Lobal cooling

June 21, 2011

A denialist's brain: recent scans show evidence of cooling

The Man who writes stuff like this…

Sure Glenn Beck has his faults but they are vastly outweighed by his strengths: his fearlessness in speaking truth to power; his gift for explaining political ideas in a way that galvanises the attention of Middle America; his sheer entertainment value

And this…

the values of the eugenics movement and of the modern green movement are closely connected

Brings you this:

It’s official: a new Ice Age is on its way. In what has been described as “the science story of the century”, heavyweight US solar physicists have announced that the sun is heading for a prolonged period of low activity. This makes global cooling a much more plausible prospect in the next few decades than global warming.

Sadly one of the heavyweight US solar physicists (only heavyweight when they’re telling you what you want to hear, it seems) has had to issue a follow-up statement [see bottom of page]:

We are NOT predicting a mini-ice age. We are predicting the behavior of the solar cycle. In my opinion, it is a huge leap from that to an abrupt global cooling, since the connections between solar activity and climate are still very poorly understood. My understanding is that current calculations suggest only a 0.3 degree C decrease from a Maunder-like minimum, too small for an ice age. It is unfortunate that the global warming/cooling studies have become so politically polarizing.

Delingpole is one of the ringleaders of the denialist movement and when any of his claims about climate science is examined it leads to a similar misinterpretation/incontrovertible lie. But good on them for winning the propaganda war.


The tabloid fallacies of immigration

April 30, 2010

Angry Mob and Tabloid Watch have interesting things to say about the Gillian Duffy factor, especially the tabloid lie that immigration has until now been a taboo subject, except this granny has somehow, single-handedly, untied the national tongue so that everyone can shout “IMMI-FUCKING-GRATION!” from the rooftops of Britain. Except that it’s a flagrant fucking lie. Read them (↑).


April 23, 2010

We knew it would get ugly but maybe not this ugly. April 15 was the date that Nick Clegg punctured the political/press/PR gasbag and left them all a muddle.

I couldn’t contain a squirm of  Schadenfreude when it became apparent that the Lib Dems had lopped the Conservative tree and trampled on Labour’s rose. You can imagine the chagrin of the tabloid nexus at seeing the Tories’ lead dwindle, and the years of election hopes dashed by the third party. Labour’s cronies must be equally shocked at being outgunned by the Cleggster. What a delight to see the glib bastards rattled and disarrayed.

It wasn’t long before the press backlash began, as expected. Plenty of opprobrium was heaped on Clegg, especially on the morning of the second debate. The Telegraph had something about donors and bank accounts, the Mail a ‘Nazi slur’;  the Express screamed about a ‘crazy’ immigration policy. The criticism has been so intense that Clegg’s election coordinator, Danny Alexander, claimed that the Tories had orchestrated a media campaign.

Peter Oborne writing in the Mail found his inner Littlejohn and wrote this spiteful bollocks:

‘The truth is that Clegg is the leader of a profoundly dishonest party that is prepared to lie, cheat and on occasion issue outrageous smears on its opponents in order to win power.’

Equally applicable to all parties, more so to Labour and Conservatives in my opinion. And at least the Lib Damns have for years been advocating the reform of the political system so that dishonesty, lies, cheating and outrageous smears aren’t the modus operandi of British politics.

Despite all the violent criticism, Rasputin refuses to die–the Lib Dems remain strong in the polls. Maybe the conservative press is using diversionary tactics by obsessively focussing on Clegg  so the electorate might forget about the inconvenient Vince Cable whose ability and likeability make him one of the biggest political assets in the Commons.


March 11, 2010

The Sun, Star, Mail, Express, Telegraph and even the Times have all run with a ‘story’ about red hair being caused by ‘weather’, chiefly Scottish weather because you can stick a picture of a Scottish celeb into your page leaving less room for embarrassingly inept journalism.  This inane story originated in a genetics student’s musings in the Edinburgh University science magazine. I’m not sure how to express in words how stupid and lazy it is for a newspaper to publish this story. For most of the British press to publish it is weird.

The Mail ‘reveals’

The 26-year-old came up with the theory, ‘genetic mutation + bad weather = red heads’, in an article about her sister’s red hair for a University of Edinburgh magazine.

