Climate Change CO2 Emissions Data Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics Science

If Waxman-Markey Went Global…

…we might get up to 2.37C total temperature reduction by 2100. That’s around half of the projected BAU rise. And 1.129C of those would be the result of implementing Waxman-Markey targets in China, India and the rest of Asia, minus the Middle East and the former Soviet Union that is.

All figures come from MasterResource.

Now, who or what is going to convince China and India, a combined total of 2.5 billion people, to remain poor in the name of safeguarding the planet, exactly at the moment when their fortunes appear to be turning and future riches start to beacon?

Good luck with that…considering also that the implementation of climate-virtuous solutions developed in the USA and in Europe will not necessarily be feasible outside of the USA and Europe.

AGW catastrophism Climate Change Culture Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics Skepticism

Harbingers Of A Climate Dictatorship

I am not referring to Paul Krugman, the best evidence that Alfred Nobel was right in NOT establishing a Nobel Prize in Economics at his (Nobel’s) time (what Krugman’s got is an afterthought sponsored by the Bank of Sweden).

The harbingers of the upcoming climate dictatorship are all those commenters to his NYT article, confirming Krugman’s totalitarian idea that political disagreement about global warming is akin to treason.

If there’s really many of them, there isn’t much hope in the future. Either the scary climate scenarios will happen, and a climate dictatorship will be founded. Or they will not, and thousands and thousands of very angry people will be looking for something else to base their thirst for dictatorship upon.

English Europe Politics

On The Rise Of Far-Right Parties In Europe

Recently I have been a panelist on TV talk-show “Forum”, presented by Andrew Gilligan on PressTV. I have been invited as London Media Officer for Silvio Berlusconi’s party, “The People of Freedom”.

One of the other panelists was Mary Honeyball MEP (Lab). The below is my reply to her blog “The Lure of the Bright Lights“:

One of the points made during the programme is that the far-rightists take advantage of the divisions among mainstream political parties. I am afraid you are perpetuating those divisions. I can assure you that Silvio Berlusconi’s party, “The People of Freedom” (”Popolo della Liberta’”) is on your “same side regarding the far right”.

In fact, there is no Party in the Italian governing coalition that could be described as belonging to the “far right” by any stretch of the imagination.

We, just like the European People’s Party as a whole, have the fight against all forms of fascism of old and new as one of our foundation stones. And let me be proud of the fact that throughout all recent elections all Italian far-rightists have been losing voters to the point of effectively disappearing from the political spectrum.

Why are things looking different in the UK? This is not something one can answer in a blog’s comment area. Because it takes time to analyse, then to understand what is peculiar about British politics and society. Such a strong and long-standing Parliamentary Democracy as yours, truly the envy of the world, still manages to inspire the rise of absolutely nasty and repugnant parties like the BNP. Why?

Likewise, Europe is a big place, and there is no chance to fight back at the ugly racist and neo-nazi ideas being banded around without having a good look at the peculiarities of each country’s political system and society.

I therefore urge you and everybody else interested in European politics to make the effort to understand the particular circumstances that regard each country. I know it is a huge effort, there’s now 27 of them.

But the last thing we should be doing is mindlessly sticking labels around. By making sweeping statements, sometimes based on what is summarily reported in the media by distracted journalists perhaps with a particular précis to follow, the risk is to create artificial divisions among what is an overwhelmingly anti-fascist electorate, effectively presenting tens of millions with the choice between feeling disenfranchised, and voting for the racists.

ps personally, I do not think there is anything to discuss with the BNP’s representatives. I am sure you will agree that it is impossible to change the mind of a Holocaust denialist on any subject. If I were a British politician, what I would be more interested into would be to share a platform with BNP voters. It is them, the ones we should all be working to welcome back to our world.

Democracy English Italy Politics

Italy Explained: Berlusconi, The Northern League And A Working Class That Votes Centre-right

The extraordinarily lucid analysis below is my translation of an article published by “Notizie Radicali”, the online newletter of the Italian Radicals, a political party currently associated to the centre-left Democratic Party.

The original publication date was 4 May 2009. Little has changed since then, despite all the Berlusconi sex scandals. The results of local and European elections in June 2009 have seen a further erosion on the centre-left of the Italian political spectrum.

Probably, the best thing the Democratic Party could do at the moment would be to dissolve itself and give somebody, anybody the chance to start anew.

(the text between square brackets is all mine)

When the Working Class Votes Centre-Right
by Valter Vecellio

The People of Freedom (PDL) at more than 50 percent. The Democratic Party (PD) at around 26 percent. The data from the Ipsos-“Sole 24 Ore” opinion poll is not news in itself, rather a further confirmation of what was already common knowledge.

Among professionals and the self-employed the coalition led by Silvio Berlusconi reaches a “People’s Republic”‘s majority, around the 70 per cent. But the actual “bleeding wound” for the PD concerns that section of the electorate traditionally linked to left, the workers. Among them, consensus for the governing coalition of Northern League (Lega Nord) and PDL exceeds 43 per cent. The PD appears stuck at much more modest 22.4 percent.

The Democratic Party certainly is paying for the competition with Antonio di Pietro’s Italy of Values (IdV). The IdV has been widening its base by leveraging on demagoguery and low-level “qualunquismo” [the mindset of being unable to tell one established party from another].

PD is also paying for competition from its left, from parties such as Communist Refoundation, the Italian Communists [several of them], the Greens, the Socialists. Although those will be unable to cross the 4 percent threshold for being represented at the European Parliament, they will all be eroding valuable points of consensus and percentage from the PD.

Nevertheless, the fact that Berlusconi has managed to wrestle consensus from the centre-left is beyond dispute. A trend in this direction was already clear after the general elections of April 2008. In fact, surprising and inconvenient truths can be found in a very useful report, “Winners and losers in the elections of 2008” published by “Itanes” (Italian Election Studies), a research group started in the early 90s by the Cattaneo Institute in Bologna and guided by a “student” of Giovanni Sartori, Professor Giacomo Sani.

Those are surprising and inconvenient truths, of course, for the losers, not for the winners. According to the report, the PD has paid a combined effect: on the one hand the phenomenon scholars call “selective abstention”, affecting PD voters much more than PDL ones. On the other hand, there has been a real-and-present migration of support.

To put it simply: for every three PD voters of the past, one decided not to vote in the general elections of 2008, and one voted for the opposing coalition.

The centre-left as a whole“, we read, “suffers from the flows of mobilization and demobilization a loss of around 4 per cent of the electorate .. . whilst the PD sees the disappearance of the votes of around 10 percent of those who had chosen the Olive Tree coalition in 2006, in favour of parties of the centre-right.”

The end result is that nowadays, the traditional centre-left electoral base has more overall confidence in the governing by Berlusconi than in the opposition by the PD. But we can go beyond that, by reading a well-researched book “Padanian Breed” by Adalberto Signore and Alessandro Trocino.

It is a book that chronicles twenty-five years of Umberto Bossi’s Lega Nord, and it is not lacking in surprises: despite some “folksy” and “noisy” [i.e. bordering on the loony] public statements by Lega Nord leaders, the authors tell of a a political party made up of activists running local public Offices to the voters’ appreciation, regardless of the social group to which the voters belong.

