Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Corals not as threatened as we thought | Main | High tide for the shale gas scare? »

Quote of the day, hypocritical lowlife edition

You are self employed and I was told that your work takes you to the USA. I can not resist surmising that you may get there using air travel.

District Judge Wright draws attention to the almost unbelievable hypocrisy of Robert Basto, one of the Heathrow 13.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (79)

Dork, please, shut up.

Feb 28, 2016 at 10:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid Smith

[snip - manners}

Feb 28, 2016 at 10:52 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

[snip O/T]

Feb 29, 2016 at 12:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

[snip O/T]

Feb 29, 2016 at 12:21 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

A degree in Climate Change eh. I bet the final exam is difficult and assume it consists of one question:

Do you think the average global temperature in the future will:
a. Increase to a dangerous level.
b. Remain about the same as today.
c. Decrease

Candidates are advised that they should show all working UNLESS they have chosen answer a.

Feb 29, 2016 at 10:42 AM | Unregistered CommenterSteve Jones

@Steve Jones: Yes, very fitting! What's a the old saying,? "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up!".

Feb 29, 2016 at 11:15 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlan the Brit

@Athelstan yep agree Commenters shouldn't be put off by Brandon's dramaqueening attitude, I imagine he's being recruited by the Sepo diplomatic dept right now.
- I don't understand why he had to intimidate instead of just saying "well I disagree and have a different point of view"
- The judge said

18. You described your activities not as a protest but as direct action
...your plans to carry out this protest were being made long before 1st July 2015. (the political decision day)

20.It was your clear and stated intention to cause as much disruption as possible to the flight schedule for that day

92,000 passengers flying into or out of Heathrow had their journeys disrupted to some extent that day (not counting knock on effects)

23.You occupied the emergency runway for that night.

...(only) Some of you have adjusted your lifestyles to reduce your carbon footprint.

.. I can not pass a sentence which will come anywhere near effective reparation making amends for the losses you caused

...I can not accept Mr Summers assertion that it would be more serious if you were there to plot criminal offences or carry out activities (see he's calling them thugs)

I agree with D Geezer about the judges cleverness of giving them a sentence but not martyring them.

Feb 29, 2016 at 11:49 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

Steve Jones, it amazes me that we need people to study Climate Change. Apparently the science is all settled, so what is there left to study? Grant funding? Getting scare stories published in the media?

Feb 29, 2016 at 12:00 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

It's about crossing lines

1. Protesting legally ..that's fine even tho in can inconvenience

2.BUT Cutting thru a fence and break the criminal trespass law and breaking other laws.
..well that's crossing a line

3. Expressing an opinion on a blog that those people behaved like thugs
.. that's not even as bad as point (1) cos it inconveniences nor harms anyone ..No line has been crossed.
...People should be able to express such opinions instead of being intimidated into hiding them.

Feb 29, 2016 at 12:00 PM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

stewgreen, 'cutting a fence' is a symbolic gesture, because it does represent a criminal offence, even if no attempt is actually made to go through the fence. It is therefore provocation, a challenge to the owner/Law Enforcers - what do they do about it?

My disappointment in this instance, is that the Green Blob Bullies have 'got away with it'. UK Law Enforcement did demonstrate commendable restraint, but the UK Justice have given in to the bullies.

It only proves to the likes of Putin, the correct way to deal with Green Blob Bullies is to jail them, and guess what, the Green Blob Bullies leave Putin alone, and concentrate on soft UK targets.

Feb 29, 2016 at 12:51 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Article at the Conversation. As usual, the supposedly unbiased Conv is a mouthpiece for political activism. One of the authors is a member of the Green Party.

Feb 29, 2016 at 1:07 PM | Registered CommenterPaul Matthews

Dork, you used to be interesting and entertaining. Now you are neither.

Feb 29, 2016 at 1:37 PM | Unregistered Commenterhunter

Hunter, only people like One World Government groupies have the intellect and the wisdom to decide whether your flight is pointless and wasteful or not. Clearly you are too much of an ignorant peasant to safely decide to spend your money as you see fit yourself - Uncle Joe should decide for you, you must agree. In fact this is exactly what greens say too.

People like this used to be dismissed as merely busybodies, or in more enlightened times ducked in the village pond. Nowadays they spend their working life making rude comments about other people being "science deniers" or "climate deniers", and complaining 15 years after the event that the media didn't report them correctly. Or even blaming "the banks" for the EU's immigration policy.

