Morano on Fox News on the 10:10 exploding children film

We’ve seen Marc Morano from time to time on network news programs. Usually he’s being heckled by somebody brought on for “balance” like Joe Romm or some clueless professor named Watson from East Anglia. This time, nobody wanted to come on, and it wasn’t because of fear of debating Marc. “no pressure”

Watch:

Advertisements

164 thoughts on “Morano on Fox News on the 10:10 exploding children film

  1. Murder of Children is not funny.
    one-more-time.
    Murder of Children is not funny.
    Totalitarians are not funny.
    [snip]

  2. It still boggles my mind that no saboteur was involved. They really, truly did this to themselves without any “help” from a skeptic. That aspect of this story may give it legs for a hundred years. It’s like Madame Butterfly — “How is it possible?”

  3. O.T. but IMPORTANT news by Stephan (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/04/sea-ice-news-25-nsidc-says-2010-3rd-lowest-for-arctic-sea-ice):

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/New%20Mann%20CID.PDF

    “September 29, 2010 – Civil Investigative Demand – The nature of the conduct constituting the alleged violation of the false claims law is that, based on claims made in Dr. Mann’s CV, he participated in the application for and claims for payment under the grant listed below. Upon information and belief, the grant application references Dr. Mann’s prior work, including two papers, “Global-scale Temperature Patterns and Climate Forcing over the Past Six Centuries” and “Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties and Limitations”, which have come under significant criticism (see Attachment B, which is incorporated herein by reference) and which Dr. Mann knew or should have known contained false information, unsubstantiated claims and/or were otherwise misleading. Specifically, but without limitation, some of the conclusions of the papers demonstrate a complete lack of rigor regarding the statistical analysis of the alleged data, meaning the result reported statistical significance without a specific statement to that effect. To the extent that Dr. Mann did reference or rely on his past work in these papers (or others like them) to aid in the winning of the grant when he knew of [sic] should have known of the potential of the papers (or others like them) to mislead the grantor..”.

    This will be interesting..

  4. Cudos to Fox for picking up on this and getting it exposed for what it is.

    I understand Beck was going to have a spot on it as well but wasn’t able to catch it.

  5. Good! The word is spreading to the MSM. Is there a list of corporate sponsors (besides Sony)? I’d like to know who to boycott during the upcoming Christmas shopping season…

  6. The logical conclusion of implementing draconian AGW measures is suffering and starvation on a scale perhaps never seen before. In contrast, being blown up is a painless end.

  7. This whole mess has been blown all out of proportion.

    A killer idea, it was splattered across the internet as an attack on the hearts and minds (and other internal organs) of deniers and middle-of-the-roaders alike.

    It is explosively obvious that this film shatters the bloody-mindedness of those that fail to see the light….

    Need I go on?

  8. To me, this looks way too much like the first stages of the campaign to demonize and eradicate the Jewish people in Nazi Germany.

  9. Beautiful one-liner from Morano, “environmental snuff films.” That is the level to which they sank.

  10. You know, I don’t think that anyone, (right thinking) on any side of any issue anywhere (other than the clowns that produced the 10:10 video), would think that this was a good thing to do!
    G.

  11. Oops. The HTML didn’t behave the way I expected. I guess one can’t add images in the comments. Anthony, if you’d prefer to insert these into a post, please feel free. That would probably work better. No pressure, though *wink*

    A two-part screencapture from the 10:10 Facebook page. They ran a contest, inviting people to guess what was happening in a photo.

    Part 1 is here – it shows the photo

    Part 2 shows various guesses, including the winning one. (Pink and yellow highlighting were added by moi.)

    I grabbed these about 24 hours ago. The Facebook page now seems to be a unavailable.

    “We needed some sounds of blood and gore splattering on the floor after the children/footballers/celebrities blow up…Thanks for playing my amuse-oneself-whilst-bored-in-sound-studio game everyone. See you, Franny.”

  12. When rhetoric boils over and good sense fails.
    It’s time to look at what’s going on under the hood.
    Hijacked environmental issues would mean that key persons sold out a long time back.

  13. The presenter said: “What happens next is even more horrifying than what you just saw.”

    I think the bit Fox broadcast was the easily the worst of it, does anyone want to argue that the following two scenes are “even more horrifying”?

    REPLY: No, we don’t want to argue about it, bugger off. – Anthony

  14. Frank K. says on October 4, 2010 at 7:35 pm

    Good! The word is spreading to the MSM. Is there a list of corporate sponsors (besides Sony)? I’d like to know who to boycott during the upcoming Christmas shopping season…

    It was claimed that 10:10 in Germany said the Microsoft was a sponsor.

  15. The thing is, these people screened this among themselves, and loved it! Was it the power of vengeance that they felt?

  16. That interview was actually pretty low key. After they showed the video, there’s not much to say. You just sit there wondering what they were thinking.

  17. “REPLY: No, we don’t want to argue about it, bugger off. – Anthony”

    As I know you’re a fan of free speech, can I assume that you’re not banning me just because I’ve made the point that FOX had a good story, they didn’t need to exaggerate?

    REPLY: No, you can assume you don’t get to run the conversation the way you want with your snark. Given your track record here, you’ve now reached troll bin status, meaning each of your comments gets an extra pair of eyes. Get Gareth to man up and admit his error, and maybe you’ll get out of the troll bin. Ennegram for example, just got out of the troll bin, after having learned how not to gum up a thread. You can learn too. -A

  18. It reminds me of those mindless catch-phrases, like: “Whatever it takes”
    “Just do it” “Get in touch with your power” etc. These people seem to have gone to the wrong personal development (read: brainwashing) classes.

  19. Mark forgot to mention that science has also failed the alarmists. They are getting desperate with their failure to find any evidence to support their nonsense, as the earth stubbornly refuses to warm for them.

  20. The people who created this film are ideologues, true believers, to whom it does not seem at all unreasonable to blow up and exterminate dissenters. In fact, as they admit, they think it’s funny.

    For true believers, it’s a short step from a sick joke to reality.

    /Mr Lynn

  21. Sony has abandoned them reportedly:

    http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/climate-group-regrets-shock-film-tactic/

    Thank you for your email concerning the video released by the 10:10 climate change campaign group. Sony has supported the 10:10 climate change campaign because we share its objective to reduce carbon emissions. However, we strongly condemn the “No Pressure” video which was conceived, produced and released by 10:10 entirely without the knowledge or involvement of Sony. The company considers the video to be ill-conceived and in extremely bad taste.

    We also believe the video risks undermining the work of the many thousands of members of the public, schools and universities, local authorities and many businesses, of which Sony is one, who support the long-term aims of the 10:10 movement and who are actively working towards the reduction of carbon emissions.

    As a result we have taken the decision to disassociate ourselves from 10:10 at this time.

    In our press statement we will be posting tomorrow morning we reaffirm our ongoing commitment to the reduction of global carbon emissions as part of our ‘Road to Zero’ environmental plan.

  22. The video is offensive, not because kids get blown up (that happens on South Park and it is obviously make believe), but because it reinforces the belief that the AGW brigade are justified in silencing those who disagree or don’t believe.

    The Greenpeace video using a young boy to try and intimdate sceptics was just as offensive but at least it was honest about its intent.

    The UEA email scandal has taught them nothing. You cannot silence or intimidate people forever. Eventaully, the truth always gets out.

    To really hurt 10:10, attack their funding. Governments and corporates that provide funding to these looneys really need to hold them to account.

  23. Glad to see the first part of this video on Fox, as I did not have the guts to view it after reading the descriptions (I have something about eyeballs). As I have a mid-Atlantic sense of humour I was curious to see if there was any trace of Monty-Python or any other famous exemplars of British humour, especially after some commentators defended the video was being funny. Nope. Mind you, British humour has headed into the toilet in the past couple of decades, and political correctness drains much of the fun out of everything. The video is just very sad, and what many bloggers have said is so true – this is more likely to conjure up eco-terrorism than anything else. 10:10 deserves every ounce of condemnation that has been sent in its direction.

  24. I found the whole idea of the commercial to show a complete lack of sensitivity.
    Putting aside for the moment whether it is or isn’t funny or humorous, when I first watched it I kept asking myself exactly what is the point ?
    Are exploding people going to make reducing one’s carbon footprint seem like a “cool idea” ?
    This ad is equivalent to the Vatican running a TV spot using Monty Python’s skit about the “holy hand grenade” thinking it would fill the pews on Sunday.
    Yeah. This piece is funny. So funny that you think it was done by a bunch of jokers. A bunch of jokers completely unserious about their cause.

  25. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
    October 4, 2010 at 8:10 pm

    I think this video will hurt ‘global warming’ in poll numbers more than ClimateGate did.
    ========================================================

    Yes, because it’s easier to follow. ClimateGate meant nothing to the people that weren’t paying attention to begin with. lol, you don’t need a program to follow the who’s who in this attention grabber!

    Maybe someone should create a program for the newcomers to the climate debate. This video will surely entice many more to watch more closely. A list of who’s who in the climate debate.

  26. As an ex ad-man I recognise this campaign as a textbook example of ‘group-think’. A small number of likeminded people, self selected, isolated from the real world who reinforce, reflect and amplify each other’s views sometimes to the point of absurdity…I presume the same thing happened with the Hockey Team.
    I’m just waiting for the parodies to appear, you know where the ‘exploded’ declare themselves: gay, christian, muslim, jewish etc.
    Massive own goal…at a critical moment of the game…excellent!

  27. That is: I Apologize for my snipped remark….
    Trying to do a video and type at the same time…

  28. Andrew W says:
    October 4, 2010 at 8:45 pm

    “Get Gareth to man up and admit his error, and maybe you’ll get out of the troll bin. ”

    Maybe you should have another look at that thread at HotTopic, I was the first and one of the most determined to argue against Gareth’s defense of the video.
    http://hot-topic.co.nz/no-pressure-1010-on-the-button/
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Andrew, I went, and I saw. In this instance, you were right. Well done. It isn’t always easy disagreeing with people one usually agrees with. And sometimes it is even harder to agree with people one usually disagrees with. Again, well done.

  29. Wait a minute, what was that old chestnut about “No such thing as bad publicity…”

    Seriously, being suspicious of everything has its advantages, such as – I think this is a prime tester to feel the mood of a global audience.