In Lombardy or Piedmont, it is nowadays no longer considered odd to find members of the communist-leaning workers’ trade union CGIL also belonging to Lega Nord and/or having no qualms to vote for centre-right candidates.

At present, what is new is that how the above phenomenon has become consolidated and disseminated. An entire section of the Italian society doesn’t vote to the left any longer, tired of in-fighting, demagoguery, and inconclusive statements of intent. It is a situation exposed to little or no avail by those in the PD nearer to the electorate, for example the Mayors of Turin Sergio Chiamparino, and of Venice Massimo Cacciari.

Like the mythical Cassandra, nobody listens to them speaking the truth: instead Veltroni, assisted by a strategist of no strategy called Goffredo Bettini, collected a string of ever bitterer defeats, before resigning. Now we have Dario Franceschini seeking to unite the pieces of a vase broken in a thousand pieces. The outcome of all those efforts is reflected in the results of the Ipsos-“Sole 24 Ore” survey: bitter results, for the PD, but also a confirmation of a situation whose cause is to be found in the PD itself.

As things stand, the PD can only wait for its final decay. Its leaders have done their utmost to reach that goal, and now they are reaping what they have sown.

America English Iran

Enough With Anti-Iran Propaganda!

In the UK, and in Italy, and I am sure in the USA as well for what I can read on the International Herald Tribune, we are being bombarded by anti-Iran propaganda. There is no attempt at explaining, let alone understanding the complexities of the present situation, and one side is depicted as “good”, the other as “bad”.

Italian daily “Corriere della Sera”‘s home page a couple of days ago was literally drooling at the rumors of a “lake of blood” in front of the Majlis, the Iranian Parliament. Why? Because that would finally seal the concept of a violent, evil regime. Trouble is, there is an unfortunate number of dead but it has nothing to do with what you would expect from a violent crackdown by armed thugs and police firing live round on the crowd.

President Ahmadinejad’s fight against corruption is never mentioned, just as only few will have noticed that the opposition’s eminence grise is Ayatollah Rafsanjani, former President himself and whose sons appears to have “magically” become the richest people in Iran during that tenure.

What is requested by the opposition is never explained either. What has apparatchik Mousavi got to do with people asking to be freed from the long hands of the Moral Police, is left to the reader’s imagination. Supreme Leader Khamenei is belittled for having himself allied with Ahmadinejad and the Veterans of the Revolution.

What do we read instead in Western newspapers, but absurdist analyses showing very little respect for Muslimhood, let alone the Islamic Republic of Iran? (I’ll put a link about that soon…)

In this atmosphere it is clear that too many powerful, and truly evil forces, in Iran, in the USA, in the UK, in the Arab world and in Israel have a heavy interest in keeping Iran as a trouble spot and impeding a geostrategically completely natural alliance with the United States itself.

There isn’t much a person, or even a group of people can do. But denouncing the propaganda is one possibility.

Italiano Uncategorized

Iran – Boicottare I Mujaheddin Del Popolo

Stigmatizzo decisamente (e so di non essere il solo) la decisione della Zamparutti e di altri politici europei di partecipare alla manifestazione di Parigi dei “Mujaheddin del Popolo” (MEK), un’organizzazione che si e’ macchiata di innumerevoli crimini inclusi diversi attentati esplosivi che hanno coinvolto civili, e nonostante abbia rinunciato alla lotta armata nel 2001 ancora nel 2003 si e’ fatta beccare con 6,000 combattenti in Iraq ben armati inclusi diversi carri armati.

Perche’ erano in Iraq, loro che si professano liberatori dell’Iran dal regime degli Ayatollah? Perche’ il MEK e’ la stessa organizzazione che ha trasferito le sue basi sotto la protezione di Saddam Hussein, nel mezzo della guerra fra Iran e Iraq.

Si tratta anche di un gruppo che Human Rights Watch non ha esitato definire un “culto”, i cui membri sono pronti a tutto incluso darsi fuoco e morire come manifestazione di protesta.

Le immagini da Parigi ricordano, infatti, un raduno tipo Testimoni di che va benissimo per i Testimoni di Geova, ma se fatto da un’organizzazione politica dovrebbe far tremare i polsi.

Vista la popolarita’ del MEK in Iran (=zero spaccato), associarvisi in un qualunque modo significa sostanzialmente autodichiararsi nemici del popolo iraniano, di laici e clericali, liberali, seguaci dello Shah e conservatori tutti. E poi ci si lamenta che il Governo Iraniano si comporti in maniera paranoica…

Il contributo del manifestare con i MEK alla causa della giustizia, della liberta’ e della nonviolenza nel mondo e’ “meno infinito”… tanto varrebbe marciare osannando le effigi di Cheney e Rumsfeld e inneggiando alla distruzione armata della Repubblica Islamica.

English Iran War

Not All Civilians Are Born Equal

Reuters: “Obama condemns Iran crackdown on protests” Tue Jun 23, 2009 12:45pm EDT

“we deplore violence against innocent civilians anywhere that it takes place,” [Obama] said

BBC: “‘Dozens dead’ in US drone strike” Page last updated at 12:22 GMT, Wednesday, 24 June 2009 13:22 UK

There have been more than 35 US strikes since last August – killing over 340 people – and most have landed in the North and South Waziristan tribal regions

AGW Climate Change Data Global Warming Omniclimate Science Warming

Scientists: Mediterranean Sea "Not Warming"

(via Piero Vietti’s Cambi di Stagione. My translation of course)

17 JUN 2009 From the ongoing OGS conference on Observational Oceanography in Trieste, Italy – Rome, 17 June (Apcom) – No water warming processes are likely to be undergoing in the Mediterranean. It’s one of the preliminary results obtained under MedArgo, the “sister project”, coordinated by OGS [the Italian National Institute on Oceanography and Experimental Geophysics].

MedArgo deals specifically with the Mediterranean Sea and surrounding countries and is part of EuroArgo, the European component of the international Argo project.

Argo’s objective is an intensive analysis of the seas to see what are the impacts of climate change and global warming on the waters of our planet and, consequently, also on its ecosystems. That is why 60 European scientists are comparing data and knowledge at the Second EuroArgo Conference on Observational Oceanography, being held in Trieste, and organized by OGS.

In order to study the chemical and physical parameters of the waters of the seas, OGS uses special tools called “float profilers” [?], battery-powered cylindrical tubes released into sea currents. Devices last between 3 and 4 years and collect 150-200 profiles before being abandones.

“These instruments – says Pierre-Marie Poulain, Head of the Remote Sensing Group at OGS and coordinator of MedArgo – go down to an average depth of 350 meters and remain there for five days. Then they do a quick foray to 2,000 meters and come back up, measuring the physical parameters of the water column and transmitting the data via satellite. Everything is done in real time: the data arrives at research centers, scattered throughout the world, where it is processed, managed and disseminated to the community of scientists.”

At present, there are around 3,000 profilers worldwide, spaced apart by about 300 kilometers. In the European seas there are 800 profiles, 23 of which in the Mediterranean Sea, with the objective of bringing the total to 30 for a complete coverage of the basin.

