Well, it’s official. The 10:10 Carbon reduction team was embarrassed enough by their vile video showing children who disagreed with carbon reduction schemes getting blown up.
They’ve put an apology up on their website:
It reads:
Sorry.
Today we put up a mini-movie about 10:10 and climate change called ‘No Pressure’.
With climate change becoming increasingly threatening, and decreasingly talked about in the media, we wanted to find a way to bring this critical issue back into the headlines whilst making people laugh. We were therefore delighted when Britain’s leading comedy writer, Richard Curtis – writer of Blackadder, Four Weddings, Notting Hill and many others – agreed to write a short film for the 10:10 campaign. Many people found the resulting film extremely funny, but unfortunately some didn’t and we sincerely apologise to anybody we have offended.
As a result of these concerns we’ve taken it off our website.
We’d like to thank the 50+ film professionals and 40+ actors and extras and who gave their time and equipment to the film for free. We greatly value your contributions and the tremendous enthusiasm and professionalism you brought to the project.
At 10:10 we’re all about trying new and creative ways of getting people to take action on climate change. Unfortunately in this instance we missed the mark. Oh well, we live and learn.
Onwards and upwards,
Eugenie, Franny, Daniel, Lizzie and the whole 10:10 team
Well, I’m not impressed. The correct way to phrase it is “I’m sorry” or “We are sorry”.
Simply saying “sorry” doesn’t cut it, and removes the person(s) from the apology. It’s an admission of error, but not of guilt. I correct my own children on this point of distinction.
Their vile video continues to go viral, I think they’ll have to do better than this because they’ve released a firestorm upon themselves now. This was to be their premiere day, but its a “Black Friday” for the eco movement now.
The video keeps getting posted to YouTube faster than it can be deleted. They have a game of legal whack-a-mole on their hands on the day that was to be their premiere:
Related posts:
ElizabethA says:
October 1, 2010 at 7:46 pm
“[…]Limbaugh or Glenn Beck. When I asked how one group felt about the revelations of Climategate, not one of them had heard of it. I wonder if they’ll hear of this.”
Nearly all my colleagues are warmists. None of them ever heard about or thought about the increase in photosynthetic productivity through increased CO2 until i told them. They did know, though, that the polar caps are melting. They were under the impression that this is a continuus process at both poles.
In other words, terribly uninformed.
Here is a collection of email addresses where you can complain to 10:10’s private sponsors:
pressoffice@o2.com
kyoceramita@kyoceramita.co.uk
rik.kendall@eaga.com
Lucie.speciale@eu.sony.com
Oh you poor delicate little flowers 🙁
“Here is a collection of email addresses where you can complain to 10:10′s private sponsors:
pressoffice@o2.com
kyoceramita@kyoceramita.co.uk
rik.kendall@eaga.com
Lucie.speciale@eu.sony.com”
~Claire
Oh right, it’s just politicized faux moral outrage. Classy as ever watts up crowd, classy as ever…
“Jason says:
October 2, 2010 at 8:47 am”
Clearly you are OK with the abuse of children? Children in the UK are ALREADY “offing” themselves on this garbage!
I have spent several hours reading online about this topic and here as on most sites someone suggests spoofing/dubbing or altering the video. I think this would be a bad idea as claims of tampering and other changes would “muddy the water”. This thing needs to be “sold as seen” and not changed whatsoever.
Does anyone really believe they pulled this movie because ‘a few were offended’? That was their precise intention – to offend those few non believers, while they remain secure sheltering behind the many, who will ‘be laughing’.
How tragic. It turned out that it wasn’t the many who were laughing, but the few. It wasn’t the few who were offended but the many. That is why they pulled it. No other reason. I can now join those laughing. Laughing at the shock and surprise they must now be feeling.
Jason says:
October 2, 2010 at 8:47 am
“Oh right, it’s just politicized faux moral outrage. Classy as ever watts up crowd, classy as ever…”
Jason,
I described the gist of the matter to my two sons and daughter in law who are in their 20s. They assumed my outrage and even fear was unjustified.
I then showed them the video and their shock and fear was neither faux nor politicised.
What you fail to realise is that few of us trust the State to be fair and reasonable any more. The past 10 years of leftism in the UK and no doubt elsewhere have created a plethora of legal and social traps for the honest well meaning citizen many of which could result in ruin either personal, financial or both just on the basis of bad luck.
This sinister aggressive threatening and generally vile piece of work just ratchets up the pressure even more and it can easily be seen as a precursor of worse to come.
The State has become our enemy despite our limited voting opportunities and there is potentially a nasty slide towards tyranny ahead of us.
It must be reversed, and soon. Unfortunately the privileged insulated ruling elite have done so well that they just do not see it.
Jason-
“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. God will not find us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”
Dietrich Bonhoeffer
He was hung by a meathook by Hitler’s Gestapo and SS.
