>(loband)- original | Report error

Blogroll

icon18_wrench_allbkg[i-icon18_wrench_allbkg]

Climate Change

Blog Archive

icon18_wrench_allbkg[i-icon18_wrench_allbkg]

Counters



Site Meter[i-Site Meter]
icon18_wrench_allbkg[i-icon18_wrench_allbkg]
Showing posts with label greenies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label greenies. Show all posts

In a new report, Friends of the Earth Europe is crying foul about the production of biofuels, claiming it is leading to a land grab in Africa.

In the best patronising style of the liberal neo-colonialists, it thinks the niggers should be using the land to grow subsistence crops instead of generating economic activity on the backs of gullible Europeans, which can then be taxed and used to foster independence from whitey and his NGOs (like Friends of the Earth).

As much to the point, the greenies and their supporters see better revenue earning opportunities in REDD, where they can turn the forests of Africa into carbon credits, freezing economic development and making the nigger totally dependent on whitey and his NGOs.

Thus, the report is far from what it seems. The very fact that it is produced by Friends of the Earth Europe – a publicly-funded body, heavily supported by the EU, tells you there is an agenda here.

But it also gets additional support from the EU Commission, the Sigrid Rausing Trust, the Isvara Foundation, a rather dubious German Catholic agency called MISEREOR and an advocacy group called GRAIN. The Netzwerk Africa-Deutschland and Markus Bier (a geographer from the University of Aachen) are also in there, plus Greenpeace.

This is an interesting if not untypical mix – the EU, Christian evangelicals, largely German greens and academia. These are the new colonists, spreading the word in the name of their religion of neo-environmentalism.

But it also shows up the stresses within the EU, where the German green faction is seeking to frustrate EU policy. As we get more of this, we will see the EU tearing itself apart with its own money (our money). The creed has nowhere to go but down.

COMMENT THREAD

I could not resist a "quickie" on this one.

"Rare earths, a class of metallic elements that are highly reactive (er ... no - many are not. ed), are essential for the next generation of 'green' technologies. The battery in a Toyota Prius car contains more than 22lb of lanthanum. Low-energy lightbulbs need terbium. The permanent magnets used in a 3 megawatt wind turbine use 2 tons of neodymium and other rare earths."

So says The Sunday Times.

And the biggest source of these elements is China, where they are mined in the most appalling conditions, causing significant pollution and untold human misery ... all so rich Westerners can prattle on about their green credentials and how they are saving the planet. And there is no realistic alternative to China – they have the biggest deposits.

But, asks Mark Smith, chief executive of Molycorp Minerals, a US mining firm, "If the purpose of putting hybrid vehicles on the road is to lower our dependence on foreign oil, and all we're doing is buying cars that need Chinese rare earth materials, aren't we trading one dependence for another?"

Indeed we are. But as long as the sanctimonious little Greenies get their feel-good factor out of it, why should they care? Doesn't the Boy Cameron have a Prius, by the way?

Back to Afghanistan. Sigh!

COMMENT THREAD

IPPR[i-IPPR]That is the finding – or at least one of the findings – from a report by the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) on "climate change".

The IPPR has been conducting a series of "workshops", focus groups and other types of malarkey and found out that, when the subject is brought up, many "participants" expressed a weariness and fatigue about the subject. Many of the workshops became notably less animated following the introduction of climate change as a topic for discussion. Some found the issue very boring. Others dismissed it as "faddy" and "trendy".

It would have been nice to bring you more but the report turned out to be rather boring as well – incredibly so. Relying on a much shorter summary in The Guardian therefore, we get a much stiffer message. The general public are (is) resentful, cynical and resigned when it comes to the issue of "climate change", we are told.

Despite all the work the greenies have been putting in, it seems that, although there was a general acceptance that climate change is happening, most people thought that humans are unlikely to be wholly responsible. Some – probably to the despair of the greenies - confused climate change with ozone layer depletion. Others linked climate change to recycling, remarking that by recycling they thought they were already "doing their bit" and did not necessarily feel they had to do any more.

There was also general cynicism about the motivations of the government in pushing for action. A common thread was that the government could be using the issue as a means of increasing taxation. Others highlighted inconsistencies and hypocrisy on the part of government and corporations, such as the decision to grant permission for the building of the third runway at Heathrow.

The study, though, was not carried out to find out what we think. Its purpose was to explore peoples' attitudes in order to find out what buttons to press in order to turn them into rabid greenies who will happily adopt "lower-carbon lifestyles" – which includes, it seems, having your holidays in Britain and going there by train.

Other advice is to avoid the term "carbon dioxide" as people have difficulty accepting that an invisible gas is problematic. Instead, campaigners are advised to use the word "carbon", which is seen as black and "dirty", and where possible to refer to "pollution". Geoffrey Lean, one of the team of resident greenies on the Telegraph, has obviously read the report and has been quick to adjust his vocabulary.

The report then says something about using humour and sarcasm in the messages, people being more likely to respond to that than the "holier-than-thou" planet-saving schmuck normally churned out. The greenies will certainly score on the humour front, suggesting that people take the train to their hols, especially when a single train fare is likely to cost more than a two-week break in Benidorm for a family of four.

That apart, the greenies are also not unfamiliar with sarcasm, although they tend these days to be on the receiving end of it, especially when we are confronted with their increasingly pathetic attempts to convince us (and themselves) that the planet is still warming up.

There will certainly be sarcasm aplenty this winter as we scrape the accumulations of "global warming" off our cars and doorsteps, but I suspect that this will not quite be what the greenies have in mind.

COMMENT THREAD

>(loband)- This page might not display properly. designed by Aptivate