is there gold in the sewers?...
As Antarctica is melting a bit faster due to anthropogenic global warming, one has to revisit a mixed bag of few skewed issues and bad opinions.
Some scientists like Ian Plimer dispute the concept of anthropogenic global warming. For me, it is a little annoying that someone who has a great humanist scientific mind comes to this wrong conclusion — wrong as clearly demonstrated by serious examination from many scientists.
Of course most of Plimer's analysis of global warming is underpinned by his own participation in the carbon intensive industries... Ian Plimer has also had a few tiffs with creationists, some of whom have pointed out that Ian Plimer does not know the difference between "melting point and boiling point" (http://creation.com/ian-plimers-bloopers-a-selection) but then I believe these self-CONvinced people don't know the difference between time and time, themselves.... So there.
So why would a non-university-educated Gus take on the might and knowledge of an Ian Plimer — a fellow humanist with degrees and professorial chairs?
Well, I don't know what I am doing... Though, creationists? I can eat them for breakfast, but I'd rather not — due to the hard solidified indigestible pig-headed fibre...
But when someone like Tony Abbott uses Ian Plimer as a crutch for his understanding of global warming, I get a strong fever going up my spine... I feel like punching someone.
We are now told that "Abbott" nowadays has quit the Ian Plimer views and "accepts the reality of anthropogenic global warming"... Can you believe this? Bollocks. I knew you did not... If Abbott did subscribe to the anthropogenic views of global warming, he would not pursue his silly stupid "direct action" and would crank up the carbon pricing as any intelligent person would...
But Abbott, first and foremost, is a lying political beast, is an agent for the carbon polluters and is a shifty policy wind-vane according to where the most votes of the day are, as whispered by the merde-och press, while avoiding the proper path of contrary information.
In short Abbott is a religious spruiker for snake oil merchandising and is ready to steal your money before the wind does, to prove it...
Ian Plimer is a geologist — a carbon-intensive-company director and a hater of religion — with views on global climate. Like me, he has no degree in climate science (as of last check). Thus Plimer is a complex character who wrote at length about global warming without expertise — in a book full of unscientific assumption, that has got him to be named as part of the "Denialism Dirty Dozen".
Ian Plimer and Lord Monckton (of breaches and whatever) toured Orstralya to tell us, with the help of Alan Jones —spruiker for the right-wing of the right-wing — that global warming is a fallacy — a disbelief in global warming that has been taken up by Tony Abbott and a zillion of his cabinet colleagues... Thus we are in a pick-a-box kookooland where Abbott still secretly takes Ian Plimer's views on global warming but will reject his views of religion.
I agree with myself: not everyone's nor everybody's views on the world is unified — not only we contradict within each of us we do it with all of us. We can have doubt about the price of fish, especially godot, and paint ourselves in a corner. I have views that will not be accepted by other people while I have some views shared with other people. Hopefully I make sense to myself, though sometimes I wonder, especially as night falls.
Here on the climate change situation, I feel we need to become more and more ruthless. We need to line the denialists up against a wall and shoot arguments till they convert or die. The future of this planet is at stake, unlike during the inquisition when it was only the ideology of a few religious nuts that was being challenged. Nothing more then.
Much more to lose now.
Serious scientists have debunked all of Plimer erroneous fiction on global warming. As mentioned above even some creationists challenged his views on their beliefs, even with better scientific rigour. But that is not a reference to the facts, as creationists have no idea about reality while they try to fit twisted scientific illusions into their own wonky dodgey art-form.
In attacking the creationists on completely irrelevant but precise points, Plimer let himself open to argument ridicule from the creationists. It is my humble view that one does not try to scientifically nor mathematically dismantle the bible stories — mainly because there are few valid reference points, apart from stupid burning bushes and wine made from water instead of grapes... One should thus dismiss the overall tone of the work, full of paradise lost, moralizationing threats, of glorious wars, of concubined and bigamist sex in a sin-binned godzilliated structure of the universe, which makes no sense at all.
So for the next few paragraphs, I will dump the creationists views in hell where they belong. I know, don't tell me, hell does not exist. Take it easy...
I believe Ian Plimer is a reasonable thinker. He can construct an argument. But he is choosy about what he is going to use in his construct in regard to global warming. This of course is wrong. Science is not an art form, unlike politics in which pick-and-chose-your-donkey and hope for the best is the arty-farty fuel. Science cannot dismiss or inflate parameters to suit a preferred result or a spruik. And this to some extend make most global warming scientists scared of being wrong as they search for more and more clues about the theory and its implications.
The science of "global warming" is done with as much information as possible by scientists who know what they are doing. There is as much data collection on this subject than the NSA collects on any given day. The diagnosis is basically clear. The method and the formulation is complex but takes care of all parameters, including those Plimer accuses them of ignoring.
The scientists do a good job. An excellent job.
Thus I hate those lying religious "accountants" who devalue the work of scientists, of engineers and of philosophers. This is what the Abbott government is full of: religious "accountant" who lie for political gain to the detriment of the future. They hate scientists, especially those who tell them what they don't want to hear. They hate them like you would not believe. Not only these lying religious "accountants" manipulate your future for the quick gain of a few bucks, they often do it without knowing how to add up (hence the "quote marks"). They use static number systems that will die from lack of oxygen within two weeks. Don't get me wrong, they're not nerds. At least with nerds, you know there is a basic knowledge of stuff, including Lagrangian equations which tell you the earth is warming up, fast.
These lying religious "accountants" are just plain dorky thieves who still secretly hope the earth is flat and their god sits on a cloud of glory above. They have perfected the arts of fairy dust in dodgey-talk and of pickpocketry.
It is a pity that these dorky thieves are helped along by some people's stupid ideas like Plimer's bad interpretations of a scientific situation...
You could say, I don't have much of a future left and any hope of a better one is in iffy-land...
But this is where my humanistic altruism comes in. I'd want you — especially you the young ones who have no clue as to what life is yet (we've got no idea ourselves but we've had plenty of experience at not knowing much but we keep trying) to have a better future than the one we found under a murderous war, laced with stupid bum fights, while loosing sight of the planet.
In the end, it does not really matter.
If you think that being impaled by a stupid budget-prong from lying religious fake "accountants" is necessary and fun, so be it. Enjoy the unnecessary pain.
Meanwhile I'll keep fighting the bastards.
Your local Dorkbuster
Image at top from Gus' collection of useless things...