As well as coordinating the launching of the profilers, OGS is also involved in collecting the data recorded on the characteristics of currents, temperature and salinity. The researchers from Trieste are, in fact, among the few with the oceanographical skills needed to perform the necessary quality control.

MedArgo so far has collected a series of data that illustrate what is happening in the Mediterranean. “The Mediterranean current – adds Poulain – is an important engine of the local circulation, because it influences all motions of this enclosed sea. On the basis of information gathered so far, all we can anticipate is that at the moment there are no processes warming the waters. But we will have more details only at the end of the project, with the final data in hand.”

AGW catastrophism Climate Change Culture Global Warming Omniclimate

Somebody Please Help Me Find BBC Non-Warmist Biases And Errors

As of Monday evening GMT, Richard Black’s “UK ‘must plan’ for warmer future” (Page last updated at 17:04 GMT, Thursday, 18 June 2009 18:04 UK) is still visible under the “Environment” sub-section the of BBC Science & Environment home page.

Pallab Ghosh’s “Climate warnings’ error margins” (Page last updated at 11:58 GMT, Thursday, 18 June 2009 12:58 UK) is nowhere else to be seen than via directly input of the URL. Remarkably, it cannot be found even under FEATURES AND ANALYSIS in the “standard” right-side column sub-section for climate-related pages. It is missing from the GREEN ROOM as well.

Richard Black’s article appears in that same right-side column under LATEST SCIENCE

I am a regular follower of the BBC Science & Environment site. Still, had it not been mentioned in today’s Benny Peiser’s CCNet mailing, Pallab Ghosh’s work would have disappeared without me noticing a thing.

And it is not a matter of when the article was last updated: there are two pages under Environment, one “Page last updated at 09:24 GMT, Thursday, 18 June 2009 10:24 UK” and the other “Page last updated at 08:25 GMT, Thursday, 18 June 2009 09:25 UK”. Both have been written/modified before Pallab Ghosh’s article.

There is one big difference though. Pallab Ghosh’s piece is much more critical of the Defra latest absurd claims on totally-unscientific climate projections over a 5-km grid.

Of course answers could range from “Not everything at the BBC is well planned” to “The Analysis list will be updated soon”, and more. But…if the BBC always and every time inadvertently and unwittingly errs on the side of the warmists, what ever will be left of the feeling that those errors are really inadvertent and unwitting?

Where are the BBC non-warmist inadvertent errors?

Please help me find any, as I have promised Richard Black via private e-mail I will refrain from criticising the BBC about AGW bias for a year, if he (or anybody else) can find anything.

And no, The Blog of Bloom doesn’t count. It would have had counted, had the BBC itself lent it any credibility in the past…

democrazia Diritti Umani Iran Italiano Politica

Repressione In Iran? Andiamoci Piano!

Sono passati vari giorni, e ancora non mi e’ ben chiaro cosa potremmo o dovremmo fare riguardo l’Iran.

L’espulsione (o il mancato rinnovo dei visti, che e’ un po’ diverso) dei giornalisti stranieri, ha senso nel quadro paranoico del pensiero di governo in Iran (e come dar loro torto…).

La liberta’ di informazione, con tutto quello che ci sta arrivando, non mi sembra che sia in gioco. Ci sono anche particolari che ci dicono come non si tratti della solita storia di repressione, come i continui richiami di Khamenei alla legalita’ e alla democrazia, e il fatto che dopo tutti questi giorni si sente parlare di polizia che usa i lacrimogeni.

Quando uno allora manifesta in Europa “in appoggio ai manifestanti a Teheran”, puo’ essere sicuro di chi o cosa stia appoggiando? Penso proprio di no (io i proclami osannanti Khomeini da parte degli intellettuali europei me li ricordo ancora…).

Per questo direi che il piu’ grande favore che ci possiamo fare e’ seguire l’Iran in maniera intelligente, senza bruciare alcun ponte e aspettando che si risolvano le loro beghe da soli. L’unico proclama da fare e’ che vengano rispettate le leggi della Repubblica Islamica in materia elettorale. Su quello ci sarebbe molto da chiedere, anzi pretendere.

Per un confronto con altre situazioni, quelle si’ di repressione brutale, pensiamo all’Uzbekistan, alle sue elezioni presidenziali, e al massacro di Andijan del 2005. Tutta roba che non e’ arrivata a Twitter, su Facebook, su YouTube. Peggio per gli Uzbeki?

AGW catastrophism Climate Change CO2 Emissions Dissent Freedom Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics

Close-Minded Environmental AGW Lawyer Plays The Bait

It is truly amazing to discover an “Open Letter to Climate Change Denialists” that is as close-minded as they can get, with sentences such as “we also welcome dissenting views, even when we think they’re unfounded” and “there’s no point in debating the science with you“.

The guy signing as Daniel Farber appears to be some sort of a “lawyer” that has written a paper titled “Climate Models: A User’s Guide” with “two goals: providing legal and policy analysts with a basic understanding of the types of computer models that are used in studying climate change, and thinking through the uses and limitations of these models for courts and agencies“.

Trouble is, the “User’s Guide” looks just like a glorified appeal on managing risk by concentrating on the “fat tail”, the potential, enormous risks should things go very badly. Its conclusions are not climate-specific: they apply to any problem with a “fat tail”. And they are wrong.

Man shall not manage risk on “worst-case scenario” alone. If one were to educate one’s children only based on that principle, one’d make their life a hell on earth. If one were to live by that principle, one’d never get out of bed in the morning. And if one were to make politics by that principle, well, no need to imagine things there, it’s been the Cheney/Rumsfeld strand of foreign policy for a few decades.

Luckily Mr Farber is no risk manager, otherwise some serious professional questions could have been made. Anyway, it would have been nice to read something more lawyerly than a rather fallacious attempt at presenting a three-possibilities choice that is obviously a reduction too far (already the second comment found a fourth possibility…)

ps as of now no much support for Mr Farber in the comments

pps Mr Farber appears to make the peculiar argument of having only AGWers as friends and acquaintances (“reaching readers who are well outside our usual circle of friends and acquaintances“)

ppps I would not be surprised if the overall goal is just to write another article attacking all anti-AGW arguments that pop up in the comments

America English Humor Politics USA

The United States Of Larger-Than-Life Media Savviness

The Greatest
The Greatest
The Great Communicator
The Great Communicator
The Greatest Communicator
The Greatest Communicator
democrazia Iran Italiano Politica

Giu’ Le Mani Dall’Iran

(commento postato sul blog di Giulia Innocenzi “Liberta’ verde“)

Manifestare per la liberta’ scalda sicuramente i cuori ma…sappiamo cosa stiamo facendo? Cosa conosciamo, anzi cosa comprendiamo dell’Iran quando un giornalista che ci abita da 25 anni afferma che “Tutto quello che sappiamo sull’Iran e’ sbagliato“?

