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, 2010http://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.
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“
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]
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.
If you don’t have a consensus, blow up the oposition and make one
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?
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.
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.
Where did I see that 10:10 before. Now I remember min. 5.27 on this video.
http://data.gov.uk/content/real-time-energy-data-government-headquarters
Now I understand why they all applaud there has to be someone with a red button.
Interesting that the ad shows AGW believers as the majority…
I don’t have the words…….it’s setting up kristallnacht for a new century.
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.
Reduce your emmissions, or we’ll kill you!
Have I got the right message here?
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…
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.
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.
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.
Desperation writ large.
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.
Get this copied. Fast. I expect it will be pulled in short order…..
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.
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!
I hope someone is copying this video before they take it down….
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).
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.
This will probably be a hit among the extremist ecopeople.
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