Thursday
Sep242015
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Environmentalism may not be perfect!
Sep 24, 2015 Greens 
The Today programme picked up the current ecomodernism meme, with a segment in which Owen Paterson faced off against Greenpeace's Doug Parr on the subject of technology.
I can't recall a previous occasion on which someone has been permitted to take a potshot at environmentalists, so it will have been a surprise for the average Radio 4 listener, who has previously been led to believe that greenery is beyond reproach.
A three-minute segment on a news programme is just a gesture of course; we await (with no great sense of expectation) a three-part critique of environmentalism analogous to critiques the BBC has commissioned on, say, climate sceptics and libertarianism.
But nevertheless, credit where credit is due.
Audio below.
Reader Comments (38)
The BBC is probably trying to show how impartial it is before its charter is renewed.
There was even a piece this morning about birds evolving to live further north. No mention of global warming.
Not to mention the Today programme's coded critique of Angela Merkel: that the practice of leaving out bird food was attracting to the UK birds (warblers) that normally winter in southern Europe. Pull factors, eh Angie? BBC creeps gently to the right.
What wasn't mentioned is the Ecomodernism meeting today with Paterson, Ridley, Lynas, Shellenberger, Nordhaus.
Invitation only, but Richard Drake is going so we may get a report back.
Our new shadow farming minister wants to treat meat eaters like smokers: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/agriculture/food/11887317/Treat-meat-eaters-like-smokers-warns-Jeremy-Corbyns-new-vegan-farming-minister-Kerry-McCarthy.html
Monbiot points out that ecomodernism is historically inaccurate. Industrialisation led to less food production.
It's a fascinating read, here.
And so obviously wrong it's amazing the Guardian let him publish.
At least he can't be worried about overpopulation anymore as the world must have starved down over the last 200 years.
Climate Change was barely mentioned, Paterson steered the subject to GMF and the impacts of golden rice, Doug Parr came across badly in defending GP actions on this. He ended up trying an argument from authority - his authority.
"I'm not taking lessons in science from a former SOS who.....etc"
I think what you are seeing is that, aware of the outrage of the "Green Blob" (yes - the presenter actually used this term!)
consequent of the "historic climate agreement" that will emerge from Paris, the real powers that be are moving to discredit (and distance themselves) from these organisations and so defend the illusion that a triumph has occurred.
Signs of intelligent life !
Unfortunately Paterson (whom I admire a great deal) and Parr are arguing about the wrong things. The science/technology does not matter; only the outcome matters.
Greenpeace and court action over golden rice produces a big hit on google. What was it that Greenpeace were trying to deny responsibility for? Just one bit of vandalism of one farmers food crop, or condemning millions to death?
Diogenes2, thankfully Paterson DID ignore Met Office advice about global warming. Imagine the mess we would still be in otherwise.
Greenpeace can see trouble ahead. One of their more accurate forecasts, which we should all congratulate them on.
vvussell, good to note your positive views of Paterson versus the Green Blob
I keep getting unsolicited begging letters from Greenpeace. Fortunately they supply a pre-paid reply envelope so I just post them back with a 'no thanks'.
There was another mention later in Today of the changing habits of blackcaps, but the commentator hastily added that as well as the practice of putting bird food out in gardens, it was also caused by climate change- [not something that the scientist originally interviewed had said.].
M Courtney LOL !
Monbiot is an anarcho primitivist. He has expressed his hatred of farming numerous times. This is an article from Monbiot's website, a manifesto of anarcho-primitivism . The reference to 'dangerous notion of progress' goes to the heart of ultra conservative deep ecology. 'Dangerous' is an extreme word to describe the achievements of civilisation. It fits perfectly with the concept of anarcho-primitivism
Progress is dangerous
The peculiarities of the Abrahamic religions - their astonishing success in colonising the world and their dangerous notion of progress (now inherited by secular society) - result from a marriage between the universal god of the nomads and the conditions which permitted cities to develop. The dominant beliefs of the past 2000 years are the result of an ancient migration from soils such as xerepts and xeralfs to soils such as fluvents and rendolls.
At Easter, the Christian belief in a permanent resurrection is mixed up with the pagan belief in a perpetual cycle of temporary resurrection and death. In church we worship the Christian notion of progress, which has now filtered into every aspect of our lives. But, amid the cracking of easter eggs and the murmur of prayer, there can still be heard the small, faint voice which reminds us that our ecological hubris must eventually be greeted by nemesis.