    Engineers please stand up and chime in, don’t we check Range and Tolerances, before finalising a solution, 10:10 seem to be finalising a final solution.

    Did not 10:10 find their EXTREME outer edge (Range), and now its just a sweet tweak to ensure they keep just inside Tolerances. At least until Children the world over beg their parents to kill the nasty climate change deniers, a term I despise and use here reluctantly.

    And then its, Green shirted Gaia youth coming to a public hanging near you.

    Its chilling, but some [SELF SNIP]tard will kill in the name of Gaia (as distinct from the lunatic green policies condemning developing countries to starvation and misery.)

    They might even trace the trigger back to 10:10.

    Sure its a PR ****-UP, but its also in circulation, its changed some minds, its created more tension, its ramped up the arguments. If I was a master of dissent and chaos, I’d be rolling around in a pile of carbon credits right now, very please with myself.

    Because while the left hand is waving the 10:10 handkerchief, the right hand just palmed your watch.

  30. Haha, like I said, the response from alarmists would be dead silence.

    For what its worth, the last part of the video was pretty graphic too with Gillian’s eyeball dripping down the inside of the sound room glass, but I digress – the whole concept was in poor taste.

    Thanks for the link to the debate between Marc and Joe. Really enjoyed it.

  31. Sorry for the additional [O/T]: But perhaps interesting.

    http://gkurl.us/gp9

    Heads are rolling over at the DoE.

    Is it because of ‘failure to perform’ in spite of all the money shoveled in their direction?

    Or is it a matter of clearing the way for even more ‘green minded’ people to take their places?

    Time will tell.

  32. Don’t forget the behind the scenes of the 10:10 video when it shows a young “actor”, covered in guts and blood saying this:

    “My name is Drew Barnard, and I think it is fine to explode children for a good cause.”

    Reference it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDHhgF1mIvA

    [And I don’t really CARE if you think it is tongue and cheek and satire. For christ’s sakes….the kid is a young teen. He doesn’t even know what satire is!!]

    “My name is Drew Barnard, and I think it is fine to explode children for a good cause.”

    The only other group in the known universe that believes this sick thought…are radical Islamic terrorists who have no qualms exploding children “for a good cause.”

    Sick sick sick.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  33. I think they are champion smearers, they forgot how to debate with the other side long ago and ran out of ways to smear the other side, so they just kept on smearing and finally got to smearing their own waverers. What is it called when prisoners smear themselves with their own excrement?

  34. I showed the Fox segment to my daughter. She was appalled at the video showing children being blown up in school. She thinks the “people that put the video together are stupid psychotic idiots”. If you wonder why I showed my daughter the video it is because she goes to public school and has seen the indoctrination from both her teachers and in her school books with respect to global warming. No science only fear and intimidation, not funny at all.

  35. That the Guardian and various true believers would attempt to portray the video as humor (or even more pathetically ‘British’ humor) is very weak. Not content with offending humanity, the warmists turn on the defenseless British, who may be quirky, but are steadfastly opposed to randomly detonating children.

    All the video shows, as anyone who watches it can tell, is that hatred is all the warmists know.

  36. Yes indeed. In the end pop culture will destroy AGW. Pop culture trumps science and economics every time. The bogus climate models, the buggered data, the IPCC shenanigans, the Climategate email antics, the destructive economic proposals, the attempted government power grabs…. all these pale compared to animated exploding children. Perhaps justice exists, but she is very very ironic.

  37. The British media response to this scandal has largely followed the way they handled the climategate scandal.
    It shows clearly how the new media is overtaking the old media in reporting breaking news and taking action where the old media is silent and unresponsive.

    The real story is why the MSM have not really reacted to this scandal and who has been instrumental in sitting on the story. I have a feeling that groups like the NUJ/SEJ have been key players.

  38. Donna Laframboise says: October 4, 2010 at 8:04 pm
    The Facebook page seems to be back now.
    In fairness, this contest ran on “The Age of Stupid” (Franny’s film that preceded the 10:10 Campaign) Facebook page, rather than the 10:10 Facebook page.
    See the whole thing here A searing review of the “The Age of Stupid” film appears here
    ==========================================================
    Donna. Thank you for the reference to the ‘searing review’ of “The age of Stupid” – Most revealing! I was interested in Franny Armstrong’s background and earlier ‘work’ to get a clear idea of her thinking. The review simply reinforces my conclusion that she is a fanatic. Someone earlier commented that Bin Laden has gone ‘green’ while the ‘greens’ have gone ‘explosive’ and I think that pretty well sums it up. Madness is the only common denominator and the two (Al -Quaeda and some of the Greens) have become and are interchangeable.
    Doug

  39. I doesn’t seem to me that people are alarmed enough about this. The mindset on display here is exactly the same as one we saw in the middle of the last decade. People being collected up and politely reassured that they were safe, when in fact they were about to be mass murdered? This doesn’t ring familiar with anyone? This is not just a few misguided people with “bad taste”, this is who they are – you’re either with us, or we want to kill you.

    These guys actually go a little farther. At the very end of the video (not shown on Fox), they actually execute one of their own supporters after she’s finished doing her part to help them. She has the nerve to refuse to make the sacrifices herself, considering what she has done for them to be helping “enough”. You have to be a “true believer” – sacrificing yourself for them, in your own personal life – or you’re dead. No exceptions. It’s classic cult stuff.

  40. I can’t believe that no one has mentioned that Megan looks fantastic…. :-)

    But I wish they had taken the opportunity to slam the scam of CAGW here.
    One of the most aggravating things is that it is:
    …… the warmers who have abandoned science,
    …….who have falsified data to support their fantasy,
    ……..who have slandered and intimidated those who simply told the truth,
    ……..who have worked to wrongly destroy reputations and livlihoods,
    ……..who sought to silence dissent AND STILL LOST THE DEBATE,
    so now they turn to defenseless children with their indoctrination. Deeply sick and disturbing.
    As evil as anything society has seen before. We cannot underestimate the malevolence of this cult.

  41. “The charity ActionAid, which co-ordinates the 10:10 schools programme, today welcomed the move. “Our job is to encourage proactive decisions at class level to reduce carbon emissions. We did it because evidence shows children are deeply concerned about climate change and…”

    Well I hope that is some comfort to the Brits that ActionAid will tone it down a little in the classroom.

  42. This from the BBC.

    It seems like the warmists are finally beginning to realise their cause is a lost one and that their continued reliance on bad science and misleading and/or untrue scare stories is backfiring.

    Those attending this week’s meeting of the climate faithful in China will doubtless be grateful that there should be enough space to park their private jets and limousines, unlike Copenhagen in December last year.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/

  43. how low can you go . I have started to ask all my friends children just what thay are telling them about global warming it is sad that our kids have to put up with this crapp everybody start asking please

  44. “John Q Public says:
    October 4, 2010 at 7:08 pm
    Intolerance, thy name is environmentalism.”

    No. These people are violent totalitarian religious extremists, not environmentalists. Children are part of the environment. Destroyers of children are destroyers of the environment.

  45. me says:
    October 4, 2010 at 10:12 pm
    Intolerance, thy name is the politics of today on both sides. People on the right make death threats of anti-Palin folks regularly (at her bidding??). We do need snaity in our discourse again, and folks stoking hate on both sides, please stop.

    http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2010/10/it-is-time-for-sarah-palin-to-take.html

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

    LOL. You talk about the need for “snaity [sic] in our discourse again” and “folks stoking hate on both sides. Please stop.”

    And you produce THIS link??

    Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

    You lost me. The link is stupid.

    Chris

  46. Stop Global Dumbing Now’s video was typical of the last British government, which turned wasteful spending into an art form, almost bankrupting the country.

    Unfortunately, the present coalition is still publicly dedicated to support the bad science and unsupported scare stories of climate change. However, there are a growing number of sceptics in the Conservative Party, which may just have enough political muscle to ensure those who want to make this and the 10:10 type of scare videos no longer receive any government financial support.

  47. Me says,
    Intolerance, thy name is the politics of today on both sides. People on the right make death threats of anti-Palin folks regularly (at her bidding??). We do need sanity in our discourse again, and folks stoking hate on both sides, please stop.

    I second that, its a real shame. The reference to extremists on both sides was the best thing anyone on Fox News has ever said, that I recall. They didn’t need to show that damn video.

    I dare say I hate that crazy sob Beck will have ahold of it. I can see him as the next Adolf Hitler with Sarah as Veep. You heathens and sinners be workin’ them mines and smelters and if you collapse they’ll put you in a plastic coffin.

    Thing is the other side of the aisle is just as crazy as them!

  48. Benjamin P. says:
    October 4, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    Painting with a broad brush is fun.

    “Co2 causes climate change.” Could you give the specifics on how that is done? Or will it just be a broad brush saying co2 causes climate.

    “Global warming is damaging the planet.” Could you give the specifics on what is happening? Or will it just be a broad brush?

    The Arctic is changing in ways never seen before. Could we have the specifics? Or will it just be a broad brush there too?

  49. Meanwhile, the UK government seeks to greatly extend powers of government over homeschoolers.

    “Schedule 1 of The Children Schools and Families Bill

    Introduces an annual registration scheme, effectively a licence, for Home Educated children. Parents would have to apply an advance plan for their children’s education every year in order to remain on the ‘register’ and Local Authorities would have extensive powers to refuse or revoke registration on a variety of grounds. This reverses the fundamental principle in English law that parents are responsible for the education of their children.

    Under the proposals, Local Authorities would have wide powers to monitor home educated families and children. The proposed system includes mandatory annual visits and requests for unaccompanied interviews with children.”

  50. Those who engage in denouncing AGW non-believers seem to forget that there are many skeptics who live a largely “sustainable” lifestyle. People who minimize the use of energy, drive sub-compact cars, live in small homes in a city close to work, recycle, avoid flying and otherwise maintain a small energy footprint. Can we say the same for those who are advocates of AGW?

  51. Ed Murphy says:
    October 4, 2010 at 10:57 pm
    “I dare say I hate that crazy sob Beck will have ahold of it…”

    I’m not worried about what Beck has to say about the video, that might seem strange when it probably seems like I was being too pedantic with the point I raised earlier. But the difference between Fox News and Beck is obviously that one is news, the other an opinion piece, to me that’s a big difference. I’m probably a bit old fashioned in that I think broadcasters should labor to be objective when presenting news as news.

