Thursday, December 10, 2015

Stuff happens. Live with it, or die, who cares, or how to be a Lomborgian philosopher ...

(Above: and more Moir here).

The pond has been studiously avoiding the Lomborgians during the current Paris talks, but felt an obligation - the Lomborgians are hot contenders for the pond's 'lizard Oz climate science scribbler of the year' award - to take notice of today's effort, which might just sway the judges before they scribble the winning name and tuck it into the envelope.

It's true that it is feeble, and short, and clearly written in haste, and as a result, has even greater charm:

The formatting leaves something to be desired - much like Google's current fiddling with the way blogs are formatted, which has produced something of a total fuck up and led to many tears and much frustration at the pond - but let us not use form as a distraction from content ...

Now it takes a really sublime form of sociopathic thinking to scribble blithely a sentence such as:

So if we worry about civil war being partly caused by global warming in Syria, we should also be thankful that global warming makes civil war less likely in these other countries.

As if that's some consolation to the poor fuckers in Syria, or some of the other heat-stressed folk around the world who might decide to bung on a do once the eggs start cooking on the bonnet...

And how about that carefree other line ...

Since global warming will overall mean increased precipitation, the fact that some nations will experience more drought also means other nations won't ...

It's really code for that ancient standby - sorry baby there are winners and losers in this world, but don't worry if you're a loser, just worry if me and you - or at least me - aren't the winners...

And so with a single line, the Lomborgians turned only a fair average entry into a white hot contender.

Is it enough to discombobulate the prime contender, Moorice 'the infallible' Newman?

Only time will tell ...

The tragedy is that we're never likely to know what the Bolter thinks of the Lomborgians talking as if climate change was real and there were many reasons to take it seriously ... he's off working for the ABC, perhaps on an alternative career path as the resident contrarian, at least when Pauline Hanson's not around to support Abbott...

But thanks to the Lomborgians, it seems some have moved down the chart a little, while the Bolter stays at the first stage ...

Of course it would seem that chart is now in urgent modification.

3a. Shit happens for some, not for others. Isn't that nifty? No problem there, there no problem at all ...


  1. A tragedy indeed Dot and so very inconvenient for the Bolter - or is it convenient? Who can tell with the clever white contrarians? - that he has been offered a job with the ABC at this time and what a disappointment to his followers that he has chosen to work with the biased ABC 'greenfilth left' rather than keep them up to date with his climate science insights.

    One wonders how the ABC can afford him.

  2. Hi Dorothy,

    I’m sure Lomborg would also decry any attempt to associate the rise of Boko Haram in Nigeria with Climate Change.

Its all down to bad water management anyway, watch how a proper Lomborgian handles his resources;


  3. Possibly it's a clever move by Bolt. Perhaps he sees the way things are going and this gives him a chance to be 'converted' - 'I was a denialist, and then I saw the light' (not 'I was an opportunist who wrote whatever my paymaster wanted, until it became unfeasible, when I switched sides')

  4. Australia’s poor cop out at Paris climate talks? - Tim Flannery

    Greg Hunt proclaimed that Australia would overshoot its 2013-2020 target by 28 million tonnes. This seemed like a grand claim, even when you consider that cutting our emissions by 5% below 2000 levels by 2020 is a (very) small target. So, how was this possible?

    Is this cheating?

    Some countries think so....

    Australia, on the other hand, is relying desperately on these loophole credits. If Australia were to follow suit we would actually be on track to undershoot our (very small) target by a whopping 100 million tonnes.

  5. Look we'll just relocate a few billion of the world's poorest people from their newly-drought stricken areas to those new food bowls opening up just waiting for agricultural exploitation. Simple!

    Most of 'em are just economic refugees anyway, so it won't matter where we send them, will it?


Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.