Murder of children-real or not is evil…
@ur momisugly Phil October 1, 2010 at 12:11 pm posted this from the link that WillR had provided October 1, 2010 at 10:48 am:
This is something many, many people ASSUME about Hitlerism, that it snuck up on people little by little.
But it simply isn’t true at all.
Up until the moment Hitler took power at the end of January, 1933, he HAD no power. His party was not the majority in the Reichstag, and it never had been. He was NOT the most powerful man in Germany until that moment.
He did not sneak up, gradually, on the German nation. He was put in place by people who thought he had more balls than the previous guy, Kurt von Schleicher, who only lasted about 2 months. They all thought they could control Hitler.
It took them less than 3 months to find out otherwise.
Within 6 WEEKS he had opened the Dachau concentration for undesirable politicals (Communists and Social Democrats mostly, at first) – and yet it was not even the first camp. It was the THIRD camp opened between the beginning of February and the middle of March. That is the most incredible thing about Hitler, was that he was doing all this stuff right from the beginning.
And here is what Wikipedia has to say about something else:
And how was Hitler able to get the Reichstag to give him that power? He had the Reichstag burned down and blamed it on a Communist, in one of the most blatant false flag operations of all time. And when did it happen? FOUR WEEKS AFTER HE TOOK OFFICE.
Where is the “gradual erosion”?
He basically said to every other part of the government, “Now that I have power, I am going to kill anyone who tries to stop me. Anybody willing to test me on that?”
They got the message: Knuckle under or this will happen to YOU!
And 17 months after taking office, Hitler eliminated his main rival, Ernst Röhm, the leader of the SA Brown Shirts, on The Night of the Long Knives. He also had Schleicher killed that by the following noon. (Wikipedia:)
There was nothing gradual about the way Hitler “eroded” civility in people one small step at a time. Hitler grabbed power, disappeared people, killed people, framed people, and locked up people right from the beginning.
The reason people did nothing about him was that they were all afraid of him, after what he did in those first few months.
People should get this crap out of their heads, that we get monsters because our rights and civility are encroached on gradually. NO. Not historically. And certainly not in Germany in the 1930s. It happens when some wacko like Hitler or Stalin seizes power and starts eliminating other powerful people and eliminating the opposition – BY OUTRAGEOUS USE OF FORCE.
The assertions in that link in this regard SOUND reasonable, but they simply are not true.
Jason says:
October 2, 2010 at 8:47 am
Oh you poor delicate little flowers 🙁 ……………..
===================
Continue to fertilize, watch us grow.
I scrolled somewhat quickly through the comments so far, looking for the one word that most describes the perpetrators of this video. I couldn’t find the word.
Has everyone forgotten how to spell psychopath?
davidmhoffer: Thank you. That was very appropriate, and funny too. (Yes, and I’m English).
All that cycling to school will make that Jemima a right fit one when she grows up, though. ; – )
This thread would be funny if it did not sum up what your site and your commentators are all about.
The video was satire; ill conceived and inappropriate, but nothing more than that. It’s purpose was a noble one.
You align yourselves with those like Morano who advocate acts of of terrorism against scientists to stop research on climate change.
Many of your acolytes also have suggested violence against climate researchers and governments that are acting on the certainty of dangerous climate change.
I would say that yo are being “Holier than thou” except that there is nothing in this world at this time that is more unholy than your conspiracy to destroy civilization through inaction.
REPLY: “It’s purpose was a noble one.” ???? Yeah sure, whatever. Another rant from person to cowardly to put their own name to their challenge, we get dozens a day. If you believe in yourself and your cause so much, care to put your name to your words?
There is certainty though. Not one skeptic has ever organized mass disobenidence protests, set fire to buildings (like Earth First), blown up kids in propaganda videos, spiked trees to injure lumberjacks (I have a friend missing a finger, thanks), or strapped explosives to themselves and entered a building demanding a change in TV programming. Then there’s this: Grist Magazine David Roberts wrote in the online publication on September 19, 2006, “When we’ve finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we’re in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards — some sort of climate Nuremberg.”
Great company you keep there bucko. Skeptics aren’t the problem, regular people who don’t believe aren’t the problem, angry unhinged people pushing an agenda like yourself are. – Anthony
What a pitiful response. There are terrorists in every corner of the world and your attempted deflection doe not “cut it.”
I don’t use my name because there are a lot of psychopaths out there: quite a few of them take their cues from you.
However, I would debate you about this matter anytime. You are damned right that I keep good company. It is not the company of paid shills of oil companies. Or of those so called leaders who put votes ahead of the millions of lives that will be lost IN THIS CENTURY ALONE. A consummation that you will be guilty of through your associations.