Non dimentichiamo inoltre che tutti gli interventi esterni sull’Iran negli ultimi centocinquanta anni sono stati un disastro per l’Iran stesso, dalla Convenzione Anglo-Russa del 1907, alla occupazione straniera del neutrale Iran durante entrambe le guerre mondiali, all’appoggio all’autocrazia di Mohammad Reza Pahlavi contro il democratico Mossadeq (il cui governo fu rovesciato dagli USA e dal Regno Unito), all’appoggio dell’intellighentsia europea all’Ayatollah Khomeini in esilio, poi rientrato in Iran per combinare quello che ha combinato, e infine alle politiche vessatorie americane degli ultimi venti anni che hanno fatto in modo che i conservatori iraniani rimanessero ben saldi in sella, e hanno convinto ogni Iraniano dotato di sale in zucca che e’ molto meglio costruire un po’ di bombe nucleari e il prima possibile.

Dopo una tale fila di disastri, direi che se gli Iraniani all’estero vogliono manifestare, sara’ bene applaudirli, ma per il resto, per una volta almeno teniamo le nostre manine lontane e proviamo per una volta prima di tutto a non fare danno.

AGW catastrophism Climate Change Culture Data Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics Science Skepticism

Extracting 'Climate Refugees' Out Of Thin Air

The most vaporous of climate-change reports seems to have just been published, and its title is “In Search Of Shelter: Mapping the Effects of Climate Change on Human Migration and Displacement“. Even warmist Tom Zeller Jr could not avoid pointing out that:

  • The idea that drastic, human-induced climate change could have an effect on global stability, particularly to the extent that it might spur mass migrations of people fleeing increasingly inhospitable landscapes, has generated a good deal of academic scrutiny and political hand-wringing over the past decade, and for good reason
  • the very notion of migration spurred by climate change remains scientifically opaque
  • there is little agreement on just how one ought to describe — or even measure — the phenomenon
  • all [labels like “climate change refugees”] tend to suggest a singular driver behind migration — and that, several researchers have begun to argue, is perilously simplistic
  • Environmental migration “is not a real phenomenon […] the decision to move cannot be removed from the economic and political situation […] there is evidence that the decision to leave an area adversely affected by environmental conditions is more a function of political relationships
  • Other researchers have pointed out the near futility in trying to quantify the concept
  • “Because one cannot completely isolate climate change as a cause, however, it is difficult, if not impossible, to stipulate any numbers”

It gets even funnier. Here some quotes almost straight from the mouth of “Koko Warner, a researcher at United Nations University’s Institute for Environment and Human Security in Bonn and one of the principal authors of the most recent analysis

  • “there’s no real science yet”
  • she was careful to note that the surveys her team conducted […] provided only anecdotal evidence
  • “You couldn’t call this statistically significant. It’s probably not a large enough sample”

Ms Warner says that “codifying some connection between climate change and migration in [a post-Kyoto] treaty […] will provide a political basis […] for dealing with whatever might come over the next several decades“. Is there any scientist left doing any science at the United Nations University’s Institute for Environment and Human Security?

ps Thanks to Ms Warner also for admitting that “the numbers [of potential climate change refugees for the future decades] are all over the place“. I guess there is no shortage of methodological embarassments

democrazia Iran Italiano Politica Radio Radio24 Sole24Ore

Tutto Quello Che Sappiamo Sull’Iran E’ Sbagliato

Trascrizione dell’intervento di Alberto Negri, inviato del Sole24Ore a Teheran, a “Jefferson 2 – L’arte della svolta” (Radio24), lunedi’ 15 Giugno 2009. Le domande sono poste dal conduttore Stefano Pistolini:

(per ascoltare l’originale andare al minuto 21:43 di questo file mp3)

Non sostenevo affatto che questa votazione fosse regolare e democratica. Venendo da piu’ di 25 anni in questo Paese soltanto le procedure di annuncio del voto lasciavano aperti moltissimi interrogativi. Qui non c’e’ piu’ brace sotto la cenere qui c’e’ fuoco ormai. Qui abbiamo centinaia di migliaia di persone in questo momento…si sono radunati oggi a piazza inghelab, Piazza Inghelab (?) e’ Piazza della Rivoluzione, Inghelab vuol dire questo, e poi sono diretti verso Piazza Zadi (?), Piazza Zadi vuol dire Piazza della Liberta’ dove ai tempi dello Shah si consumo’ uno dei piu’ grandi massacri della rivoluzione che costrinsero poi all’esilio Mohammed Reza Pahlavi.

Centinaia di migliaia di persone capeggiate da Mousavi, il capo del movimento riformista che si e’ presentato alle elezioni, con Karobi (?) e con Khatami l’ex-presidente dei riformatori si sono avviate per questa manifestazione che e’ la maggiore, la piu’ grande, la piu’ incredibile che si sia vista dai tempi della rivoluzione.

D: quale esito ti viene di presagire nei confronti di quello che stai vedendo, rispetto a quello che stai vedendo?

Premetto che secondo me tutto quello che sappiamo sull’Iran e’ sbagliato. Nel senso che ogni volta noi facciamo delle previsioni errate e molto spesso anche al breve periodo che si dimostrano totalmente poi contraddette dai fatti. Soltanto ieri sembrava che la rivolta fosse stata soffocata. Questa mattina la citta’ si era svegliata con pochissima gente, semideserta, quasi impaurita, sospesi in questa tensione, e ci si domandava se ci fosse mai stata questa manifestazione, se si potesse mai svolgere.

Non solo si sta svolgendo, ma e’ diventato un movimento di massa davvero difficile da capire, la cui portata e’ difficile da capire.

D: Useresti la parola “spontaneo” per questo movimento di massa?

Io direi che e’ spontanea la reazione degli Iraniani. milioni di iraniani sono andati alle urne venerdi’ e anche moltissimi che non erano mai andati a votare in trent’anni si sono presentati credendo che fosse la volta buona in qualche modo per cambiare il governo se non il sistema. milioni di questi iraniani si sono sentiti defraudati dal risultato e hanno reagito.

D: Tu in prima persona per quello che hai visto, per quello soprattutto che ti sembra di vedere in queste ore, credi al risultato elettorale o no? credo a quello che vedo. c’e’ un proverbio del profeta Ali’ che dice “la Verita’ sta in mezzo alle orecchie”. In mezzo alle orecchie ci stanno gli occhi per vedere, non le cose che si sentono dire e io vedo quello che vi ho descritto prima.

Cioe’ anche se questo risultato elettorale fosse non diciamo regolare ma se si avvicinasse alla realta’ probabilmente non ci sarebbero tutte queste migliaia di persone, centinaia di migliaia di persone in piazza. Altrimenti non ci sarebbe stata questa reazione che sembra essere soffocata di giorno in giorno e poi ritorna fuori regolarmente.

Come vi ho detto prima tutto cio’ che sappiamo sull’Iran e’ sbagliato.

Berlusconi Italia Italiano Partito Democratico PdL Politica USA

Tu Quoque, Barack….Dramma Al Loft!

Roma, 15 Giugno (MNN) – La notte capitolina si preannuncia molto impegnata al Loft, la sede del Partito Democratico scelta vicino alla Chiesa di Santa Anastasia in modo da aiutare anche i piu’ incaponiti peccatori a criticare la vita privata altrui dopo essersi lavata la coscienza.