Ms Pritchard conceded her weather-based theory ‘was speculation rather than scientific study, but it is plausible’.

If it was speculation then why publish it?
The Telegraph has this moronic juxtaposition: the sub-heading contains “new research has claimed” before opening the first paragraph with “The non scientific research found”.
Not only is the story based on a non scientific article, it is obvious to fucking anyone why Africans are black and Europeans are white, even if we have to wait for geneticists to find proof. And it is a theory which has been around for tens if not hundreds of years. Can the national readership be this stupid?

The Health ‘n’ Safety myth industry debunked

January 14, 2010

BBC 4’s Woman’s Hour interviewed elf ‘n’ safety chair Judith Hackett yesterday. She went into some detail about the misrepresentation of the HSE by the media. Thankfully the HSE has an antidote to most of this fabulation in their Myth of the Month page, going back to 2007.

Health and Safety stories have become an exceedingly easy way to ratchet the indignation of an angry readership. Stories like conkers being banned at schools (no they weren’t) are so beautifully seductive to both hack and reader; the journalist can make up all the lies he wants and never risk litigation, the reader can further convince himself that the world is indeed going (or has gone) mad.

Some indication of the magnitude of the reservoir of spurious health and safety stories is apparent in the numbers of them published in the papers whose very existences, it would seem, depend on the lies of tabloid journalists. These stories are oxygen for The Daily Mail and The Telegraph. Searching their sites you get the following results:

“health and safety” in Daily Mail = 4738

“elf ‘n’ safety” in Daily Mail = 140*

“health and safety” in Telegraph = 6360

The latest one to emerge is that you’ll face prosecution for clearing the snow outside your home. Another risible lie, but a myth which has had the momentum to carry it abroad. People in Ireland actually believe this shibboleth too. Nothing to do with the Irish Daily Mail, would it?

*Richard Littlejohn coined the term ‘elf ‘n’ safety’. He is arguably the most strident critic writing about the HSE and its fascist agenda, which he does from his home in Florida.

Some of the best media critique around

January 7, 2010

Tabloid Watch is a relatively young blog doing exactly what it says on the tin, exceptionally well.

Violence against children is OK; it must be true, it’s in the newspapers

January 4, 2010

It always starts with a study. Marjorie Gunnoe, professor of psychology at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, has carried out research demonstrating that children who get a bit of a smacking fare better than their un-smacked counterparts in adulthood.

Keyword of the last paragraph: Calvin. He’s the man who created Calvinism. For the enlightenment of the uninitiated, that’s a variant of Christianity.

Ms Gunnoe is a professor of psychology at a Christian college. Their mission statement contains this nugget: ‘We pledge fidelity to Jesus Christ’. This in itself doesn’t discredit the research, rather it behoves the journalist who cites the ‘study’ to disclose the potentially biased background in which the research was conducted. Neither The Times, The Daily Express, The Telegraph nor The Daily Mail did this when they lazily, bovinely and uncritically published the conclusions of the research. But the damage is done. This story has gone viral and there’s no stopping it.

This could be a brilliant and rigorous study but the trouble is you won’t find it anywhere. At least I didn’t. No link to it appeared in the above articles and I couldn’t find it anywhere in a search engine, despite a frenzied array of search-term permutations. It never appeared. Nor did the biggest newpapers in the land reveal to the dupable reader the name of the prestigious journal in which the study appeared. Absolutely nothing. The British nationals simply gulped it down without a grimace, when they should have gagged on it.

It is quite possible that the only thing this study proves is that national newspapers don’t give a cuddly cudgel about checking their facts, and that a substantial tranche of the national press practically exults in stories which surreptitiously advocate violence against children.

It’s a wet dream for family advocacy groups, authoritarians and tabloid readers everywhere. Proof that the loony-left have spared the rod and spoiled the children with their progressive pacifism. None of your PC-gone-mad/yuman rights, just a good leathering like what we used to do when we won the war. Obviously children need a smack every once in a while to safeguard against them becoming undisciplined chavs or godless homos.

These ‘studies’ seem thin on study but conspicuously good at absolving you of the guilt you’re suffering from being physically aggressive to your children.  Sorry, I meant smacking. Because there is an important distinction. Apparently.