  52. Often times, in school shootings here in the US, the perpetrator posts his intentions beforehand on a website or social network. These kinds of violent threats by students are taken seriously.

    In this case, though, this has been created by ActionAid, a group that continues to have access to the classroom.

    Does that mean that threats of violence by students can no longer be taken seriously, since it is practiced by those who organize school programmes?

  53. Frank K. says: October 4, 2010 at 7:35 pm
    Good! The word is spreading to the MSM. Is there a list of corporate sponsors (besides Sony)? I’d like to know who to boycott during the upcoming Christmas shopping season…

    Here’s a sponsor page from their web site –
    http://www.1010global.org/uk/partners
    It, too, may have been sanitized.

  54. This year GreenPEACE coomunicationd director – said ‘We Know Where You LIve’

    Lot’s of backtracking, explantion now on their website…
    But there was a LONG weekend, when thyey were trying to defend it..

    One moderator, tried to comapre themselves to Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King…

    My response was, I can’t imagine ‘Rosa Parks’ saying – “We Know Where You Live”

    GREENPEACE – Gene (Director Comms)

    “We need to hit them where it hurts most, by any means necessary: through the power of our votes, our taxes, our wallets, and more.”

    “‘We must break the law to make the laws we need: laws that are supposed to protect society, and protect our future. Until our laws do that, screw being climate lobbyists. Screw being climate activists. It’s not working. We need an army of climate outlaws.’

    “The proper channels have failed. It’s time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism.

    “If you’re one of those who believe that this is not just necessary but also possible, speak to us. Let’s talk about what that mass civil disobedience is going to look like.

    “If you’re one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this:

    “We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.

    “And we be many, but you be few.”

    http://joannenova.com.au/2010/04/greenpeace-are-coming-we-know-where-you-live/

    This just shows an out of touch mindest.. Lots of global warming activits havelive in an echo chamber, and now believe thier own propaganda..

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/04/03/climate-craziness-of-the-week-greenpeace-posts-threats/

    http://weblog.greenpeace.org/climate/2010/04/will_the_real_climategate_plea_1.html

  55. We Know where you work……
    (actual similar message to the office seen in ‘No Pressure’ – label, eclude, ostracise, spit in the drink, abusive name calling, exclude)

    This is what Greenpeace feel about office workers that don’t agree with them (he drives a 4×4)



    I imagine everyone in that video flies – A single persons return trip to New York – London) is the equivalent to that cars ANNUAL mileage (so hypocrites!!)

    Work it out for yourselve, buy a JP MORGAN BANK, Climate Care carbon offset.
    http://www.jpmorganclimatecare.com/

  56. Green Peace – Angry Kid…

    Use of children, Again. Saying amongst other gems.
    “For or Against”

    “friend or enemy”

    “The lines are drawn, You have to choose sides”

    “this is the last time I will be talking to you”

    “entire countries will disappear, famine, world wide epidemics, life expectancy will be lower”

    “you are for my future, or you are against it”

    Look at the hate in his eyes……

  57. The presenter said: “What happens next is even more horrifying than what you just saw.” I think the bit Fox broadcast was the easily the worst of it, does anyone want to argue that the following two scenes are “even more horrifying”?

    She said “what happens next…”. She does not refer to “the following two scenes”.

    What is horrifying is the way murdering for the cause is presented as perfectly normal and without negative consequences or moral compunction. It is not the violence itself. Rather it is the moral sanction and the glorifying of violence for the cause that is so disturbing.

    Fox showed the most “shocking” part — but “horrifying” speaks to something that “terrifies, causes dismay, is appalling, frightening”. It is the morality of environmentalists that frightens me. I’m not appalled by their Hollywood-style special effects.

  58. Andrew W says:
    October 4, 2010 at 8:02 pm

    The presenter said: “What happens next is even more horrifying than what you just saw.”

    I think the bit Fox broadcast was the easily the worst of it, does anyone want to argue that the following two scenes are “even more horrifying”?

    REPLY: No, we don’t want to argue about it, bugger off. – Anthony

    Ha!

    BTW, is it just me, or has there been a load of trolling from users with a first name and initial in the last few months? I wonder if that is the same person, or just coordinated? Of course, if I’ve pointed it out, it will surely stop now….

  59. Global Warming activists betrayed a sinister underlying truth about themselves. They do not respect human life. They see people and an infection on the planet. They are willing to consider the notion that the culture of death is a solution to the loss in popularity of the global warming lie, and killing the opposition is a workable solution.

    They have been “killing” good scientists for years, professionally speaking. They have been socially isolating any skeptics with this kind of attitude. Ask Timothy Ball.

    The film is simply a reflection of what the global warming alarmists really think and that alone is justification to stop them.

  60. I got an email back from O2 stating that they didn’t sponsor 1010. I sent them a link back with a press release on it stating thea O2 was a sponsor of 1010 and asked for clarification.

  61. Sony have bailed from the 10:10 Campaign.

    “it is now evident that Sony does not see the funny side of 10:10’s “snuff movie”. In an e-mail statement, it says:

    … we strongly condemn the “No Pressure” video which was conceived, produced and released by 10:10 entirely without the knowledge or involvement of Sony. The company considers the video to be ill-conceived and in extremely bad taste. We also believe the video risks undermining the work of the many thousands of members of the public, schools and universities, local authorities and many businesses, of which Sony is one, who support the long-term aims of the 10:10 movement and who are actively working towards the reduction of carbon emissions.

    As a result we have taken the decision to disassociate ourselves from 10:10 at this time.”

    http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2010/10/epic-win.html

  62. So they exploded a container of red stuff and splattered the children with goo, and the children weren’t wearing protective eye goggles? And ear protection? Where was health and safety?

    Note for non UK countries – health and saftey is very much at the forefront here in the UK.

  63. My first thought was; is this not just more of the same? Apart from the stupidity in the choice of the storyline the message is and has been that people with a dissenting view are worthless, of no consequence, to be dismissed without consideration. But on reflection and if I may dare to suggest it, to be disposed of and society to be cleansed. Ughh.

  64. I’ve been looking at other 10:10 sites.

    10:10 Portugal was quick to put a disclaimer on their site, dissociating themselves from the video, essentially saying that they had nothing to do with it. They stop short of condemning it, and say something about the uniqueness of British humour etc. The whole tone is “I didn’t do it”.

    10:10 in France, Germany and Spain have ignored the issue as far as I could see. I suppose they think it’s better to ignore it and pretend it goes way.

  65. Zeke,

    Some parents deny public school from kids from religious / other grounds and the kids will end up discounnected from the society, with very poor skills. This is mostly aproblem with families with different cultural backgrounds – I have personal and professional experience of this issue.

    How do you suggest the kids rights to a proper education and integration into the society are upheld? I agree that parents should get to decide but the kids have rights too and if the parents fail them, having the ability to chat with them and visit the place of tuition is a necessary failsafe system imho.

  66. >>>It still boggles my mind that no saboteur was involved.

    No need, this is how they think. I had an argument about renewable electricity with one group, and pointed out that the intermittent supplies may bring down civilisation, and reduce their children to poverty and penury.

    Their answer?? “”If that is what it takes….””

    There you have it. From the horse’s mouth, they are willing to sacrifice their own children. Worse than Abraham himself.

  67. Don’t be too hard on the sponsors … YET..

    Sony, I am sure were totally oblivious to all this, and have BAILED OUT immediately (ie a weekend got in the way)

    I’m sure the other sponsors will follow..
    The actuall idea of the campoaign, whilst never possible of doing anything about emmissions was not to bad….

    In the UK there were 1600 schools listed in the 10:10 website…

    Including my six year old dfaughter’s infant school..

    I spoke to the HeadTeacher, (oblivious) sent her the below email..

    And she withdrew the school IMMEDIATELY….

    Email to my child’s headteacher ( I may do the same to other schools in my area , and a few sponsors)

    This 10:10 Campaign video was proudly launched as a scoop in the Guardian..

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

    watch the video…. How to Cut Carbon Emmisions

    DO NOT WATCH IT WITH ANY CHILDREN AROUND

    It was prominently displayed on the from page of the 10:10 website.

    They were proud of it, ANY child in a 10:10 campiagn school, looking at their website.. this was the first thing that they would see.. First thing you would come across, if you were innocently looking for 10:10 information.. SAFE to do so, because you had seen about 10:10 in school.

    The (ignore the blood and guts for a moment) the underlying message is appalling, go along with voice of authority, those who disagree, or not totally commited, are labelled, identified as, lazy, scruffy, indifferent, unintelligent…

    It is pure propaganda to impose one groups world view, and desensitise people.

    put aside the violence (that is just an excuse to make it a joke) the message is bullying and conformity..not something any school should be involved with.

    What shocks me the most is that hundreds of people wewre involved with this, and did not see how it would be perceived, Including the Guardain, who were excited to promote it…

    It was due to be shown in cinemas, posted on Youtube, twitter, etc, all the media that children would and could see.. and look out for, alongside, Greenpeaces ‘Angry Kid’ ‘ UK governments’ Bedtime Stories’ and ‘The Falling Polar Bears’ cinema ad.

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

    one of many comments from the Guardian..

    1 October 2010 11:26PM
    What struck me were the faces of the children after their friends had been blown to pulp, astonishment. As if understanding had suddenly registered to their young brains what “no pressure” really means when it comes from the mouth of an ecowarrior.

    If it were supposed to be light hearted and funny they would not have included those images of fear on the faces of the children who had complied to their green carbon message.

    This tells me this was never meant to be humour, it was a deadly serious attempt to intill a climate of fear. And then the final sequence when the girl has given her time for free, she is a supporter, but it is not enough, she must also be disposed of.

    In Cambodia they executed people for owning glasses. I think this come close to that mindset.
    This really is about inciting hatred and violence against anyone who is outside the paranoid world of extreme green politics. I hope it really causes a storm in

    the media, but I am not holding my breath. The Guardian actually seem to be proud of their association with the film!