Barack Obama e Silvio Berlusconi - 15 Giugno 2009
Barack Obama e Silvio Berlusconi - 15 Giugno 2009

Centinaia di attivisti sono stati convocati nella tarda serata di oggi per aiutare a rimuovere fotografie e gigantografie dell’ennesimo Traditore della Causa Persa Del Partito Democratico (che magari fosse partito, perche’ almeno, in quel caso, qualcuno lo avrebbe rimpianto).

Basta con Barack“, ha cominciato a cantare tale Uolter, presentatosi come “fondatore e affondatore del PD“. “Una volta ammiravamo il suo ‘Ies ui can’“, ha continuato l’esagitato rimuovitore di poster prima di minacciare di andare a lavorare in Africa, “Adesso non lo sopportiamo piu’ viste le sue nuove amicizie“.

Il portiere/autista/maggiordomo/segretario del PD, al secolo “Franceschiellinielluccio”, non ha voluto confermare ne’ smentire se gli scantinati del Loft fossero ormai pieni dei ritratti rimossi dell’amico americano di Silvio. Nessuno e’ riuscito comunque a fermare l’irrompente Debora Serracchiani, che ha dichiarato che lei in Berlusconi non ci vede niente di “Bello“.

In altre notizie: “Obama riceve Berlusconi: «Bello vederti, amico mio»

ps ma il traduttore chi era, l’Uomo Invisibile??

BBC Climate Change English Global Warming

Text Of Complaint To The BBC About Prepackaged Militant AGW “News”

(AGW: Anthropogenic global warming)

The following is the text of the complaint I have submitted via the BBC Complaints website. For a history of the BBC Australian Climate demonstrations imbroglio, follow this link:

Phil Mercer’s article about the Australian “National Climate Emergency Rallies” is much less likely to be about informing people than an advocacy piece for the fight against anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Thereby it contravenes the BBC’s stated values of being “independent, impartial and honest”.

It is not independent or impartial because Mr Mercer has published his article before being able to check its truthfulness in full, making a guess on the number of marchers based on what the organizers expected.

It is not honest because it is presented as “news” when it has clearly been pre-packaged long before anything had actually happened, with information that could not have been confirmed at the time (please note that as of now Reuters still talks of hundreds not thousands of marchers).

There is nothing in Mr Mercer’s article that could not have been written beforehand. I understand it could be standard journalistic practice, however I do not understand why the BBC would have had to rush forward without fact-checking. Given the absence of any picture of marchers in Mr Mercer’s article, one is left wondering if he has actually seen any National Climate Emergency Rally at all.

As a further note against the BBC’s impartiality on the topic of AGW in this particular circumstance, only the BBC and a few local media outlets have shown any interest in the “National Climate Emergency Rallies”. And all newsmedia including those from Australia have spoken about the marches several hours after Mr Mercer. Please note that I am not claiming the BBC reported manufactured news. That would have been fraud.

Instead, I am asking on what basis did the BBC found it necessary to rush this kind of news first, and without having had the time to check the contents of the article. That is not fraud. That is bias. And as a TV licence fee payer I have the right to question why my money would have to be spent in AGW advocacy, in direct contrast with the BBC’s own values.

If AGW is so important to you why don’t you rewrite your values accordingly?

AGW catastrophism Climate Change Culture Global Warming Omniclimate

Text Of Complaint To The BBC About Prepackaged Militant AGW "News"

The following is the text of the complaint I have submitted via the BBC Complaints website. For a history of the BBC Australian Climate demonstrations imbroglio, follow this link:

Phil Mercer’s article about the Australian “National Climate Emergency Rallies” is much less likely to be about informing people than an advocacy piece for the fight against anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Thereby it contravenes the BBC’s stated values of being “independent, impartial and honest”.

It is not independent or impartial because Mr Mercer has published his article before being able to check its truthfulness in full, making a guess on the number of marchers based on what the organizers expected.

It is not honest because it is presented as “news” when it has clearly been pre-packaged long before anything had actually happened, with information that could not have been confirmed at the time (please note that as of now Reuters still talks of hundreds not thousands of marchers).

There is nothing in Mr Mercer’s article that could not have been written beforehand. I understand it could be standard journalistic practice, however I do not understand why the BBC would have had to rush forward without fact-checking. Given the absence of any picture of marchers in Mr Mercer’s article, one is left wondering if he has actually seen any National Climate Emergency Rally at all.

As a further note against the BBC’s impartiality on the topic of AGW in this particular circumstance, only the BBC and a few local media outlets have shown any interest in the “National Climate Emergency Rallies”. And all newsmedia including those from Australia have spoken about the marches several hours after Mr Mercer. Please note that I am not claiming the BBC reported manufactured news. That would have been fraud.

Instead, I am asking on what basis did the BBC found it necessary to rush this kind of news first, and without having had the time to check the contents of the article. That is not fraud. That is bias. And as a TV licence fee payer I have the right to question why my money would have to be spent in AGW advocacy, in direct contrast with the BBC’s own values.

If AGW is so important to you why don’t you rewrite your values accordingly?

AGW Climate Change CO2 Emissions Culture Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics Science

Sustainable Energy Is The Way Forward (To Oblivion)

Gabriel Calzada Alvarez PhD. and others’ by-now-famous “Study of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources” has been hailed as a “blunt and devastating [examination], labeling [green] investments to be ‘terribly economically counterproductive’“. And it has been debunked” as having “numerous flaws.

I think too many people are missing the point…”sustainable energy” is sustainable in the sense that in the medium if not short term it will make all of us poor and jobless, therefore drastically reducing our greenhouse emissions.

As a bonus, it will also make most of the Western world wretched enough to be wholly unattractive to Third World workers, thereby resolving the immigration issues as well.

Here’s a couple of signs of what bright-minded greenies are preparing for us…

AGW catastrophism Climate Change Culture Global Warming Omniclimate Politics

Is It Christian To Worry About Climate Change?

There is no shortage of Christian people and groups telling the word we should worry about climate change.

Trouble is, the climate is not actually changing…rather, there are some people that are predicting it eventually will. Even the most rabid globalwarmers cannot in all honesty claim anything more than

there is a increasing risk of abrupt or irreversible climate shifts

Compare that to Matthew, 6:31-34

31So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own

And Ecclesiastes, 7:13-15

14 When times are good, be happy;
but when times are bad, consider:
God has made the one
as well as the other.
Therefore, a man cannot discover
anything about his future.

People talk about a Christian duty for stewardship of the planet. If that is a proper concept or not, it would take much more than a blog to evaluate. But it looks obvious that it is the problems of today that should be of interest to a Christian.

And anthropogenic global warming is not a problem of today.

AGW Climate Change Global Warming Omniclimate Science

Richard S Courtney: Temperatures, Climate Models…And The Human Brain

(This is part of a private message from Richard S Courtney, answering a third person’s question: “what fundamental principles of thermodynamic, radiative forcing or radiation balance are in conditions to explain the fall of latest global temperatures observed by University of Alabama in Huntsville?”

Published with Richard’s permission)

I look at the records of global temperature and I see a series of cycles that are overlayed on each other. For example,

1. There seems to be an apparent ~900 year oscillation that caused the Roman Warm Period (RWP), then the Dark Age Cool Period (DACP), then the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), then the Little Ice Age (LIA), and the present warm period (PWP).