I do keep the company of scientists: a number of them are in my family and they are united in one thing other than the reality of dangerous climate change.
That is their contempt for you.
REPLY: Heh, yes I know about psychopaths, I have a some that hassle me here daily. OK since you fail on the merits of talking points, let’s get to some hard data. Show me the people who are dying due to “dangerous climate change”. Mind you, weather events don’t count, because as you well know from your scientist friends: “weather is not climate”. – Anthony
———–
Amused,
Seriously, I recommend you seek out some of your close friends and step back a minute for some calm discussion. Talk this out with them. I am being sincere.
Don’t do anything figuratively equivalent to button pushing. Seriously now.
John
Seriously, John! What do you mean?
The effects of climate change are already with us, Anthony. Separating weather from climate is something you should teach to your followers and not just make the statement when you think it aids your cause.
There is no longer any doubt that the tens of thousands who are dying each year in unprecedented heat waves are dying as a consequence of climate change. That is not weather when for decades there has been a steady, and uninterrupted, rise in temperatures.
Medical authorities tell us that there is an increase in deaths from various diseases that have spread due to the changing climate regimes.
Heck, some of your acolytes may be dying soon for lack of coffee as the coffee growing regions are reaching the limits of their tolerance to higher temperatures: and are being invaded by a beetle species that could not exist in the lower temperatures that favoured those areas i the past.
But, the point I made was that it is going to happen in large numbers. There is no doubt of that. Sea level rise, temperature rise; food scarcities; disease spread; water shortage and water wars. All these will take their toll.
Any person of conscience would be acting to try to mitigate this: not giving comfort to those who persist in the activities that are responsible.
I have children and grandchildren and I do not appreciate the work of those who would imperil their future.
Incidentally, I am very well known by name to politicians and some elements of the media. I identify myself to them and pull no punches.
Amused said . . .
“You align yourselves with those like Morano who advocate acts of of terrorism against scientists to stop research on climate change.
“Many of your acolytes also have suggested violence against climate researchers and governments that are acting on the certainty of dangerous climate change.”
Really? Can you cite a single time when Morano advocated a single act of terrorism? Can you cite a single instance of skeptics suggesting violence against climate researchers and governments?
These claims are always made by Warmists, but they never cough up any evidence. Not a single threatening e-mail they claim to have received; not a single anything other than a claim. Their alleged victimization is nothing more than projection: accusing others of what they themselves engage in on a daily basis.
I challenge you to go back through all the articles posted here and at Climate Depot to find one, just one, instance of what you claim skeptics do. Then take a trip over to Jo Nova, and try again. The only threats and intimidation you will find come from the AGW True Believers, who spend inordinate amounts of time trolling skeptic sites and calling everyone names.
And speaking of names, your pitiful handle is obviously as erroneous as you are. You are not amused, you are in a snit because they people you hate (skeptics) are winning the war.
—————
Amused,
I was sincerely, but apparently unsuccessfully, trying to settle down the invective you brought to this open venue. I was worried for you, sincerely.
I think you believe what you say. OK. I am not questioning that you believe it.
Many many people, including myself, do not share your belief. You only need to look at the ratio of people across all of blogland who thought negatively of the No Pressure video to those that thought positively of it. What were the 10:10 ideological environmentalists thinking? I have no clue what they could have been thinking.
Threatening apocalytic / dooms day attitude is one of the reasons over the last 2 decades that civilized people have become being more and more unconvinced of AGW supporter’s views. The more the apocalyptic / dooms day attitude persists the more the civilized people will seek civilized options instead of knee jerk we gotta do something now or we are all gonna die. The failing tactic / strategy of apocalypse / dooms-day is the problem. I would recommend a different strategy; we should use open science and open data and open methodologies and open code and OPEN DISCOURSE to all the AGW supporters and the independent thinkers (a.k.a. skeptics). The sooner and the more then that is better . . . .
John
Amused says, “millions will die this century”.
I can go better than that & say that just about everyone alive today will die this century!
Sloppy thinking Amused.
Oh and I think I found the out-take of this vid!
DaveE.
Amused. says:
October 3, 2010 at 11:11 am
“[…]Heck, some of your acolytes may be dying soon for lack of coffee as the coffee growing regions are reaching the limits of their tolerance to higher temperatures: and are being invaded by a beetle species that could not exist in the lower temperatures that favoured those areas i the past.[…]”
Amused, you have to decide for yourself whether you want to deliver a self-parody of a Malthusian here or whether you want to be taken seriously. Now it’s a beetle that threatens us all? Seriously. Ok, lets fire up google news, enter “ecological catastrophe”, take the first hit:
http://m.theepochtimes.com/index.php?page=content&id=43540
Now, it’s toxic soil from the Ukraine that will poison the UK, see? The Malthusian game is completely arbitrary.