    The comments in the Comment are Free section are interesting, it starts with all the greenies saying how funny it all is before a deluge of hostile comments arrives. The hostile comments have approval ratings of up to 500, the people who find it funny are left languishing with very few approval ratings. This has been a big mistake.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film

    Some of words of the founder of 10:10 campiagn
    “Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age” Franny – The Founder of 10:10

    “Because we have got about four years to stabilise global emissions and we are not anywhere near doing that. All our lives are at threat and if that’s not worth jumping up and down about, I don’t know what is.” – Franny – The founder of 10:10

    “What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? ”

    I guess that means me…

    So what is Franny to do with those people……………

    So what is Franny to DO, with , ‘insert your name here’

  68. Official apology from Kyocera.

    .

    From: Tracey Rawling Church
    Subject: 10:10 video
    Date: 5 October 2010 08:09:37 CEST
    To: r****@***

    Dear Sir,

    Thank you for your email, just received. I totally understand your reaction to this video, which was very similar to my own.

    Kyocera Mita UK has supported the 10:10 campaign because we share its ambition to reduce carbon emissions. However, we don’t support the “No Pressure” video and are dismayed by the suggestion that we might have been knowing partners in its production; in fact, we had no knowledge of its content until it appeared online. We consider that 10:10 made a grave error of judgement in its choice of creative approach, which is totally at odds with the inclusive and positive attitude that has been the hallmark of its other activities. We understand that 10:10 has acknowledged its mistake, withdrawn the video and issued an apology.

    I assure you that we are taking this issue extremely seriously. A formal statement will be issued in due course.

    Kind regards
    Tracey

    Tracey Rawling Church
    Director of Brand and Reputation

    —————————————————————————
    KYOCERA MITA (UK) Limited

    8 Beacontree Plaza, Gillette Way, Reading, RG2 0BS, England
    Tel: +44 (0) 118 923 0665 Fax: +44 (0) 118 931 1108 Mobile: +44 (0) 7785 316612
    mailto:Tracey.Rawling.Church@kyoceramita.co.uk
    http://www.kyoceramita.co.uk

  69. By the way, the video you have all been looking at is not the original. This was what they wanted to put out, but it was deemed to be too shocking.

    This is what the Greens really want.

    ;-)

    .

  70. >>I’m just waiting for the parodies to appear, you know where
    >>the ‘exploded’ declare themselves: gay, christian, muslim, jewish etc.

    The spoofs are already out there. This was the best, but they have already pulled it.

    http://www.youtube.com/videos?ytsession=nUevqHAO1isfH1Mju4oQ01p92Qt88JIYgj1s380DagspQuR78jXSifRoVToQN7QRRWhNu_X_7rztDGV2oOKLs8F0nIRSUzQyz_0CeMZ31CxfNOg-2lTUXOufqRNJXaQWkoNcgptuJj8MfnLf-d9xkZBerEce1gKmM5Cn6NlHInz6AiyffjnmT3VmBhszZMI8FI6IXN2zrtWSsuYSgm8wN5nHhF4FDW1cSdfyS43W10yDv4CATbCr1HfTZfB1Ay-V3SVwxaI1cPain7sCttIlqXrmIjbEre6KfXshCE2dlIzwIT3gyXnwTQpxeqco0ELrmQlhJUt0tdg4RFsAB0BzgEJua_HHubvZ-kID5dTuIUfZbh4Ak2jWhjsNP4thM2BTJgebyaFAmZY

    Someone is embarrassed, obviously. Damage limitation is full swing….

    Spanner Films is putting a spanner in the works !!

    .

  71. Optimizer at 10:14 pm makes the most important point to me, and one which Fox barely touched.

    “People being collected up and politely reassured that they were safe, when in fact they were about to be mass murdered? This doesn’t ring familiar with anyone?”

    It rung all the same bells with me, mate. The point to focus on is not the exploding of children per se but that anyone who fails to embrace the cause with sufficient enthusiasm, never mind actually disagree, is of absolutely zero value and can be ended at the touch of a button with no more regret than is felt when taking out the garbage. Even Gillian Anderson’s character is treated as disposable once it’s clear that while she’s an enthusiastic supporter she doesn’t care to join in. All they missed was someone saying, “Thanks, Gill, but you’ve just outlived your usefulness.”

    That kind of callous indifference to human life is indeed familiar, and while the obvious comparison breaks Godwin’s Law I feel that for once the comparison is a fair one. If you want to go with Stalin or the Khmer Rouge or whatever bunch of headcases who have the same kind of attitude to dissenters, go for it (your choice, no pressure ;-) ), but I think it’s slightly unfortunate that Fox focussed on the children aspect over the simple callous indifference to human life that the 10:10 video portrays. It’s that indifference that I find more worrying.

  72. I am a very Important Official, & you must listen to me, I understand the issues that Mr Morano raises, but we feel he has behaved “irresponsibly” in his deliberate misinterpretation of the thread of the video in bringing the extremely dangerous issues of Climate Change to the fore!

    Well that’s the sort of PC bovine faecal tosh that we’ll be fed over this most unpleasant piece if entertainment! We have had 13 years of a Socialist government telling us what our rights are, all fed through the sanitised portal of the EU. (& 20 years of PC garbage). The only time I have ever heard a member of that government ever use the word repsonisbility, is as used in the above paragraph! It’s the typical PC socialist put down to refer too an opponent as “irresponsible” of course! My views have been expresses elsewhere on this blog. I have no excuse for it. I used to love British humour, it was always on the risky/saucey side, slightly lavatorial if you will, but this is not British Humour at all, is British sickness, a disease that’s engulfed the entire country. The UK is a provincial state in the PDREU/UESR, where they give millions in grants to Greenpeace & WWF to lobby, err…….well the EU & British Government (provincial council), to make environmental laws based on alleged independent reports by these organisations, so that they can claim that their hands are tied, they don’t want to pass these laws, but they have to so hard cheese! Do you think the USA/Canada/Australia et al are so immune? I don’t think so.

    BTW I’m not a golfist & don’t own a set of golfist bats, so apologies for the UESR winning at that peculiar past-time! I also apologise that we played under that ghastly blue banner. The circle is almost complete. I wonder when the Thin Red Line will be called upon yet again to make a stand, holding out long enough to buy time & then turn to our colonial cousins across the water to help us out?

  73. >>Barry Woods says: October 5, 2010 at 12:11 am

    Ouch !! What a disgusting GreenPeace video !!

    What fascist regime produced this video eh? Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, PR of China, Pol Pot??

    Just replace the word ‘adult’ with ‘Jew’ and you get the idea.

    Fascists.

  74. The Guardian (a 10:10 “media partner”) has an article here describing the film as “intended as a tongue-in-cheek spoof of hectoring greens”. Er, yes, so we’re supposed to believe, are we, that they went to all this trouble – money, people, time, etc. – just to make fun themselves? Somehow I don’t think so – the excuses are getting increasingly absurd.

  75. Sorry for the long post, email just sent…

    Dear O2

    I imagine that O2 like Sony, were completely unaware of the content of the 10:10 Campaign ‘No Pressure’ video…

    I just sent this email to 10:10 (attached below) I forgot to copy O2, O2 still apparently support this stupidity..

    James Delingpole – Telegraph journalist – credits me with sending him this story (and half the civilised world – he said)
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100056510/go-green-or-well-kill-your-kids-says-richard-curtis-eco-propaganda-shocker/

    Fox News has just shown, the 10:10 Campiagn exploding children on their News channel in the USA
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/04/morano-on-fox-news-on-the-1010-exploding-children-film/

    The Headteacher at my 6 year old child’s INFANTS School, watched 1 minute and 11 seconds of the ‘No Pressure’ video.
    (when the first child that disagreed with 10:10 is killed by the teacher)

    She then immediately, contacted 10:10 and withdrew the school completely from the 10:10 Campaign

    Sony pulled out VERY quickly from 10:10, what will O2 do….?

    !! Your Choice, No Pressure !!!!! (I have no red button !!!)

    What were they thinking!!!!

    And the Guardian, to sponsor the launch.!

    Best Regards

    Barry Woods

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Barry Woods
    To: xxxxxx@1010ukCc: jonovaxxxxxx ; willettsd@parliamentxxxxx ; stringerg@xxxxxxxx; Roger Harrabin – BBC ; Richard Black-BBC ; millera@parliamenxxxxxx; Telegraph, Herald Sun, Eureferendum blog
    Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:47 AM
    Subject: The lesson learnt is….. 10:10 Campaign’s sickening ‘No Pressure’ video.

    the lesson learnt is…

    Delete all the critical comment of you…Supress any criticism as if it wasn’t there….
    This is going to be huge in the USA: Fox News ran with it.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/04/morano-on-fox-news-on-the-1010-exploding-children-film/

    Thousand of comments, that you invited on your website (ignore the rude,swearing ones) you just deleted everyone, your child supporters amongst them, because you were embarrased..

    Bit like the video, Or In Franny’s words…

    What DO with THOSE people….. (the afflicted: she said, her words and video in the link below)

    What WERE the Guardian thinking?!

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

    Many thousands of children were part of the 10:10 Campaign, many have been doubly betrayed, by the video, and by your censorship.

    They have NOW LEARNT an IMPORTANT LESSON, that there voices can be deleted to, by the people they supported, just for critcising..

    Some (now deleted) comments below.. that is the mindset, delete/ignore/supress/label, wish away anyother thoughts or people…
    Some of the 3000 plus (your own supporters) missing now from the 10 10 apology page…

    http://www.1010global.org/uk/2010/10/sorry

    2. Dan Woodfine

    Dear 10:10

    I’m a teenager who has spent the last year trying to convince my parents to be more aware of the environment, to put more effort into recycling, to save energy etc. And what’s more – it was working.

    They’ve now seen your video and have been interrogating me about who I’m associating with, warning me about “eco-terrorists” and other such nonsense.

    In short, with this video, you’ve completely undone everything I’ve tried to do to help my parents. You’ve made them suspicious of me, and you’ve made them downright angry.

    Thanks for nothing, you bunch of idiots.

    1. Carol Ann Cattell

    Is that the best you can do, 10:10 leaders? Still no apology even to your supporters. Mention jokingly a “lively round on cake”, which was about 5 out of 3000 comments? Like a finishing school dormitory girls’ giggle? And your main statement still says “most” thought it funny but “some” didn’t – but the truth is, as you know, the opposite – that globally, thousands found it crass and unfunny and authoritarian and just, well, crap in promoting your cause.

    You. Just. Don’t. Get. It.

    And some – a handful of goodhearted souls – have loyally supported you, but not terribly well, all the time you were silent. All a bit of a laugh, was it? Going back to Mummy and Daddy and their contacts for a bit more money, now, are we?

    God, you make me angry. And most of us were on your side, if you hadn’t been so blinkered. No, the eco stuff is still there and serious and needs serious consideration, proper scientific facts, and effective action. But I hope to god you lot aren’t anywhere near it. You’re toxic. You can’t even say sorry properly. You’ve no idea, have you? We’re just plebs to be sniggered at, fodder for your little wanky games. For the earth’s sake, just grow up, will you?

    Yeah, I’m a smidgen cross.

    3. Managing Director

    Our corporate accountants alerted me this evening to the existance (sic) of this video and to remind me that we had made a financial contribution to the 10:10 campaign. Having viewed it, I find it personally repulsive in the extreme. You have had the last donation you will ever get from our business or any business with which I have any influence. What could you have been thinking?

    4. Dear all at 10:10

    I have supported your campaign to date, am pro-green, pro-cutting carbon emissions, and generally very environmentally conscious. I also grew up in a country where people were blown up and killed by terrorists on a daily basis. I know people who died in this way, and from this video, I imagine from this video that no one at your office, or on your creative team, has experienced this.

    The mini-movie campaign indicates a total lack of sensitivity. Further, whatever the intended message might have been, it does implicitly suggest that those who disagree with you should be blown up. If this had been aimed at people who are of a different race, religion, sexuality, etc, it would have been evidently grossly unacceptable.

    Sadly, the mini-movie makes me ashamed to have lent my support, and put my name to 10:10. I imagine your corporate sponsors may feel similarly. I am reluctant to continue to be associated with an organisation which can advertise its cause in this way, even if I support the underlying green cause.

    This is compounded by what is somewhat obviously a non-apology. It is not a sense of humour failure (as you seem to imply) for people who may actually have seen children, friends, etc blown up, not to consider your mini-movie particularly funny.

    The environmental cause will now to have to deal with the damage that you’ve managed to do it. Your supporters deserve a decent apology for the damage you have done to the general reputation of the green movement.

    We will just have to continue onwards and upwards without you.

  76. Barry Woods (12:04am), your quote bears repeating and I’ve bookmarked it

    GREENPEACE – Gene (Director Comms)

    “We need to hit them where it hurts most, by any means necessary: through the power of our votes, our taxes, our wallets, and more.”

    “‘We must break the law to make the laws we need: laws that are supposed to protect society, and protect our future. Until our laws do that, screw being climate lobbyists. Screw being climate activists. It’s not working. We need an army of climate outlaws.’

    “The proper channels have failed. It’s time for mass civil disobedience to cut off the financial oxygen from denial and skepticism.

    “If you’re one of those who believe that this is not just necessary but also possible, speak to us. Let’s talk about what that mass civil disobedience is going to look like.

    “If you’re one of those who have spent their lives undermining progressive climate legislation, bankrolling junk science, fueling spurious debates around false solutions, and cattle-prodding democratically-elected governments into submission, then hear this:

    “We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.

    “And we be many, but you be few.”

  77. Kath @ 11:26 on the 4th.

    Quite so. I am very annoyed that being a ‘sceptic’ is equated with being wasteful and uncaring of the world’s resources. We have been trying to do ‘green’ things for many years, but all this coercive nonsense from 10:10 makes me feel like going out and having a massive energy binge.

  78. I feel this too bears repeating:

    FREE THE DEBATE

    Here are the main science issues for debate and reexamination (IMHO):
    * The inflation of warming due to a whole basketful of factors like UHI, corrupting the data and insufficiently or improperly accounted-for.
    * The artificial depression of past temperature records due to the very nature of the calibration of proxies, that cannot help but mine for hockey sticks.
    *The artificial depression of past CO2 levels due to a whole basketful of factors including the reasons for CO2’s partial escape from ice cores before measurement.
    * The city-dwellers’ failure to comprehend the vast mass of the oceans, compared with the tiny mass of the atmosphere, and the oceans’ capacity, following Henry’s Law, to outgas CO2 far in excess of all our emissions, at the tiniest global temperature increase.
    * Reluctance to look at what is staring everyone in the face: the Sun and astrophysics: because the measured solar effects, still very inadequately understood, are not large enough to cause the measured temperature changes – although there is correlation.
    * The unstated, unrecognized abandonment of Scientific Method, and adoption of models rather than data, again for a whole basketful of reasons.

    And here are the ethical issues (h/t Layne Blanchard):
    …… the activists who have abandoned science,
    …….who have falsified data to support their fantasy,
    ……..who have slandered and intimidated those who simply told the truth,
    ……..who have worked to wrongly destroy reputations and livelihoods,
    ……..who sought to silence dissent AND STILL LOST THE DEBATE,
    so now they turn to defenseless children with their indoctrination.

  79. Donna Laframboise says:
    October 4, 2010 at 8:04 pm

    “A searing review of the “The Age of Stupid” film appears here

    “…sitting in a shed, Lynas takes out a piece of paper and draws a graph on it with a pencil. It has an x axis and a y axis, and a curved line in the middle with the year 2015 written on it. This, he explains, shows that we have only another six years to save the world. This is the only ‘proper science’ in the whole film. Seriously. It makes those L’Oreal adverts – ‘here comes the science!’ – look like summaries of the quantum-physics debate between Einstein and Bohr.””

    Hmm, maybe this is where Franny got her ‘four years to save the world’ idea from. Her own film!

  80. Just received this from O2:

    Dear Mr Wood

    Thank you for your email to the O2 press office.

    Along with 100,000 members of the public, leading businesses, schools and universities, local authorities and NHS Trusts, O2 supports the aims of the 10:10 campaign. We acknowledge our responsibility to the environment and are committed to reducing our carbon emissions both as an organisation and in society as a whole. 10:10 is an independent organisation and we don’t ask for editorial control over the content of its campaigns.

    Kind regards

    Sarah

    pressoffice@o2.com

  81. I noticed my comment got the childish clip as it didn’t conform to your one sided blog. The hypocrisy is huge when Fox is outraged by this fictional video but not outraged when it helped the US government by selling the Fearful WMD’s into Iraq War. And if a video of Real Iraqi children being blown up by “Shock and Awe” or the ones deformed by DUI’s doesn’t shock them. Maybe Fox could apologise for lying to the public. One video is a Fiction, the Iraq lies to War are real. Is that on topic enough for you.[not really and if you think this blog is one sided you have a strange definition of that indeed]

  82. Benjamin P. says:
    October 4, 2010 at 10:10 pm
    ‘Painting with a broad brush is fun.’

    Of course it is – that way you never have to provide adequate scientific evidence or (dare I say it) data that shows how you’ve manipulated the real observations. And this broad brush, can we remind you, is covered in blood, brains and intestines.

  83. Volt Aire: Some parents deny public school from kids from religious / other grounds and the kids will end up discounnected from the society, with very poor skills. This is mostly aproblem with families with different cultural backgrounds – I have personal and professional experience of this issue.

    The Children Schools and Families Bill reverses the fundamental principle in English law that parents are responsible for the education of their children. It would set up databases on English families, open homes to inspection, force burdensome filing and state reviews of curricula, and bring criminal penalties to those deemed to be inadequately educating their children. The so-called “right” to an education then becomes a coercive mandate to receive only a public education, from a system which is plainly breaking down before your eyes, as radical environmentalists are allowed access to the classroom and portray violence for their cause. Placing such blind trust in the state to determine what a proper education is, stigmatizing parents who do not choose public schools, and instituting new and sweeping legal threats for parents who want the best for their children is not the answer to a vague sense that some children may be “out of touch with society.”

    The British should be thinking long and hard about intruding on and violating this most intrinsic of relationships, that of the parent and child. Consider carefully what is set before you, especially in light of this recent educational video.

  84. I only wish other media were paying attention. While I do watch and surf Fox, I also do the same for CNN, MSNBC (probably their only viewer), ABC, CBS and BBC.

    No a word from any others – maybe it’s good, in that 10-10 won’t get as much publicity.

  85. Paul Westhaver says:
    Global Warming activists betrayed a sinister underlying truth about themselves. They do not respect human life.

    I’m not an ecologist, but I gather it is a consequence of the very narrow perspective that ecology assumes; people are just one species amongst many, and consequently we’ve no more right to be here than bacteria or lizards.

    Their view is that the biggest thing on the planet is the Ecosystem. Humans are just one part of the Ecosystem (Gaia), so the Ecosystem is more important than humans. If the Ecosystem could have more diversity and health without us, that that is morally better, they believe. Gaia is the “One Thing” the one God, the one united living system. Humans are just a part of it. Hence the analogy with cancer; we consume too much of “the whole” and are therefore a “cancer”.

    The colossal error they make in their analysis is that they ignore the complexity and development of the human mind and heart. People are actually more intelligent than cats and dogs. Ecologists don’t like this, to them this is putting humans first, like racism puts whites above blacks. But, they completely ignore that we are produced by nature, and nature continues to evolve and produce greater complexity of mind. They ignore this. The story of human history is the story of 200,000 years of gradual development to greater complexities of mind and heart.

    Yes, we need the food chain otherwise we could not survive. But nature produced humans at the top of the food chain, nature put us there. Everything has value, true. But if you have the choice of killing ten monkeys or one human, normal people would kill the monkeys. Ecologists and greens think this is a grave travesty and that zebras and polar bears are worth more than humans.

    It is an odd contradiction. I don’t see zebras rushing to save polar bears. Only humans with conscious minds and hearts try to do that.

  86. I had to reply to Mr Broadbrush first but wanted to add that the impact of so many people expressing their disgust at No Pressure, both on blogs across the world and by letters written directly to the sponsors, is reasonable evidence that we can all have a small part to play in defeating the anti-life and anti-liberty evil ideology that these activists are promoting. The sponsors will hardly have picked up on this film by scanning their newspapers, since there has been almost no coverage to speak of (at least here in the UK). I wearily wrote my emails to them, not even expecting any sort of response or, if I was to get one, just the usual corporate newspeak stuff. BUT IT WORKED – because so many of us did it. From little acorns etc..

  87. I really like to video. Am I on my own? I mean its not often I get the chance in my lunch hour to mail a pageful of bile to the Director of company and feel completely justified in doing so.

    Thanks 10:10. Resorting to terrorist scare tactics and bullying is doing more damage to your cause than a thousand Watt or McIntyre blogs can do.