2. There seems to be an apparent ~60 year oscillation that caused cooling to ~1910, then warming to ~1940, then cooling to ~1970, then warming to ~2000, then cooling since.

So, has the warming from the LIA stopped or not? That cannot be known because the pattern of past global temperature fluctuations suggests that the existing cooling phase of the ~60 year cycle is opposing any such warming. And that cooling phase can be anticipated to end around 2030 when it can be anticipated that then either

(a) warming from the LIA will continue until we reach temperatures similar to those of the MWP


(b) cooling will set in until we reach temperatures similar to those of the LIA.

But this begs the question as to why such global temperature fluctuations occur. And I address that issue as follows.

The basic assumption used in the climate models is that change to climate is driven by change to radiative forcing. And it is very important to recognise that this assumption has not been demonstrated to be correct. Indeed, it is quite possible that there is no force or process causing climate to vary. I explain this as follows.

The climate system is seeking an equilibrium that it never achieves. The Earth obtains radiant energy from the Sun and radiates that energy back to space. The energy input to the system (from the Sun) may be constant (although some doubt that), but the rotation of the Earth and its orbit around the Sun ensure that the energy input/output is never in perfect equilbrium.

The climate system is an intermediary in the process of returning (most of) the energy to space (some energy is radiated from the Earth’s surface back to space). And the Northern and Southern hemispheres have different coverage by oceans. Therefore, as the year progresses the modulation of the energy input/output of the system varies. Hence, the system is always seeking equilibrium but never achieves it.

Such a varying system could be expected to exhibit oscillatory behaviour. And, importantly, the length of the oscillations could be harmonic effects which, therefore, have periodicity of several years. Of course, such harmonic oscillation would be a process that – at least in principle – is capable of evaluation.

However, there may be no process because the climate is a chaotic system. Therefore, observed oscillations such as ENSO, NAO, PDO and etc. could be observation of the system seeking its chaotic attractor(s) in response to its seeking equilibrium in a changing situation.

Very importantly, there is an apparent ~900 year oscillation that caused the Roman Warm Period (RWP), then the Dark Age Cool Period (DACP), then the Medieval Warm Period (MWP), then the Little Ice Age (LIA), and the present warm period (PWP). As I suggest above, all the observed rise of global temperature in the twentieth century could be recovery from the LIA that is similar to the recovery from the DACP to the MWP. And the ~900 year oscillation could be the chaotic climate system seeking its attractor(s). If so, then all global climate models and ‘attribution studies’ utilized by IPCC and CCSP are based on the false premise that there is a force or process causing climate to change when no such force or process exists.

But the assumption that climate change is driven by radiative forcing may be correct. If so, then it should be noted that it is still extremely improbable that – within the foreseeable future – the climate models could be developed to a state whereby they could provide reliable predictions. This is because the climate system is extremely complex. Indeed, the climate system is more complex than the human brain (the climate system has more interacting components – e.g. biological organisms – than the human brain has interacting components – e.g. neurones), and nobody claims to be able to construct a reliable predictive model of the human brain. It is pure hubris to assume that the climate models are sufficient emulations for them to be used as reliable predictors of future climate when they have no demonstrated forecasting skill.

So, my bottom line answer to a question that asks, “what fundamental principles of thermodynamic, radiative forcing or radiation balance are in conditions to explain the fall of latest global temperatures observed by University of Alabama in Huntsville ?” is

I don’t know because nobody can know, but I want to know.

And that is why I support attempts to quantify all the “fundamental principles” which you mention because that attempt affords the possibility of telling me what I want to know.

catastrophism Climate Change CO2 Emissions Culture Freedom Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics Skepticism

Greenpeace, Poorpeace

Or…how the usual “little” greenie exaggeration can ethically harm people under the unscrutinizing gaze of journalists and politicians…

Ben Pile on Spiked: “Greenpeace: putting trees before people

[…] There may well be an argument that what happens to trees thousands of miles away is a problem. But the problems experienced by the poor in Brazil, and throughout the world, must surely be more pressing. Instead, it is squeamishness about what our shopping habits do to forests that drives the argument for international regulatory frameworks, and it is hard to see how focusing on land, trees and cows will raise the standard of living for people whose labour and lives are cheap. Such campaigns seem to express greater solidarity with wood than with people.

Greenpeace enjoys an increasingly cosy relationship with the establishment. As politicians find it harder to make arguments for themselves, they frequently turn to NGOs to give their policies credibility. For instance, the UK Conservative leader David Cameron recently launched his party’s energy policy at a press event held on the rooftop of Greenpeace’s London HQ (watch it here).

Journalists, too, look to such organisations for moral direction and sensational copy. This means that rather than holding them to account, the claims and broader agendas of NGOs often go without scrutiny or criticism. It is taken for granted that they are ‘ethical’, but no one ever voted for Greenpeace and there is no good reason to believe that the preoccupation with environmental issues is in the interests of people, either in the UK or in Brazil

democrazia Iran Italiano Politica Uncategorized

Il Pasticcio Chiamato Iran

Il Presidente Ahmadinejad e’ stato davvero rieletto? La violenza a Teheran continuerà nei prossimi giorni?

Purtroppo, non c’è modo di saperlo. Fra una persona che risiede in Occidente e la Verità ci sono la Commissione Elettorale iraniana, il Ministero degli Interni iraniano, il Governo iraniano, i mass-media e la propaganda iraniani, i mass-media e la propaganda occidentali, e i Governi occidentali. Un vero nebbione capace di far prendere lucciole per lanterne e viceversa.

Probabilmente, tutto cio’ che leggeremo e vedremo, incluse le immagini TV e gli scatti fotografici, sarà manipolato all’estremo.

Di cosa si può allora essere sicuri? Prima di tutto: c’è troppo in gioco della democrazia iraniana perche’ le elezioni vengano interpretate come una “farsa”. Dopo un dibattito televisivo e le fotografie del Leader Supremo iraniano, il Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hosseini Khamenei che usciva da una moschea dopo aver votato come un qualsiasi altro cittadino, niente altro che una vittoria riconosciuta dalla stragrande maggioranza dei cittadini iraniani potra’ essere sufficiente per la stessa società iraniana.

Cinicamente, si potrebbe dire che o si ha una democrazia, o se non la sia ha. Qualsiasi “fondamentalista” veramente impegnato a palesemente manipolare le elezioni, si sarebbe fatto beffa di Ahmadinejad, e di Khamenei.

Se quelli stessi hanno un qualche tipo di dittatura in mente, che scoprano le loro carte, o ne affrontino le conseguenze. Per Khamenei, e ancor più per Ahmadinejad, la scelta e’ tra sbarazzarsi della democrazia in quanto tale, o sembrare dei pagliacci.


In realtà, se le cose stanno come appaiono in questo momento, con una contestata rielezione del Presidente Ahmadinejad, scontri per le strade, e arresti di membri del partito di opposizione, a lungo termine il perdente sarà Ahmadinejad stesso, non più in grado di interagire con il mondo esterno come legittimo leader (eletto) dell’Iran. Un nuovo tentativo di discussione pubblica come quello alla Columbia University di New York incontrerebbe derisione se non molto peggio.

