THE PSYCHOLOGIST : Another very negative view of COP 26

Another very negative view of COP 26

It's just a great excuse for the rich and powerful to have a satisfying get-together. It CANNOT achieve anything. Change is up to the national legislatures

By DAN WOOTTON

I don't know which image of unbridled hypocrisy, sickening privilege and total tone-deafness made me fume more.

The parade of 400 private jets parked up at Scottish airports as world leaders, royalty and billionaires gushed out more carbon within a 24-hour period than most of us will in a lifetime in order to arrive at Cop26 and preach that we must all change our lives forever more in order to reach Net Zero by 2050.

Or the dangerous Insulate Britain criminals splayed once more on the roads, this time in Manchester, to stop more hardworking Brits from going to work, taking their kids to school or getting to hospital when most of these eco-terrorists haven't even bothered to properly insulate their own homes.

And that's just the start of the maddening spectacle of Flop26 over the past 48 hours.

There have been hyperbolic statements about the end of the world designed to terrify our children from the great and the good; a sweary display from that omnipresent sulky teen Greta Thunberg; no shows from China and Russia; the Archbishop of Canterbury comparing the climate debate to Nazi appeasement; and Prince Charles blatantly wading into politics yet again by demanding a 'vast military-style campaign' to reduce emissions.

In fact, I'd go as far to say there's never been a bigger disconnect between everyday Brits and the political, business and media elite determined to tell us what we must do while not changing a thing about their own lovely lives.

And I say all of this as a passionate environmentalist.

I actually spent much of my own youth as some sort of 1980s Kiwi Thunberg wannabe, writing songs and campaigning about the hole in the Ozone Layer that, you might remember, was going to lead to our imminent demise.

Yup, I was one of those terrified youngsters back then who listened to the environmental doomsday merchants with complete terror.

But guess what? Moderate changes to chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) in spray cans and refrigerants over a period of time have meant that the Ozone hole has actually shrunk in recent years!

The world survived the warnings from the hysterical campaigners (again) and I learnt a big lesson that constant scare campaigns from people who jet around the globe in private jets is not the best way to tackle climate change or environmental issues.

This is where you would hope the so-called independent British broadcast media would step in to bring a degree of perspective to Cop26 proceedings.

Chance would be a fine thing.

Instead, we've had hysterical Channel 4 News anchor Jon Snow tweeting on his way to the summit: 'En route to COP26 - trees and branches affected by climate change have slowed our rail journey - tho the branches have been cleared we are doen (sic) to 5mph - What an irony! What a message! We MUST change! Dare we hope that we shall?'

Er, is a so-called impartial broadcaster really trying to claim that branches never fell onto train lines thanks to storms before the so-called 'climate emergency'?

Sky News' craven coverage has been unsurprising, given they are an official sponsor of Cop26 and run a dire daily climate show.

But I'd like to see one of their journalists question the company's own chief executive Dana Strong, who spent the first half of the year commuting to her job in London from Philadelphia in the US via – you guessed it – private jet!

And, despite forcing its own TV dramas to start including characters driving electric cars and rejecting meat for vegan dishes, Sky had the audacity to defend the 3,500-mile transatlantic commute.

A spokesperson for the company said: 'Many CEOs leading multinational companies have schedules that mean it is appropriate to use different modes of transport. It is critical to counterbalance this, that is why we offset carbon emissions caused by the business travel of Sky employees.'

Translation: While we're telling our viewers to stop going on holiday and reduce meat consumption, if you're rich, you don't need to change a damn thing.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10157499/I-want-save-planet-resent-told-it.html

No comments:

Background

The essence of conservatism is caution. The essence of Leftism is anger

This blog is written solely by John Ray, who has a Ph.D. degree in psychology and 200+ papers published in the academic journals of the social sciences. It does occasionally comment on issues in psychology but is mainly aimed at giving a conservative psychologist's view on a broad range of topics. There are very few conservative psychologists.

The blog originated in Australia and many (but not most) posts discuss Australian matters. Australians have an unusually good awareness of events outside their own country. Australian newspapers feature news from Britain and the USA not as an afterthought but as a major part of their coverage. So Australians do tend to have a truly Western heart, which is the reason behind the old name for this blog. So events in Australia, Britain and the USA all feature frequently here, plus occasional coverage of other places, particularly Israel.

A primer in American politics for non-Americans:

SCOTUS is the Supreme Court of the United States, the highest court in the land

The "GOP" stands for "Grand Old Party" and refers to the Republican party. The GOP is at present center/Right, while the Democrats have been undergoing a steady drift Leftwards and now have policies similar to mainstream European Leftist parties.

The ideological identity of both parties has however been very fluid -- almost reversing itself over time. In the mid 19th century, the GOP was the party of big government and concern for minorities while the Democrats advertised themselves as "The party of the white man" -- an orientation that lasted into the mid 20th century in the South. The Democrats are still obsessed with race but have now flipped into support for discrimination AGAINST whites.