    Hop
    p.s. do you think I could run my central heating with a thousand Watt blog?

  88. Mike McMillan says:
    October 4, 2010 at 11:52 pm

    Thanks Mike – looks like the sponsor list is pretty thin (probably has been scrubbed – Sony is no longer there). Mostly British groups (hey look, “The Guardian” – would would have thought? heh…) O2 appears to be a proud sponsor – I’ll make sure to avoid them in the future.

    If other big name sponsors are found, please let us all know by posting their names and contact info here. Thanks!

  89. “Yeah but Fox news is pretty difficult to watch too.”

    Not when Julie Banderas is on. Woah.

    Andrew

  90. I liked how Morano several times turned the discussion toward the topic that there is an “intellectual” theme in the whole environmental movement to silence skeptics with intimidation.

    That needs to be emphasized. It is not just the 10:10 ideological environmentalists doing it. It is generic to the broad ideological environmental movement.

    On a different aspect of ideological environmentalism, I recommend we focus toward contrasting the essential nature /concepts /values of ideological environmentalism versus the dominate trends of modern Western society.

    I think if that contrast is brought into the open-light-of-day then there will be much more shocked reaction to it than that caused by the “No Pressure” video itself.

    The ability to clearly focus on that contrast with high levels of energy by many independent thinkers . . . . that is the precious gift we received from 10:10. We thank you 10:10!!

    John

  91. >>The Children Schools and Families Bill reverses the fundamental principle
    >>in English law that parents are responsible for the education of their children.
    >>It would set up databases on English families, open homes to inspection,

    But we only have ourselves to blame for this, because England is no longer England.

    This change came about because it was discovered that a number of independent schools and many home taught children were being fed a diet of hatred of Western values, and being urged to commit terror.


    This is why this change in law is required. As you say it is a great shame, but we only have ourselves to blame.

    .

  92. Fox are putting a Fox spin on it.

    The film doesn’t just reflect poorly on the environmental movement, it, together with the poor response from the makers is making us Brits generally look like a bunch of silly tw@ts. Pardon the language.

  93. H says:
    October 4, 2010 at 8:39 pm
    The video is offensive, not because kids get blown up (that happens on South Park and it is obviously make believe), but because it reinforces the belief that the AGW brigade are justified in silencing those who disagree or don’t believe.

    The Greenpeace video using a young boy to try and intimdate sceptics was just as offensive but at least it was honest about its intent.

    The UEA email scandal has taught them nothing. You cannot silence or intimidate people forever. Eventaully, the truth always gets out.

    To really hurt 10:10, attack their funding. Governments and corporates that provide funding to these looneys really need to hold them to account.

    I equate these sick scum to those renegades in African countires where civil war is rife, & children are stolen quite literally by either the ideological left-wing marxist rebels or by the corrupt government/dictator’s side, brutalised & given an AK47 or RPG launcher & their childhood is lost forever at such a young & tender age! I have a name for this kind of action, “Bloody Criminal!”. (Moderator snip profanity if desired). I put Greenpeace (Redwar) & 10:10 & Al Gore (“children, don’t listen to grwon-ups) into this catagory. It’s an abomination, AND it’s a form of child abuse!

  94. Sigh. Let me add a bit more than a soundbyte. This is how many stories now about 10:10? They made a ridiculous video, I would never try to defend it, and they should be ashamed. But goodgreif people! Reading the comments here so many of you are just saying every single person who believes in AWG is of the same caliber.

    How many more stories about 10:10 on this “best science blog” will we see?

    Cue predictable responses in 3…2…1…

  95. mr.john,

    As far as twits go, we in the US look much worse than the Brits. Just check our normal media – lots about Lindsey Lohan, what to eat to keep skinny, dancing Filipino flight attendants, etc. but not much substance. At least you have decent beer.

  96. Benjamin, the trouble is that we’ve known that they wanted to keep skeptic voices silent for some time. Moderation of undesired opinions on pro-warmist sites is rife, as you well know. Evidence of professional silencing was uncovered in Climategate. The propaganda has been steadily cranked up over recent years as the warmists have become ever more shrill with their message. Greenpeace, WWF, ACT (image of child with noose around neck) and many more.

    The 10:10 video has finally woken the general public up to this.

    It’s not so much that this one video is so repulsive (although it most certainly isn’t nice), it’s when you add it all together that you get a massive outburst when they finally go too far.

  97. Eliminating the way of life of thousands of English homeschooled families will not solve any problems England has with “hatred of Western values” within your immigrant populations. Abandoning English law and tradition which upholds family responsibility for children will not save you.

    Mandating government inspections of homes and interviews with children without their parents will not save you; why do you think it will stop with homeschooled children? That is not a sensible assumption to make.

    Do you think foreign populations will allow these gov’t invasions of homes? Or will they demand separate religious schools provided by the English taxpayers? Look at this clause in the bill:

    a requirement for local authorities to provide full-time education for children and young people who, for various reasons, are in alternative provision
    greater powers for school governing bodies on how they use their budgets, and the power to set up new schools and academies

    It’s really interesting that you mention terrorism and hatred of Western values on this thread, since this very video was produced by environmentalist groups which are in fact generating educational school programmes.

  98. Benjamin P. says:
    October 5, 2010 at 7:49 am

    Sigh. Let me add a bit more than a soundbyte. This is how many stories now about 10:10? They made a ridiculous video, I would never try to defend it, and they should be ashamed. But goodgreif people! Reading the comments here so many of you are just saying every single person who believes in AWG is of the same caliber.

    How many more stories about 10:10 on this “best science blog” will we see?

    Cue predictable responses in 3…2…1…

    ————————-

    Benjamin P,

    The favorite tactic of ideological environmentalists is to invoke the precautionary principle in their arguments.

    Most of the commenters here are now invoking the precautionary principle on our own behalf regarding the blatant intimidation toward us as shown by the video; and also by many other public instances of intimidation from the ideological environmentalists.

    This seems to be a very reasonable application by skeptics of the precautionary principle. It is also precautionary for skeptics to probe the basic ideas / values / actions of all similar groups to see what they really are versus what their nice PR shows them to be.

    John

  99. This isn’t just some one-off video from a fringe group, Benjamin P. This group purports to be mainstream; they get UK taxpayer money , and HAD corporate sponsors. Further they had some famous and semi-famous talent involved in the project.

    There were simply too many people of too many walks of life involved in the making of this to claim “Oh this isn’t what we believe!”

    I’m just not buying it.

  100. Zeke the Sneak says:
    October 5, 2010 at 8:12 am

    Eliminating the way of life of thousands of English homeschooled families will not solve any problems England has with “hatred of Western values” within your immigrant populations. Abandoning English law and tradition which upholds family responsibility for children will not save you.

    I am curious, what is your solution?

  101. Benjamin P;

    Were this video produced in isolation, you would be quite correct that it has garnered more coverage than it deserves. But is was not. This video is the culmination of a 20 year process of increasingly agressive tactics used by elements within the environmentalist movement to entrench their point of view without the need for scientific fact, reason, or logic. As such, it is a reminder of the lessons of history which bear eery similarity to atrocities of the past and foretell the future of the environmentalist movement should it be completely hijacked by its extremist elements and should the rest of us fail to divert them from the path history tells us they are on. Consider the evolvement of the debate over the years:

    1. Ostracism of scientists with contrary views.
    2. Abuse of the peer review process to suppress contrary science and funding of scientists with contrary views.
    3. Manipulation of the peer review process to allow flawed science to be published as credible.
    4. Bold statements declaring the science to be settled, an outright dismissal of any contrary evidence and a blatant attempt to quash any further debate or even the perception of the need for debate.
    5. Labeling of those with skeptical views “denialists” in an attempt to not only discredit the evidence they present, but to associate them with an evil cadre of intensely bigoted fringe elements who deny the murder of millions in the Holocaust.
    6. Calls by various people in the environmental movement to make skeptical views a criminal offence, studies suggesting skeptics are predisposed to disbelieve based on defects in their intelligence, upbringing, or genetic disposition. Calls for the captains of industry to be subjected to Nuremerg style trials for crimes against humanity.
    7. The advancement of the “Precautionary Priniciple”, a philisophical argument predicated on the notion that the potential outcome is so disastrous that strong steps toward mitigation must be enacted despite any doubts raised regarding the science, and with no regard to the damage that the mitigation steps themselves would cause.
    8. The Greenpeace editorial (later withdrawn) making veiled threats of violence toward skeptics and business leaders accompanied by not so veiled suggestions that “we know where you work, we know where you live”.
    9. The 10:10 video (also now withdrawn) which on a pretense of humour and satire, depicts the murder of skeptics as nonchalantly as one exterminates vermin. By their own admission, they think the notion humurous, and cannot really understand the outcry they have caused.

    As I said at the beginning, the 10:10 video in isolation is vile, in the historical context above it is the culmination of a process, which, if not derailed, ends in something horrific. That the envrinomentalists of 10:10 could not see the horror of their own creation is a consequence of the world in which they have immersed themselves. A world in which the critical science was suppressed, then dismissed, then associated with fringe elements of society regarded in general as evil, then painted as criminal, followed by veiled threats and finaly, overt threats.

    The abandonment of fact and reason in this progression is readily apparent, the parallels in history striking, and the next steps frightening. There is no amount of coverage of this video that is too much, and the demand that they back down and return to a frank and honest scientific discussion is a moral obligation for the rest of us to make of them, for their good as well as our own.

  102. >>It’s really interesting that you mention terrorism and hatred of
    >>Western values on this thread, since this very video was produced
    >>by environmentalist groups which are in fact generating educational
    >>school programmes.

    Eco-fanaticism has little in common with traditional Western values – it it totalitarian, overbearing, ideological, arrogant, aggressive and decidedly undemocratic. In fact, it is rather similar to the Muslim fanatics we often see in the West.

    This is why the educational comment I made is pertinent to this thread, and why that brilliant spoof of this despicable video worked so well (but it has been deleted from YouTube by Spanner Films Ltd.)

    P.S. It is rather funny that Spanner Films are desperate to protect the copyright on a film that has been withdrawn by its backers, and they will not even acknowledge making in the first place!!

    .

  103. The problem for companies that sponsor this sort of environmental nonsense is that these groups are practising a religion and not thinking about the consequences for their sponsors.

