Guest post by Thomas Fuller
Well, with the calming passage of 24 hours, let’s take another look at the 10:10 video showing the splatterfest of gore as skeptics play the more volatile roles from the worst portions of the movie ‘Scanners.’
It’s still disgusting.
I spent four years in the Navy and have seen a lot. The film did not upset me physically or emotionally. My reaction was mental (Cue Michael Tobis: “See? Fuller’s going mental…”)
What disgusts me first is its target. The video is meant for the young. Young people get blown up by a calm and engaged teacher in the first scene, and music and sports and film figures appealing to the young are both victims and perpetrators throughout.
Our reaction is irrelevant. They are not talking to us. They are talking to our children.
What are they saying? That it’s okay to ostracize, bully and dismiss those who don’t agree that climate change is uber alles (Oops! Godwin alert, Godwin alert) and that skeptics or the children of skeptics are fair game for… whatever.
As there is no real attempt at humour in the video, there’s no point in pretending it’s a parody. It’s instructional. It’s not even aimed at helping children work towards reducing emissions. It’s about helping children take aim at those who do not.
This is worse than Orwellian, although Eric Blair would certainly understand the meaning behind this message. And I don’t want to (and internet traditions would forbid me in any case) link this to the propaganda tactics of World War II. So somewhere in between those two, there is a special place in hell reserved for those whose intent it is to legitimize the cruelty of children towards each other based on what has evidently become a religious belief. And I hope that none of the film’s makers reaches that special place ahead of their allotted timespan–but I hope they get there.
Joe Romm and Bill McKibben have already announced they are ‘Shocked! Shocked!’ that gambling is going on in their casino and that their perpetual campaign of invective and calumny has produced people who actually believe them and hate skeptics. So I guess it’s no harm, no foul. Just as it was not their fault when a disturbed environmentalist took hostages at the Discover Channel headquarters, just as when the WWF made an ad showing planes flying into New York skyscrapers, just as when a Greenpeace blogger told skeptics the world over that ‘we know where you live.’ And as Anthony Watts knows full well, they also know where you work. But none of this is the fault of those who whip up the frenzy and the furor of those stupid enough to believe their hyperbole, enough to do something vicious, cruel, stupid or illegal.
So I guess I can’t blame hysterics like Romm and McKibben, who spend their days babbling about hell and high water and related mystical miseries, for any of the troubles we’ve seen. Except for the kids who will be downloading that video tonight. Both William Golding (Lord of the Flies) and J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan) knew full well that children need no help in being cruel. But this gives them license and legitimacy. And for that, Joe and Bill, I do hold you responsible. You sent the message first–it took years for 10:10 to make it explicit.
Thomas Fuller http://www.redbubble.com/people/hfuller
Thomas Fuller href=”http://www.redbubble.com/people/hfuller
Wow…seriously…
Who the hell thought this was a good idea.
Romm’s posturing is feigned outrage.
The dead seem to not be those sceptics. They seem to be those that do not cooperate with the group mandates.
Hansen, Romm and several others express dangerous events and seem to show glee in destruction of non believers.
We need to make this an example of their branding.
I am a skeptic and the other party is the 10:10 crowd.
–
At 9:26 PM on 1 October 2010, jeremy of W.A. had written:
“I’m not in the least surprised that the majority of Warmists who have a problem with this are American, as are the majority of Climate Realists.
“It’s a cultural thing. ”
Yeah, I’d have to agree with that. Most assuredly “cultural.” From the moment I saw that first scene begin – with the little English kids in the kind of uniform dress that we tend to associate chiefly with Roman Catholic parochial schools here in the states – I flashed instantly on a novella by Darian Worden titled Bring a Gun to School Day (2008).
From Jim Lesczynski’s review (at http://tinyurl.com/2w7g6w2 ):
“Nevertheless, Bring a Gun to School Day isn’t really about guns, nor is it really about school. It’s about the self-destructive compulsion of modern society to forsake freedom for the illusion of security, to retard the capacity for critical thought in our youth, and to stamp out any trace of real individuality wherever it is found. As a condemnation of the modern police state and nanny state, it succeeds brilliantly.”
I expect that the reason why so very, very many of those “who have a problem with this [vicious 10:10 video] are American” is that every American (especially the government-worshiping warmist types) knows full well that the immediate response to any such action on the part of our public school gulag bureaucrats would leave the advocates of the anthropogenic global warming fraud – all of them – once and for all incapable of anything other than putrefaction.
As General Burgoyne had occasion to observe of the illegal American militia besieging the British Boston garrison in 1775, we are a rabble – but we are most assuredly “a rabble in arms.”