I do believe what I say, John, and there is the whole canon of science to support that belief. There is not a single study that disagrees with AGW and that has stood up to test.
Science, methodology, discourse, have all been open from the beginning of these “differences>” It is Anthony and a few like him who have convinced so many who do not actually follow the science that they are not.
However, for all rational people, that discourse should have ended. It is details that are a question; not the issues of climate change and AGW.
To consolidate in this post some of the other “arguments:”
Everyone on either side of this divide deplored that video. It is just a handful of [snip] bloggers who are drumming up hysteria about it. That does not take away from the intentions of the makers who were trying to draw attention to the gravest threat to mankind.
To the point of “eco terrorism! It is not surprising that these acts are tyaken against the so-called sceptics. It is the “sceptics” who own and operate the oil and gas and other damaging operations. The “terrorists” are people who do not have that resource. Is it surprising that, by the same token, the perpetrators of the polluting or whatever, do not attack the other side. The other side do not have installations to destroy.
Also, Morano did call for acts of violence against the proponents of AGW. Many researching scientists have received death threats and threats to their families. Only a few scientists are actually public about the issue because of the possibility of being targeted in the same way.
And Dirk should look into coffee. What I posted is fact. There are just three or four coffee growing regions that are not yet affected. The ridiculous comment about self parody of a Malthusian seems to be about the measure of most of the “sceptics.” Meaningless nonsense!
————-
Amused,
Thanks for your reply.
It is getting late in the day here on the US east coast for me.
I think that you are confusing two situations. One obvious situation is where the consensus of AGW supporters claim the science that they produce and support is settled; a tautology. The other situation is where a science product/synthesis / collaboration that encompasses also all the independent non-consensus scientists studying climate science (plus the profession of statistical mathematics /econometrics) where it is clearly not settled.
I beg to differ about your view that there has been open science; there has not been an open discourse generally. But there is a highly viable one now, : ) , thriving on a pleasantly surprising accelerating pace. This happened/is happening in spite of the actions of the consensus. I can only think that is a great trend for the good of science. I look forward to the evolution of it in open venues. I hope for another renaissance.
Hey, I suspect we are going to see some support of a new renaissance in climate science from the French Academy of Sciences when their report comes out soon. : )
Finally, this place is special. It is only here and a relatively few other similar venue blogs where people like you and I can discuss without censorship and control. Even in disagreement with Anthony, we should show respect in this place.
John
Amused. says on October 3, 2010 at 1:32 pm
Oh my, a religious fanatic. Perhaps even a creationist.
Amused said . . .
“Also, Morano did call for acts of violence against the proponents of AGW. Many researching scientists have received death threats and threats to their families. Only a few scientists are actually public about the issue because of the possibility of being targeted in the same way.”
Again, show us the money. You can claim anything you want, but where is the evidence? I’m calling your bluff. If skeptics were issuing physical threats to scientists and their families, the police would be arresting the skeptics. But, they aren’t. How come? Because the threats are made up? Because some political-dirty tricks bloggers somewhere are fabricating alleged threats from skeptics and mailing them in? Because the so called scientists in question are having their friends write fake angry letters, all to generate sympathy?
Go to a Warmist site and see all the horrible things your side wants to do to skeptics, then come back here and try to tell us you are the victims. Nobody is buying it. We’ve seen the lengths to which your side goes, almost every day.
As for your doomsday prophesies, you need to do some more research. You are becoming hysterical over nothing. Not one of the dire predictions of your side over the past two decades has transpired. Every claim has proved false, and yet you still spout the same rubbish. The sky is falling, the sky is falling. Not here it isn’t; only in your imaginary world of misery.
Humans cannot destroy the Earth; the planet is self-regulating and self-repairing. You and your band of fanatics cannot do one thing to stop, hasten, or slow climate change, which is a natural process on a scale infinitely larger than all human activity combined. The climate has always changed and always will, and if you think this is a disaster, you need a new dictionary.
Of all the billions of dollars already spent on “climate change research,” none of it has made any difference whatsoever to the climate. You have not saved one life or prevented one breath of wind. You have, however, contributed to untold human and animal misery across the globe diverting food to useless fuel production, destroying vast tracts of land for idiotic wind farms that kill thens of thousands of birds, denying fossil fuels to Third World countries all in the insane quest for “climate control.” How many families go without necessities to pay for this lunacy? And how much poverty and death will result from carbon caps? Sure, you may say it’s all necessary for the greater good, but you don’t have a clue, and the ends do not justify the means. You are willing to destroy lives supposedly to save them. Please, just off yourself and leave everyone else alone. The people in Haiti eating dirt pies because they can no longer afford grains–thanks to your bunch and its ethanol boondoggle–don’t need your kind of compassion.
The road to hell really is paved with good intentions. We know, because your side has proved it.