    There are corporate risks to becoming known as one of the sponsors of an environmentalist movie that depicts the killing of children, and I imagine that a chill wind is blowing in the corporate halls of those sponsors.

    I would say keep reminding people that Sony, O2, Kyocera and possibly even the UK government were involved in sponsoring this disgusting piece.

  104. Recommendations:

    1. Reject the Badman review of homeschooling in England as inaccurate and requiring disproportionate policy responses

    2. “Acknowledge and celebrate the hard work of the many home educators in Britain who teach their children to an exceptionally high standard”

    3. “Recognize the excellent value they represent to the Government”

    4. Do not “conflate welfare concerns with educational issues in government statements on home education”

    5. Do not give Local Authorities carte blanche to deny homeschoolers the right to educate their children

    6. Recognize that recommendations in the Badman Report “undermine human rights and civil liberties, not only of home educators, but of all parents.”

    Right of Reply: A Response to Graham Badman’s Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England

  105. Zeke the Sneak :
    October 5, 2010 at 9:34 am

    But, but, but,
    Your list does not address the problem of ingrown communities in a collision course with the rest of the society that want to educate their children their own way, be they Christian Scientists or some cults or Islamic fundamentalists or ….

    How can one have a multicultural society without a minimum of respect of law and custom and a minimum of common values?

    In previous centuries it was the solution by the sword. Now we are sweeping it under the carpet until it raises its head in some extreme manifestation. Is bad housekeeping the solution of a multicultural society?

    I believe it is correct to identify the education of the young for introducing tolerance and excluding intolerance. How one implements this is another question.

  106. It appears, aside from some of the other awful ad campaigns by activist groups, this kind of thing is not new or unique among ‘mainstream’ entities.

    http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/11/abc-tells-kids-save-the-planet-or-die/

    The makers were actually pleased when the ‘game’ received more widespread attention, and like the 10:10 group hoped to ‘have a laugh along the way”:

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/item_euZTHfClixIvXcBOGKbhTJ;jsessionid=51283CB2A70AA0D5ABF450B9567D1D90

    The site appears to be dead now, though at least one school district continues to list it on their web page as a learning tool. It looks like another case where public exposure put the lid on an offensive attempt to bring children onside the AGW hysteria by scaring them silly.

  107. Hi anna v,

    I am here in the US and although the home education clauses were dropped from the Children Schools and Families Act on April 7th 2010, this debate in England is not going to cease as the gov’t will continue to be consulting on definitions of “full-time education” and “suitable and efficient education.”

    Again, blind trust in the government to prevent “ingrown societies” or guarantee some kind of “multi-cultural society” or make sure children are not “disconnected from society” is misplaced, and are truly vague objectives. Protecting the rights of parents raise and educate their own children is a legitimate role for government; it is already enshrined by law and also reflected in Western tradition.

  108. What I’d like to know is which city would benefit the most from Mr Morano as Mayor? Or heck state as senator?

    New York City, Detroit, Los Angeles or the state of California?

    It’s funny to me he seem to fit best in NYC but I think the most beneficial financially speaking would be to Detroit, Los Angeles (or California as a whole).

    It’s always nice to have lots and lots of time on hand so one really can wonder about the greater issues in life . . . like troll bins for instance, have I ever visited such a interesting mysterious dark and shadowy, nooks and crannies laden, bin? If so, what was it like I wonder? o_O

  109. Sweden and Germany provide examples of what other European countries are rightly trying to avoid:

    “It is distressing that Sweden [referencing the state-sanctioned removal of 8-year-old Dominic Johansson from his parents more than a year ago] has begun to mimic the repressive actions of Germany, its neighbor to the south. Many German families have been forced to flee intense persecution in recent years and have settled in European countries such as Austria, France, Ireland, and the United Kingdom, where parents are free to choose the form of education that is best for their children. In a significant victory, the German Romeike family was granted political asylum in the United States in January 2010. The USA may well become a haven for Swedish families, too.

    In June 2010, the Swedish parliament passed a new education package that makes homeschooling all but illegal, due to a new phrase that allows homeschooling only in “exceptional circumstances.” Even prior to the new law, though, homeschoolers had been forced to comply with increasingly intricate restrictions. When a family submits an application to homeschool, local authorities typically ignore circumstances and instead react in an extremely prejudiced manner, demanding that the children attend public school.”

  110. Zeke the Sneak:
    October 5, 2010 at 11:14 am

    This is off topic but not irrelevant to this video, in the sense that it was aimed at children and those particular parents would consider it quite appropriate for their children, evidently from their response to the reaction of the “consensus” of those who viewed it.

    In traditional societies the clan/extended family/village had the role of overlooking the raising of children. Children were not at the mercy of their immediate parents without an eye from the extended society.

    In our fractured world, where the nuclear family has become the standard and grandparents and clan are a distant concept, the role of overseer has been taken by the government, and when it fails, it can fail spectacularly, as that case of the girl whose father had incarcerated her and had children with her.

    The government and its agencies have taken the responsibilities of protecting children from abuse from parents, and for making sure their rights are respected. Part of those rights is their education, that the children have a right to be educated to the standard and level of the rest of their peers in the society they will exist as adults.

    Children have rights, not only parents, so there should be rules governing home schooling that should be respected by all. One can discuss the content of the rules, but , in my opinion, the rules are a one way street if we do not want to find abused children, either as child labor or worse.

  111. The video shocked me but didn’t surprise me at all. After a few years teaching in English High schools, one realises that the ‘Nanny State’ has actually become a close approxiamation to a police state in which citizens going about their lives are under surveillance to an extent undreamed of twenty years ago and the late unlamented NuLabour party cranked out a huge amount of pro-green and anti freedom-of-conscience legislation, pass laws, etc. The pressure to conform to ‘new norms’ in official circles is quite alarming and I fear the Brit Establishment is becoming the creature it defeated in 1945.

  112. Interesting that some Brits are upset because this stroke was pulled by a bunch of half-witted fellow countrymen, with a nice, half-witted teacher from up north playing the lead role. There is definitely a difference between how a yank would view this and how a Brit would, no question about it. But it does give me a really warm feeling that these eco thugs have let slip their guard and revealed the true monster that lurks behind the AGW b+ll+cks.

  113. For you unemployed skeptics out there, I am sure 10:10 will be hiring a few ‘token’ skeptics on their team immediately. It will give them great publicity about diversity and openness. You could probably negotiate some SWEET perks.

    Laughing, John

  114. anna v, in your third paragraph you make the point that the state is necessarily subsuming the role of grandparents or the local village in overseeing the “nuclear family.” This is quaint but not the case. Distant bureaucracies making more and more legislation and restrictions for parents, ultimately using the threat of incarceration, is not comparable in any way shape or form to the presence in the lives of their children of extended families.

    Next you illustrate with two examples of abuse and imprisonment of children. This happens a lot: this is conflating welfare concerns with educational issues. There are plenty of laws and agencies which are responsible for responding to cases of abuse and neglect. Within the Badman Report, all four of the Serious Case Reviews were known to local agencies social workers, and police. As many as 9 agencies were involved in the case of one child who died.

    This is arguing that all parents must give up their right to educate their children to government, because existing government and law enforcement cannot do their jobs in cases of criminal neglect. That is no way forward for England or any other country.

    Children who receive a home education have parents who are greatly concerned with their development and want the best for them. Individual instruction and the flexiblity to persue the child’s personal interests are invaluable gifts these parents give, often sacrificing in other areas of their lives to do it. Outcomes are often excellent and not dependent on the education and training qualifications of the parents. Love, bonds and time together are the best classroom and teachers for the young developing mind. To attempt to remove this tradition from English society was rightfully and successfully resisted.

  115. John Whitman says:
    October 5, 2010 at 2:19 pm
    “For you unemployed skeptics out there, I am sure 10:10 will be hiring a few ‘token’ skeptics on their team immediately. ”

    You think they still have money?

  116. DirkH says:
    October 5, 2010 at 3:06 pm

    You think they still have money?

    ———————–

    DirkH,

    OK, you got a point, I am going to insist the pay me a year’s salary in advance. : )

    John

  117. Well, Zeke, it is obvious we are not seeing eye to eye on this.

    Something is criminal for a certain value of criminal, and some tradition is valuable for a certain value of valuable.

    For example, I consider it criminal that gypsy children are not sent to school and are educated at home/tent/mobile home by parents who consider that learning how to beg and acquiring skills in snatching purses is a valuable traditional lesson. Criminal for the children themselves, because they are people who may add a lot of value to a multicultural society if the edges are smoothed off ( as many have).

    Maybe you, living in the US, where assimilation or ghettos is the rule, have no idea of a multicultural society as an objective?

    You do not want overseers for nice middle class families with educated parents, but, ( ignoring the fact that monsters can be highly educated as the video shows us) equal opportunity means that this will let off the part of society whose children desperately need this overseeing because their traditional culture with its checks and balances is either at conflict with their existing reality or completely absent anyway.

    I hope that we disagree on the level of checks and balances needed within a society and the nuclear family, and not that such checks and balances should exist.

    It should be obvious I am using the “state” in general terms as organized society outside the nuclear family.

  118. Zeke [the Sneak] & anna,

    I enjoyed your exchange.

    Your topic of discussion is important. The relation of individuals (& families) to society.

    I must wait though for another time to join in.

    John

  119. The ad was ill-considered and a huge gaffe. Anyone who thinks or suggests that the video is actually encouraging violence and murder, or thinks anyone who saw it would be so incited, is weak-minded and foolish and just looking for something easy to rant about.

    This is just a straw man for those of you without a real scientific grasp on the issue can kick around to discredit climate change. Recess instead of doing yr homework. It’s a pity Franny gave to such an easy thread to pull at. The goal of 10:10, which is to have people really think about their energy consumption and be aware of it daily and try to reduce it in small ways, is a good one.

  120. fah fah fah says:
    October 6, 2010 at 7:35 am
    The ad was ill-considered and a huge gaffe. Anyone who thinks or suggests that the video is actually encouraging violence and murder, or thinks anyone who saw it would be so incited, is weak-minded and foolish and just looking for something easy to rant about.