Un altro punto evidente riguarda l’ingerenza straniera. Finora al fuoco di fila delle notizie provenienti dall’Iran e’ stato risposto in maniera pacata da parte della Amministrazione Obama e questo è il giusto modo di comportarsi.

Come in Ucraina, se un considerevole numero di iraniani credono veramente le elezioni non siano stati rubati, sta solo a loro il riprendere possesso della propria Nazione. Per esempio, se il rivale di Ahmadinejad Mir Hossein Mousavi si fosse trovato impreparato alla situazione attuale, beh, allora sarebbe meglio se rimanesse lontano da qualsiasi posizione di potere.

È semplicemente impossibile capire da tutti i dettagli dall’esterno.

Manifestare in favore dei democratici iraniani, come suggerito da qualcuno, sarebbe una triste farsa da parte di un manipolo di ignoranti. E il commento di Franco Venturini sul Corriere “In Iran il vero sconfitto e’ Obama” e’ sicuramente prematuro. Se si sapesse che Obama avesse appoggiato Mousavi (cosa che dubito fortemente), Ahmadinejad darebbe fiato alle trombe all’istante…


Nessuno è morto finora. Che può solo essere una buona cosa.

Democracy English Iran Politics

Iran’s Elections: Looking Through The Fogs Of Propaganda

Has President Ahmadinejad truly and fairly been re-elected? Will the violence in Tehran continue in the next days?

Unfortunately, there is no way to know. In-between the average Western-based person and Truth there are the Iranian Electoral Commission, the Iranian Interior Ministry, the Iranian Government, Iranian newsmedia and Propaganda, Western newsmedia and Propaganda, and Western Governments.

Chances are, whatever we read and see, including live TV and apparently evident pictures, will be manipulated to the extreme.

Let’s try to list instead whatever we can be sure about. First of all: there is too much of Iranian democracy at stake for the election to end up been seen in Iran itself as a “charade”. After a TV debate and photographs of the Supreme Leader of Iran, Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khamenei coming out of a mosque after having casted his vote like any other citizen, nobody can expect anything but a victory recognized by the vast majority of Iran to be enough for the Iranian society itself.

Cynically, one could say that either you have a democracy, or you do not. Any “hardliner” really in the business of blatantly manipulating the election, would have made a mockery of Ahmadinejad’s campaign and Khamenei’s voting effort.

If they have some kind of dictatorship in mind they better go for it, or face the consequences. For Khamenei, and even more for Ahmadinejad, it’s like facing the choice between getting rid of democracy as such, or look like buffoons


In fact, if things stand as they appear at this very moment, with a contested re-election for President Ahmadinejad, clashes in the streets, and arrests of members of the opposition, the long-term loser will be Ahmadinejad himself, no longer able to interact with the outside world as a legitimate leader of Iran. A new attempt at a Columbia University debate would be met with derision if not much worse.

Another obvious point concerns foreign interference. So far the barrage of news from Iran have been answered with anodyne comments from the Obama Administration and that is the way it should be.

Like in the Ukraine, if a sizable number of Iranians truly believe the elections have been stolen, it can only be up to them to claim their Nation back. For example if Ahmadinejad’s rival Mir Hossein Mousavi finds himself unprepared in the fact of the current situation, well, it’s better if he stays away from any position of power.

It’s just impossible from anybody to understand all the details from the outside.


Nobody has died so far. That can only be a good thing.

AGW catastrophism Climate Change Culture Global Warming Omniclimate Politics

BBC And Climate: News Before Things Happen?

[ UPDATED 22:50 GMT June 15: Andrew Bolt kindly links here and then makes a good point in his blog, with the help of “reader Anthony“, further demonstrating the BBC bias on the topic of AGW: “That’s not reporting, but propagandising. You disagree? Then ask why the BBC reported on a Melbourne protest of a few hundred believers of its preferred green faith, but ignored this Melbourne protest by even more believers of a more traditional one“]

[ UPDATED 23:47 GMT: According to Singapore’s Straits Times, it was “Hundreds of environmental activists” marching in Australia. The Sydney Morning Herald focuses on Brisbane and “a crowd of 600“, after reporting that “thousands of environmental activists marched in central Sydney“. Finally, Melbourne-based The Age writes that “The rallies attracted about 6,000 people nationwide“.

That article is timestamped at 6:24PM, or 8:24AM GMT, a little less than 4 hours after Phil Mercer’s piece for the BBC. QED.]

[ UPDATED 13:50 GMT: I have inserted the pictures grabbed earlier today.

There is now an ABC article saying “At a protest rally in central Sydney, streets were blocked off as more than 1,000 people marched through the city streets to the office of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd“. And yes, it mentions just Sydney.

There is also a blog (with a photo) claiming “Thousands marched from Melbourne’s State Library to the Treasury Gardens to demand more action on climate change“.

To be perfectly clear, the point of this blog is not to ask if thousands have marched in Australia against climate change or not. Had the BBC reported manufactured news, that would have been fraud. Instead, the point is to ask on what basis did the BBC find it necessary to rush this kind of news first, and without having had the time to check what they were writing about.

That is not fraud: it is bias. And I do not think the BBC can afford to show bias.]

Australians demand climate action“, writes Phil Mercer from Sydney on the BBC News web pages

Thousands of demonstrators have rallied across Australia to demand greater government action to protect the environment from climate change

BBC report on marching Australians
BBC report on marching Australians

Or have they? Has Mr Mercer written his piece before the fact (could happen), and much worse, before having the information needed to verify the contents of his article?

It is rather strange, for example, that there was no picture of those thousands of people available for the BBC to publish…

Mercer’s article as of now is timestamped as “Page last updated at 04:20 GMT, Saturday, 13 June 2009”. That corresponds to 2:20pm in places like Brisbane and Sydney. The National Climate Emergency Rallies were scheduled for 1pm Brisbane time. I suppose that could put Mercer’s article in the “breaking news” category.

But look now at what else is available on the ‘net about thousands of people marching in Australia. When limited to the past 24 hours, and sorted by time, Google results include only two relevant news articles apart from the BBC’s

Google's web results sorted by date
Google's web results sorted by date report on hundreds of Perth marchers report on hundreds of Perth marchers
AFP picture of Sydney marchers from Business Recorder
AFP picture of Sydney marchers from Business Recorder

(the Nigeria Best Forum entry is a copy-and-paste from the BBC)

from Nigerian Best Forum blog
from Nigerian Best Forum blog

Notably, the AFP picture cannot be used to judge a crowd’s size. Even more notably, there is nothing as of now from Australian’s sites and blogs about “thousands of people“.

So if there’s no pictures, and the only local report is about “hundreds of people” in one city, where is the BBC picking up its “thousands…across Australia” figure? Why, look at the National Climate Emergency Rallies website:

National Climate Emergency Rally web site
National Climate Emergency Rally web site

On June 13, join thousands of people around the country at the National Climate Emergency Rally. The rally is a vital opportunity to send our governments a united message that the Australian public wants strong, swift and real action to solve the climate crisis


In summary, BBC’s Phil Mercer’s “news” article has likely been pre-packaged with an “informed guess” using activists’ own estimates made long before any demonstration had taken place.