–
Would the once prominent British Fascist Oswald Mosley have warranted this 10:10 crap?
-Just asking.
it is on the BBC…… bit hard to find
BBC: Environmental campaigners axe gory film
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11458726
Environmental campaigners 10:10 have withdrawn a film showing a teacher graphically exploding two of her students who refuse to reduce their carbon emmissions, after complaints.
In a statement, the group apologised to anyone offended.
The film aimed to “bring this critical issue back into the headlines whilst making people laugh,” the group said.
Lizze Gillett, Global Campaign Director for 10:10, told the BBC: “As you can see from various comments and social media sites some people thought it was funny and a good tool to get people talking about climate change but others strongly disliked the mini-movie. We decided to take it off our website to avoid upsetting people. ”
———————————–
They are ‘spining’ , pretending the opposite reaction, to this already….
I agree with Tom and the commenters here that the film was confusing and in bad taste. Trying to hang Romm and McKibben with it makes no sense, since both renounced it.
As for related finger wagging at “alarmists” (like me)…no.
Many people have did from global warming, in this very early stage. It will get much worse. That makes the fossil fuel companies, and their useful idiots on the blogs and in the media accessories to murder.
On top of everything else, isn’t it the case that AGW supporters tell us we need to cut by 80%? So what’s the point in asking for just 10%? How many kids would be blown up if the teachers had asked for 80%? And explained that this would mean no iPods, iPlayers, Wiis, car lifts to every social event, etc, etc.
What do such organisations do when they recognise they’re irrelevant? They make themselves into the news rather than focusing on the messages they’re intended to promulgate. This is quite an extreme way to do it, but then that’s part of the process. It’ll get them some more government funding and that’s their real aim.
For Jeremy of W.A.
I _am_ British and I am also ex-military and I can assure you I am perfectly familiar with and a user of black humour.
This video was NOT humorous. It was a targeted hate and dehumanising video showing that it is acceptable to kill opponents to your particular argument or point of view. This has none of the hallmarks of Monty Python, none whatsoever and for you to keep trying to refer it to Monty Python shows your misunderstanding of the genre and is insulting to its creators.
This video shows what will happen if the AGW proponents continue in their whipping up of their more fringe supporters. Unfortunately, there are some that are extremely easy to whip up and I can see this video being shown by them repeatedly, as they all giggle over it and desensitise themselves to the idea of harming or killing people that disagree. This is the whole essence of conditioning.
If you cannot see that then you exhibit more than a different sense of humour.
Here is a Sony brag about working with 10.10. I looked at their comments, Guess what, cease and desist from outraged people. I added my own, “No more Sony products for me” comment and why
http://www.1010global.org/uk/2010/09/1010-sponsor-sony-prepares-their-101010
Interesting how the number of posts on these blog posts differ between science and entertainment.
A really scientific post = 50 posts
A post on a film – 5000 posts
Shows how much this entire blog just falls into entertainment for the masses and not something doing much good ?
Andy
It is an interesting examination of “group think” and “noble corruption” – as Anthony termed it – in that the video actually made it to the internet.
A lot of planning, a lot of money, a lot of review must have gone into this before it came out on Thursday.
At some point, somebody must have “put up their hand” and said this is in such bad taste and is so morally wrong that we should stop this video now. Others must have said this video will backfire on the organization immensely so let’s stop now. I’m sure a few did but it went ahead anyway.
“Group think” that they were on the right side must have overwhelmed any qualms. Is the process that much different – making videos versus conducting science on the climate. I imagine the same human tendencies can take over in both areas.
“Many a true word is spoken in jest
Meaning
A literal meaning; that the truth is often found in comic utterances.
Origin
The first author to express this thought in English was probably Geoffrey Chaucer. He included it in The Cook’s Tale, 1390:
But yet I pray thee be not wroth for game; [don’t be angry with my jesting]
A man may say full sooth [the truth] in game and play.
Shakespeare later came closer to our contemporary version of the expression, in King Lear, 1605:
Jesters do oft prove prophets.”
To be safe we need to keep the spotlight on these people to ensure they never get elected and get a chance to put their full malthusian plan into action.
Apparently, I’m banned now from posting at Climate Progress.
I left a comment at the site of another guy who was quite rude to me. But that will probably disappear as well. Here it is for posterity-
“Hi Frank.
I just want to understand your reaction to my post on CP. I spelled out plainly that I have been involved in environmental restoration for years and have a consciously low carbon footprint.
Your reaction to my post was that I was an ‘inactivist sock puppet’.
Listen, I have no problem with actions on climate change, so I’m not sure where this came from. I’ve been a CC campaigner/anti nuke campaigner at various times.
Maybe you could list your ‘actions’?
This kind of response to me is exactly representative of the message of the video under discussion, where any deviation from officialdom is greeted with swift retribution, hostility, attack, and silencing. I am banned now from CP apparently so I guess Romm doesn’t really take kindly to this freedom of thought thing either. You know, I am a fairly reasonable guy. You could have engaged me in conversion and persuaded me by whatever it was that you thought I needed to know. I am open minded.
You are others at CP are alienating environmentalists and people who may care about these issues by your approach and that to me is a concern. Concern troll I may be. I agree you all need to sit down calmly and work out what needs to be done here. I suggest better interactions with the people who have problems about the messages being communicated in ‘mainstream’ enviromental media, for a start. You might find that the values being pushed in these communications are not so mainstream and that people are likely going to get upset. And damn right I am upset.
Unfortunately, due to your failure to engage with me on a human level, I’m still upset. And I will be likely pass along my experiences here to anyone who may be interested. If Romm doesn’t want people to connect him to the main message of this campaign than he should bloody well act appropriately!
Stu
“
I still can’t believe they did it! AGW supporters must be as dazed and confused as Charlton Heston’s character in the final scene of Planet of the Apes.
I am thinking of school rooms and offices across the world on monday morning, as authority figures mention global warming, and everyone legs it!
If Governments including UK and USA are going to reopen their whitewashed enquiries, and re interview the likes of Hansen, Jones, Mann, Acton, Oxburgh etc, could the committee chairs have a grey box with a red botton on it please?
To all of those comparing the 10:10 filth to Monty Python – has anyone asked any of the Monty Python team their opinion? If I was one of the Monty Python guys I wouldn’t be too happy about the comparison.
Is this hate crime covered by the 1st amendment? If not then where is the action against these purveyors of hate and violence? No response from the MSM! Maybe its OK with Couric. Maybe its OK with our government! Obama had a teaching moment with a professor and a cop but no teaching moment involving violence to children over his pet cause involving millions of viewers!
The Guardian appears to have just pulled the entire article complete with comments. However, the story has now appeared over at the Daily Mail where it’ll reach far beyond the Moonbat echo chamber.
Franny Armstrong (from the Guardian ) …
What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? … Because we have got about four years to stabilise global emissions … All our lives are at threat …
These are the kind of people you are dealing with. Zealots.
What makes them dangerous is that, unlike more mainstream religions, sinning, punishment and judgement day are to be a shared experience. The upshot of which is that while there are still “sinners” around the “righteous” will be “punished” right along with them. All believers have to be zealots, their immediate futures depend on it.
You have to wonder at supposedly intelligent people like Romm who suddenly discover that they no longer command of the mob they have spent so long stirring up. Perhaps he should have read history rather than Physics.
This would all just be a bad joke if it weren’t for the ongoing brainwashing of our children by our public schools, and the murder-suicides the Carbon Fraudsters have inspired.
If there is a ray of hope, it is that by the time crusading children were slaughtered and sold into slavery, that social mania was already subsiding.
mike roddy says:
October 2, 2010 at 5:59 am
“Many people have did [died?] from global warming, in this very early stage. It will get much worse. That makes the fossil fuel companies, and their useful idiots on the blogs and in the media accessories to murder.”
Oh? Who?
Stephen Skinner says:
October 2, 2010 at 4:07 am
> Dr Jacob Bronowski’s passionate and moving defence of science.
Ah, someone remembers. I bought my first color TV to watch his Ascent of Man series.
Just a few days ago I heard a reference to this being the 30th anniversary of Carl Sagan’s Cosmos. (The one with the stupid dandelion space ship made of star stuff). Galling reminder, the Ascent of Man was so much better….
Jean Parisot said on October 2, 2010 at 4:56 am:
Make sure to follow the proper labeling standard for red buttons sent to politicians, in this case it would be labeled “Reset”. If you were sending a reset button it would be labeled “Overload” (you’re trying to blow something up). This is done due to the tendency of politicians to do the opposite of what they say, thus this system avoids accidents. It’s a proper diplomatic protocol, just ask the US State Department for confirmation.
If, as some have mentioned, the intent of this movie was simply to increase the visibility of the 10:10 organization. Then, it has clearly worked. I had never heard of them before, but now that I have, I find them to be a bunch of hateful lunatics.
I have the feeling that was not the message they meant to to deliver.
Seen at http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments
I don’t know if this is the first reference.
In the justification for this nonsense we keep being told that the pretend deaths of a few is justified by the deaths of 300,000 real people each year.
Where does this 300,000 figure come from? I mean, can anyone name any of them? Surely that would be a more powerful message.