    If this same material was posted by a student in the US, it would be taken seriously and reported to the authorities. This has become an unfortunate custom here since several famous school shootings. It was seen in hindsight that there were clear signals and warning signs that a violent act was being premeditated. If an environmentalist school outreach programme does it, you may brush it off as a gaffe, but a gaffe within a very important cultural and legal atmosphere. Now England has to decide how it will take violent threats. Are they idle gaffes when a student does it, or not? Is there a protected class of school activists who may enter the classroom and use violence against classmates to make a point?

  121. anna v, hi.

    I may be old fashioned, but I thought snatching purses was against the law.

    We do not need to make new laws for that.

    If you are talking about Muslim populations, England has a lot of issues to deal with first before it goes after innocent English citizens who wish to educate their children at home.

    Is circumcising girls going to be legal? Do you want to make stricter immigration laws, or punish citizens and remove freedoms from them because the gov’t allowed in large foreign populations, against the will of those citizens? Are honor killings legal? Can Muslims live by Sharia Law, and have a Sharia court in England?
    Start at the beginning with this!

    As it stands in the West, parents are responsible for the upbringing of their own children. The eighteen years you have with a child go so quickly. Spend it with them!
    “Gather ye rosebuds while ye may.”

    John Whitman, jump in any time…(-:

  122. >>Can Muslims live by Sharia Law, and have a Sharia court in
    >>England? Start at the beginning with this!

    But that would be grasping the nettle! Politicians in the UK cannot do that, so they tinker around the edges – and that is why you are losing some freedoms in home education. Not saying this is right, mind, just laying out the facts of this Brave New World (that nobody voted for).

    .

  123. @Ralph says: October 6, 2010 at 11:32 am

    Interesting bit about grasping the nettle and your politicians. For English demographics, language, and culture issues, it would help if having children came back into vogue. Or is that too wild and crazy.

    I hope it has been shown that the issue of home education gets conflated with the failures of all these other government policies such as immigration, protective services, law enforcement, welfare, public housing concentrated in certain areas, etc..

    And the solution suggested is…more government policies and restrictions!

  124. Hi Zeke,
    Zeke the Sneak says:
    October 6, 2010 at 10:09 am

    anna v, hi.

    I may be old fashioned, but I thought snatching purses was against the law.

    We do not need to make new laws for that.

    We are not talking of snatching purses, we are talking of homeschooling children on how to snatch purses.

    By what you write you give no value to a multicultural society. Fortunately or unfortunately Europe is one, and talking of “English citizens” is racial discrimination, because the Muslims are also British citizens . There should be one rule for all cultures in this multicultural society that willingly or not we have become.

    In order to have a handle on the new cultures that have been grafted on our lands, some of the freedoms of the old cultures will have to be sacrificed and compromises reached.

    In Greece homeschooling is allowed only for ill children who cannot attend a normal school. School attendance is compulsory for all greek citizens until the age of 14. This is not easily imposed on the nomadic Roma population, who evade it by not having a permanent address.
    The school has to be approved and have the approved curriculum from the ministry, but can be private, church sponsored or even other government sponsored.

    On a side note: Parents do not own children, but owe children a careful preparation for the realities they will face in the world. An extra demerit of home schooling, imo, is the lack of socialization and competition with a peer group of children to prepare them for the world outside. It is a disservice to the children to protect them in a greenhouse until the age of 18, again in my opinion.

  125. fah fah fah says:
    October 6, 2010 at 7:35 am
    The goal of 10:10, which is to have people really think about their energy consumption and be aware of it daily and try to reduce it in small ways, is a good one.
    No, their goal, which is clearly stated is to reduce “carbon emissions” by 10% a year. It’s nothing but a feel-good ploy, to make the useful idiots who Believe in the CAGW/CC/CD mantra.
    Anyone who really wants to reduce their energy consumption already knows how to do so, and the only reason to (or not to) is simple: if it saves money. Saving money is good, and is a good goal for anyone. “Saving the planet”, on the other hand is little more than Green Religion. It most certainly has nothing to do with science.

  126. Legally what you are arguing is that parents must be assumed to be unfit to raise their own children, and the state must educate them in all circumstances.

    Current laws and historic court decisions in both the US and England assume the right, fitness, and “high duty” of parents to raise their own children.

    Therefore, what you are arguing for in the case of these two countries is an unprovoked massive expansion of government into intrinsic family relationships, stripping parents of legal and traditional rights, and re-casting the citizens as incompetent and unfit.

  127. Zeke the Sneak says:
    October 6, 2010 at 7:34 pm

    Checks and balances are not black and white. If wise people devise them they can be extremely useful.
    Example: parental authority rules unless the court decides the parents unfit.

    I know that in the US you have the Amish, and the Mormons and who knows who else who benefit from the lessez faire attitude of the states to a lot of societal general customs. ( still polygamy is outlawed though). Also you have the “melting pot” mentality where cultures are assimilated and third generation people become mainstream. Up to now this has worked. I do know what will happen when your latin american population reaches large numbers, though.

    It is not the tradition in fossilized Europe which is faced, England first because of the sins of the Imperial past, with a large influx of new cultural input. Have you been to the London underground? The majority are of different than english culture. A modus vivendi has to be found and a law and order procedure that will respect equal rights and non racial discrimination for all. This means the original populations will have to compromise to a change of their customs to allow for a smooth transit to the multicultural society: smooth means no social unrest and not nurturing terrorism.

    Schools and schooling are an important part of this tradition, and home schooling’s check and balances have to be finely tuned so as to progress towards a tolerant society from all directions.

    In Greece, where we are used to the imperative of the public/state school attendance for children nobody thinks it a hardship not to be allowed to educate the children at home uniquely. They can always do it after school hours and days.

  128. anna & Zeke,

    When another opportunity to discuss your subject comes up on a future thread I will join. Another time . . . . . just toooo many irons in the fire for me right now.

    There are certain questions that are litmus tests of a person’s fundamental views of mankind and of philosophy in general. The question of the relationship of individuals (and families) to society is one of them. That is why I find it a key topic.

    John

  129. There is no legitimate role or future for government in creating a “tolerant society” and a “multi-cultural” society, esp. by radically overturning existing rights, duties, laws and court decisions.

    Neither is this a legitimate objective for education.

    Educational standards to which citizens agree on a state-by-state basis include hours of instruction (for example, 800 per year) and subjects taught (Language Arts, Social Science, Math, Science, Phys-Ed, Art/Music.)

    The success of homeschooling parents in educating their children by providing individualized attention as well as flexibility are reflected in tests in which homeschooled students outperform their peers in public schools.

    National Average Percentile Scores
    Subtest Homeschool Public School
    Reading 89 50
    Language 84 50
    Math 84 50
    Science 86 50
    Social Studies 84 50
    Corea 88 50
    Compositeb 86 50
    a. Core is a combination of Reading, Language, and Math.
    b. Composite is a combination of all subtests that the student took on the test.

  130. Zeke the Sneak says:
    October 7, 2010 at 9:05 am

    Well, Zeke, we will not agree on this, I suspect because we live in different societies. Even in Greece we are turning into a multicultural society: albanians, bulgarians, rumanians, nigerians, pakistanis, chinese, …. and the indigenous turks and roma.
    Organized society, called government and its agencies, somehow has to deal with this and introduce a minimum of homogenization that will allow smooth running of the country, i.e. no terrorist cells and gross dissatisfactions . The handle of schooling is important to this objective, as I see it.

    Your comparison of home schooled in the us and public schooled made me laugh.
    According to your table all children then should be home schooled by law. You know what would happen? Back to feudal conditions where illiteracy was 70% or more.
    It is evident that the home schooled sample has educated and affluent parents, who can afford the time and effort of schooling, if they are not paying tutors.

    The true comparison would be taking the home background of the public school children into account: education and income of parents .

  131. The test:

    Drawing from 15 independent testing services, the Progress Report 2009: Homeschool Academic Achievement and Demographics included 11,739 homeschooled students from all 50 states who took three well-known tests—California Achievement Test, Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, and Stanford Achievement Test for the 2007–08 academic year. The Progress Report is the most comprehensive homeschool academic study ever completed.

    “As mentioned earlier, the achievement gaps that are well-documented in public school between
    boys and girls,
    parents with lower incomes, and
    parents with lower levels of education

    are not found among homeschoolers.

    While it is not possible to draw a definitive conclusion, it does appear from all the existing research that homeschooling equalizes every student upwards. Homeschoolers are actually achieving every day what the public schools claim are their goals—to narrow achievement gaps and to educate each child to a high level.

    Of course, an education movement which consistently shows that children can be educated to a standard significantly above the average public school student at a fraction of the cost—the average spent by participants in the Progress Report was about $500 per child per year as opposed to the public school average of nearly $10,000 per child per year—will inevitably draw attention from the K-12 public education industry.”
    http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/200908100.asp

  132. Household income had little impact on the results of homeschooled students.

    $34,999 or less—85th percentile
    $35,000–$49,999—86th percentile
    $50,000–$69,999—86th percentile
    $70,000 or more—89th percentile

    The education level of the parents made a noticeable difference, but the homeschooled children of non-college educated parents still scored in the 83rd percentile, which is well above the national average.

    Neither parent has a college degree—83rd percentile
    One parent has a college degree—86th percentile
    Both parents have a college degree—90th percentile

    Parental spending on home education made little difference.

    Spent $600 or more on the student—89th percentile
    Spent under $600 on the student—86th percentile

    The extent of government regulation on homeschoolers did not affect the results.

    Low state regulation—87th percentile
    Medium state regulation—88th percentile
    High state regulation—87th percentile

  133. But Zeke, the true comparison would be by finding a sample of public school children where the parents had the same education and income as the home schooled children.
    Of course dedicated and caring parents will have a great effect possibly with minimum expenditure.

    The objective of “wasting”money on teachers for the hoi polloi is in order to bring up the educational level of as many people in society as possible. Feudal systems worked on the elitist principle, usually with the moral support of religion. Knowledge was not to be distributed to the masses.
    This is not the objective of modern societies, at least as far as I know.

  134. anna v says:
    October 7, 2010 at 10:30 am
    Of course dedicated and caring parents will have a great effect possibly with minimum expenditure.

    Yes, and unbelievably, it is the goal of many to make it illegal.

    Teachers unions and those who desire a UN agency to determine domestic educational policies in the US are working hard at this right now. They expect to bypass all of us and state laws in the most slippery, slimey way, by ratifying a Treaty.

Comments are closed.