And it has been rushed up to appear as top “Top Story” in the Science & Environment page just in time for Britons to read early on Saturday morning: before any meaningful check about its content could be done. More: before any other major news media thought is meaningful to report about it. Google News, in fact, shows nothing else apart from what already listed above.


Now…by what stretch of imagination can an organization rushing itself forward, with pre-packaged rathern than breaking news, present itself as reporting on climate change impartially and without a bias? Were this any other aspect of politics, BBC news could easily be categorized as a political outlet.

Perhaps some Editor over there will have an answer to this…

(note: I have grabbed most of the sites above as PNGs…later today I will insert the relevant pictures)

Culture Omniclimate Policy Politics

For President Obama, Energy Is More Important Than Climate Change

(You can read previous blogs on similar topics here, here and here).

In “Can Obama Change the Climate?” (New York Review of Books, June 11, 2009) Bill McKibben has warm words for President Barack Obama, including the following

“Obama himself has continued to mention global warming at every turn, and in commendably strong terms”

I am afraid Mr McKibben is missing the point. During the first 6 months in office, President Obama has mentioned “global warming” almost exclusively as just one aspect of the “energy” issue.

Take for example the New York Times’ archives, where between January 1 and June 11 2009 there are:

  • 114 articles about President Obama speaking on “energy
  • 22 articles about him mentioning “global warming
  • 16 articles with the President of the United States talking about “global warming” and “energy

That is, only 6 articles are left when “global warming” appears without “energy“.

There are also 42 articles with President Obama talking on “climate change”: only 12 of which are not about “energy”.

Remarkably, the situation is more skewed when one visits the White House’s own website (

A search via Google on that website shows:

  • 3,260 pages with “Obama” and “energy
  • 68 pages with “Obama” and “global warming
  • the very same 68 pages with “Obama”, “global warming” and “energy

That is, 3,066 “Obama” pages talk of “energy” but not of “global warming”; and not even once “Obama” pages mention “global warming” but not “energy”.

Just out of curiosity: only 4 “Obama” pages talk of “climate change” but not of “energy”.

One can safely assume that for President Obama, global warming/climate change is a sideshow to the far, far bigger issue of the future of energy. Therefore, when and if a choice will have to be made between “energy” and “global warming”, in all likelihood the current US Administration will choose “energy”.

English UK

Vanessa George’s Case A Potential Miscarriage Of Justice

A nursery worker with 10 years of experience is “charged with a series of sexual assaults on children“.

I am not convinced by those charges.

The police has been strangely describing some of the images in their possession as “only of torsos. Not even one “victim” has been identified so far.

It is also shameful that Ms George’s photograph has been allowed for printing in the media, thereby marking her for life whatever the outcome of the judicial process.

Sexual assaults by women on young children are quite rare (but not too rare – DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A STRONG STOMACH). In any case, they are rare enough to warrant a higher level of skepticism than usual before believing the police is not just risking yet another British miscarriage of justice.

AGW Climate Change CO2 Emissions Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics

"Copenhagen Climate Treaty" An Incentive To Remain Poor and Under-developed

The “Copenhagen Climate Treaty” drafted by a group of environmental organizations singles out a particular set of countries:

Newly industrialized countries like Singapore, South Korea and Saudi Arabia should also take on binding targets in line with the Convention principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. The criteria for designating newly industrialized countries should be negotiated in Copenhagen.

Consider that with what is expected from industrialized countries:

have a dual obligation under the Treaty, representing their overall responsibility for keeping the world within the limits of the global carbon budget and ensuring that adaptation to the impacts of climate change is possible for
the most vulnerable

The end result is that as far the the “Copenhagen Climate Treaty” is concerned, there is a clear disincentive for countries not only in being recognized as “industrialized”, but even in becoming “newly industrialized”.

After all, given that the request is that somebody forks out 160 gigadollars a year, it will just make perfect sense to steadfastly remain at the receiving end of that sum…poor and non-industrialized.

Is this a case of unwanted consequences? Or wanted…perhaps

AGW catastrophism Climate Change Culture Global Warming Omniclimate Policy Politics Skepticism

From Sweden, A New Hypothesis On The Popularity of AGW

Klimatpolitiken en ny skattebas?“…”Climate Policy, another tax revenue source?”

That is the title of an article (original in Swedish, here’s Google’s translation) making the allegation that by at least some politicians, AGW is being used as a way to extract more money from the people, thus covering rising health care costs

Runaway costs of health care, medication and care for a rapidly aging population have sent the entire political class in a treasure hunt – they must quickly find a new tax revenue source. In the taxation of carbon dioxide, they believe they have found the solution. Through an unprecedented disinformation campaign following Lex Luthor’s principle: “The more fear you create, the greater the change”, they will lead us into enthusiastically accepting a sharp rise in the tax burden in the belief that we are saving the world.

Berlusconi Italia Italiano Partito Democratico PdL Politica

Silvio, Rimembri Ancora… (contro i borghesucci)

A Silvio
testo (quasi) di Maurizio Morabito

Silvio, rimembri ancora
quel tempo, poi non così lontano,
quando nella cultura splendea
contro l’ipocrisia la lotta ridente e fuggitiva,
e tutti, capaci e pensosi, il limitar
di giudicar gli altri coltivavano?

Sonavan le poco quiete
canzoni, e i film d’intorno,
a quel perpetuo canto,
allor che all’opre civili intenti
sedeano, davvero assai contenti
di quel vago dimostrar che in mente aveano.
Erano i borghesucci dolorosi: e si sollevava
la meschinita’ di far la morale.

Che pensieri soavi,
che speranze, che cori, o Silvio mio!
Quale allor ci apparia
la vita umana e il fato!
Quando sovviemmi di cotanta speme,
un affetto mi preme
acerbo e sconsolato,
e tornami a doler di nostra sventura.
O natura, o natura umana,
perché non rendi poi
quel che promettesti allor? perché di tanto
inganni i figli tuoi?

Quelli adesso che lor inaridisce il verno,
del pensiero, in chiuso morbo combattuto e vinto,
politicamente vuoti, e tenerelli. E non vedon
che l’odio verso te;
non molce lor il core
la dolce speme or delle idee la fonte,
or delle analisi appassionate e aperte;
né assieme a compagne ed a compagni
ragionan d’altro che di te.

Anche perìa fra poco
la speranza nostra dolce: negli anni nostri
anche negaro i fati
un parlar piu’ serio. Ahi come,
come passata e’,
un’opposizione senza
neanche piu’ lacrimata speme!
Questo è il mondo? questi
i dibattiti, i partiti, l’opre, gli eventi,
onde cotanto l’Italia ragionar dovrebbe?
questa la sorte delle umane genti?
All’apparir del vero
loro, miseri, caddero: e con la mente
la fredda e politica morte di tutto cercano
e quattro foto ignude
mostrate di lontano.

(*) “borghesucci” che in altri tempi sarebbe stati chiamati “farisei”