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/03/22/god-of-the-soil/
Ironic that the Shadow Farming Minister is named McCarthy
MC
"so obviously wrong it's amazing the Guardian let him publish"
Really? I thought it was a pre-requisite.. :-)
I have the highest regard for Paterson. I don't think it's out of the question that he could be the next leader of the Conservative Party, despite the ambitions of the old Etonians to keep the job among themselves.
Another point in his favour is that he is Matt Ridley's brother-in-law.
I always find it particularly offensive when having to listen to Greenpeace pretending to be in favour of technological development. What new technology have they ever researched and developed?
They still really just hark back to some mythical golden past in the same way as other Cider-with-Rosie Luddites. Agricultural colleges also existed well before they did, so anything they may to choose to promote now was certainly not invented by them. They exist to oppose new technology, not help develop it.
As an analogy, someone who really wanted to help sick people dying of cancer might go and train to become a Doctor. Not, say, join a media-political organisation dedicated to complaining about the marketing practices of pharmaceutical companies.
That so many in Greenpeace appear not to see the distinction speaks volumes about them.
That the BBC always has Greenpeace on speed-dial speaks volumes about them.
Passengers 11:40 "... changing habits of blackcaps". It is amazing how nature adapts.
Greencraps on the other hand are facing extinction, due to unexpected changes in the political climate.
I was referring to Nordhaus- the trouble with Golf Charlie is that
.uʍop ǝpısdn pǝuɹnʇ pןɹoʍ ǝɥʇ sı pɐǝɥ sıɥ uı ʎsɐʇuɐɟ ǝɥʇ
vvussell can't write sense standing on his head either.
Owen Paterson is one of the few politicians I respect and who give me hope for the future.
The majority of agw alarmists are left-leaning and thus atheist or worse. They don't give two monkeys for religion yet now they're suddenly all over Catholicism and the every utterance of the Pope like a groupie on Mick Jagger. Strange bedfellows, eh?
golf charlie
Spiffing rapid response sir and so true.
cheshired
please desist!
the esteemed M Courtney and Paul Mathews are both left wing but they join with us against the green blob ^.^
golf charlie 2.op pm
typo -not several Passengers but just one Messenger .
cheshirered, I'm a catholic atheist, if not worse. That's the good thing about Bishop Hill. You never know who you might end up agreeing with.
Messenger, my sincere apologies. Senior moments, like policemen, keep appearing younger.
I am left wing. And a Methodist, not an Atheist.
There is a history of that in the Labour Party.
But I do question "esteemed".
Why would anyone who opines online be esteemed?
It's like being a Karaoke Diva. You may feel special but you ain't playing the Royal Opera House.
A minister vs Greenpeace.
Who are Greenpeace to deserve any attention on time in the media?
Greenpeace runs a 'Nutrition Month' in Philippines. LOL.
M Courtney
I will hold in esteem whomsoever I bloody well like! However you are no longer held in esteem because you argued hehe
The BBC are such backward-thinking losers. They give the last word to a lunatic environmentalist raving "I'm not taking lessons on listening to science from a ...blah blah" - the pan-handling, monument- and humanity-desecrating fools that are Greenpeace.
I too hope that Patterson gets to head the Conservatives. Talks a lot of sense, his speeches on the Green Blob and the EU I thought excellent. That said, I wasn't impressed at all by this. The lead in was about Climate Change (tm) but Patterson failed to grasp this thread - and "Ecomodernisum" seems a poorly thought out "marketing idea". He was given two bites at the subject but didn't really gain traction and I thought that he ended up sounding a bit weak - the greenie IMO came over rather better. 4/10, needs to improve :-(
I, for one will hold judgement on Paterson. As welcome as his latest comments on greenpi$$ are, he has a poor record in other areas regarding the environment, such as bTB and his support of the badger cull.
In 2014, when he was still a minister, he confirmed to Parliament that there had been 2 cases of bTB transmitted to humans by domestic cats, but then went on to tell the house that 'it had yet to be confirmed how badgers had infected the cats', despite the then, and current evidence, indicating that it was cow to cat transmission.
The BBC deliberately chose to be biased about CAGW, and to attempt to shut down the debate. Despite appearing bewildered by the lack of belief in its propaganda, the BBC has no intention of changing its mind, apologising for its one sided stance, or being open and honest about climate. Now it is cynically putting on token alternative views in order to cover its collective ass in the future - the "don't blame us we were just the messenger and look (but not too closely) - we covered both sides really" ploy.
Heide de Klein (24th September, 10:06)
Oh, yes there was...
I'm not quite such an unquestioning supporter of Paterson as some here. He gains some kudos for daring to raise issues in public, but I sometimes feel he can be too beholden to certain highly opinionated advisors who tell him what to say. Dr Richard North, you know who you are.