Was Pope Urban VIII the first Warmist? Below we see him refusing to look through Galileo's telescope. People tend to refuse to consider evidence— if what they might discover contradicts what they believe.

Global warming

Calibrated in whole degrees. Larger graph here

Climate scientist Lennart Bengtsson said. “The warming we have had the last 100 years is so small that if we didn’t have meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn’t have noticed it at all.”

The term "Fascism" is mostly used by the Left as a brainless term of abuse. But when they do make a serious attempt to define it, they produce very complex and elaborate definitions -- e.g. here and here. In fact, Fascism is simply extreme socialism plus nationalism. But great gyrations are needed to avoid mentioning the first part of that recipe, of course.

Two examples of Leftist racism below (much more here and here):

Beatrice Webb, a founder of the London School of Economics and the Fabian Society, and married to a Labour MP, mused in 1922 on whether when English children were "dying from lack of milk", one should extend "the charitable impulse" to Russian and Chinese children who, if saved this year, might anyway die next. Besides, she continued, there was "the larger question of whether those races are desirable inhabitants" and "obviously" one wouldn't "spend one's available income" on "a Central African negro".

Hugh Dalton, offered the Colonial Office during Attlee's 1945-51 Labour government, turned it down because "I had a horrid vision of pullulating, poverty stricken, diseased nigger communities, for whom one can do nothing in the short run and who, the more one tries to help them, are querulous and ungrateful."

Defensible and indefensible usages of the term "racism"

The book, The authoritarian personality, authored by T.W. Adorno et al. in 1950, has been massively popular among psychologists. It claims that a set of ideas that were popular in the "Progressive"-dominated America of the prewar era were "authoritarian". Leftist regimes always are authoritarian so that claim was not a big problem. What was quite amazing however is that Adorno et al. identified such ideas as "conservative". They were in fact simply popular ideas of the day but ones that had been most heavily promoted by the Left right up until the then-recent WWII. See here for details of prewar "Progressive" thinking.

R.I.P. Augusto Pinochet. Pinochet deposed a law-defying Marxist President at the express and desperate invitation of the Chilean parliament. He pioneered the free-market reforms which Reagan and Thatcher later unleashed to world-changing effect. That he used far-Leftist methods to suppress far-Leftist violence is reasonable if not ideal. The Leftist view that they should have a monopoly of violence and that others should follow the law is a total absurdity which shows only that their hate overcomes their reason

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a war criminal. Both British and American codebreakers had cracked the Japanese naval code so FDR knew what was coming at Pearl Harbor. But for his own political reasons he warned no-one there. So responsibility for the civilian and military deaths at Pearl Harbor lies with FDR as well as with the Japanese. The huge firepower available at Pearl Harbor, both aboard ship and on land, could have largely neutered the attack. Can you imagine 8 battleships and various lesser craft firing all their AA batteries as the Japanese came in? The Japanese naval airforce would have been annihilated and the war would have been over before it began.

FDR prolonged the Depression. He certainly didn't cure it.

WWII did NOT end the Great Depression. It just concealed it. It in fact made living standards worse

Joe McCarthy was eventually proved right after the fall of the Soviet Union. To accuse anyone of McCarthyism is to accuse them of accuracy!

The KKK was intimately associated with the Democratic party. They ATTACKED Republicans!

People who mention differences in black vs. white IQ are these days almost universally howled down and subjected to the most extreme abuse. I am a psychometrician, however, so I feel obliged to defend the scientific truth of the matter:

The average African adult has about the same IQ as an average white 11-year-old and African Americans (who are partly white in ancestry) average out at a mental age of 14. The American Psychological Association is generally Left-leaning but it is the world's most prestigious body of academic psychologists. And even they have had to concede that sort of gap (one SD) in black vs. white average IQ. 11-year olds can do a lot of things but they also have their limits and there are times when such limits need to be allowed for.

America's uncivil war was caused by trade protectionism. The slavery issue was just camouflage, as Abraham Lincoln himself admitted. See also here

Did William Zantzinger kill poor Hattie Carroll?

Did Bismarck predict where WWI would start or was it just a "free" translation by Churchill?

Leftist psychologists have an amusingly simplistic conception of military organizations and military men. They seem to base it on occasions they have seen troops marching together on parade rather than any real knowledge of military men and the military life. They think that military men are "rigid" -- automatons who are unable to adjust to new challenges or think for themselves. What is incomprehensible to them is that being kadaver gehorsam (to use the extreme Prussian term for following orders) actually requires great flexibility -- enough flexibility to put your own ideas and wishes aside and do something very difficult. Ask any soldier if all commands are easy to obey.

A good article on Leftist hate

The real history of social Darwinism

Some personal memoirs

Memoir highlights

THE PSYCHOLOGIST

Another very negative view of COP 26

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive