baby bunny eating a banana: 2) Harry Belafonte singing “Banana Boat Song.” BUMMER!!!
ICLEI Canada has a similar piece of propaganda that I stumbled across when I was trying to figure out the rhyme and/or reason behind my municipality’s decision to go gung-ho for putting money in Gore’s pocket via voluntary-for-now-but-eventually-mandatory separation of “organics only food scraps”.
Not sure what the date of the “birth” of the “UnGreens” might have been, but ICLEI’s 2012 made in Canada 112-page “guide”, Having the Climate Conversation: Strategies for Local Governments is somewhat more “traditional” in its marginalization efforts, having the (relative) decency for the most part to speak of “skeptics” – but eventually lumping them in with the twice mentioned d-word.
To add insult to injury, in a section (p. 101) they call, “CHALLENGE #5—DEALING WITH SKEPTICS AND DENIERS”, they include the following:
And you’ll never guess what they consider to be “excellent resources”: Grist, SkS and Mandia’s flying circus, aka the Climate Science Rapid Response Team.
But on a somewhat more amusing/alarming note (depending on one’s perspective) I was thinking that for the next “reframing” of the greatest threat to the future of the planet™, I would like to nominate “climate inflation” 😉
I gather the original poster has installed solar panels. If the reason is not climate change, what is it? And is that not a good enough reason to go further in reducing oil consumption?
I guess the climate will have to get a little more destructive before people (those insulated by relative prosperity, anyway) begin to take the crisis seriously. I’m no climate scientist, but i can recognize a scientific consensus when i see one.
People do not like to have their world views challenged; that’s just human. I just hope it’s not the end of humanity.
wherein progressive propagandists propagate pulchritudiness postulations predicated to propel populations ito perpetual peonage.
Hey friend,
I found that article a couple of days ago and thought you may be really interested in such info, just read it here
Best Wishes, gerjaison