Feb 29, 2016 at 3:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterBudgie

You cannot add back radiation to solar radiation and use the total in Stefan Boltzmann calculations to explain the mean surface temperature.

The 324W/m^2 of back radiation is overstated because the wrong emissivity value of the atmosphere has been used in calculating that back radiation from measurements. On Venus, using emissivity of 0.19 for carbon dioxide, the atmosphere would have to be over 350 degrees hotter than the surface for its radiation to support the surface temperature.

Even if you use the 324 figure (as is implied in the energy diagrams which show 168+324-102 = 390W/m^2 into the surface) that 390 figure (being a mean of variable flux) gives you a mean temperature close to zero C, not 15C.

So it's all totally wrong and the whole radiative forcing greenhouse conjecture fails to explain reality.

If you genuinely want to hear explained what really happens in the equivalent of a 43 minute live presentation, watch the full video as over 1,100 others have done in its first 6 months. You can ask genuine questions on this blog.

Feb 29, 2016 at 11:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtmospheric Physicist

Bish, 3:27pm:

Dork doesn't do discussion; only derailing, diversion and disingenuity.

Feb 29, 2016 at 11:19 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

{Irish migration is O/T- please take this to a discussion page. TM}

Mar 1, 2016 at 12:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

Dork. Wrong place for care in the community. Off you go.

Mar 1, 2016 at 5:04 AM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

@Jeremy Poynton Yep, It would be convenient if the commenter's name came at the top, instead of the bottom ..So we know to quickly move on.
- I guess he's trying to disrupt and get banned as to wear it as some kind of martyr badge, Yet mwe know warmist blogs censor at the drop of a hat.

Mar 1, 2016 at 6:10 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

@Paul Matthews Interesting to see that Greenpeace types have put out a biased piece about the sentencing of the Heathrow 13, which has time for lots of propaganda, but didn't have time to put a link to the judges actual remarks or comment on them.
- It's todays' exhibit #1 that Dramagreens's are tricky and unreasonable people.
I'm sure Brandon would jump in straight away to point out - it is yet another piece of evidence that Dramagreens care about Propaganda PR narrative, rather than the real world.

What's the Beef ? They use the taxpayer funded Conversation platform as a free blog, rather than putting their material on the Greenpeace blog.
Now it is not wrong that Conversation writers are Greenpeace or FoE members it's just that we know that the Conversation does not reflect the diversity of the real world : non-left wing or contrary views are rarely given the same platform on the Conversation.
But I wouldn't thought it has that much power, as it soon becomes obvious to the reasonable that the Conversation and the Guardian are just the same as the evil image they themselves portray of the Daily Mail.

I guess you could open up a post about it on your CliScep blog ..unruined by D'rks comments

The writer @GraemeHayes, doesn't seem to understand the principles logical argument, as when you suggest that he deliberately left off the judges ruling in preference for a Guardian narrative. He calls that comment an ad hom.
It's only an ad hom if it's used as the basis for winning an argument point...So no, it was just a comment.
(Strangely after always working in the Modern languages faculty, he switched to the sociology faculty last year ..ah PhD in French eco-protest movement)

I note the Brian Doherty co-authors profile is almost 100% blank as he joined "The Coversation" only 2 days ago
I see he wrote an article in 2010 seemingly jealous of the way Fuel Price protesters managed to get govt policy changed peacefully, without crossing the line and getting prosecuted.
Bio : "I have worked at Keele since 1991 after completing my PhD at Manchester University (on The Ideology of Green Parties)." He's writeen books on Direct Action.

Mar 1, 2016 at 7:08 AM | Registered Commenterstewgreen

What is the opportunity for civil action?

Although they may not have assets now a garnering of wages until suitable damages had been paid would sting a bit.

Mar 1, 2016 at 7:00 PM | Unregistered Commenterclovis marcus


Mar 1, 2016 at 8:00 PM | Unregistered CommenterJamspid

clovis 7:00pm:

I suspect that most potential litigants won't even bother, given the English judiciary's soft approach towards 'eco-warriors'.

Mar 1, 2016 at 11:08 PM | Registered CommenterSalopian

[response to snipped comment}

Mar 2, 2016 at 12:31 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork


As I said previously, Dork doesn't do discussion; only derailing, diversion and disingenuity.

Mar 2, 2016 at 12:39 AM | Registered CommenterSalopian

Any more of these and further comments will be deleted.TM

Mar 2, 2016 at 12:44 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Dork of Cork

There was all sorts of bizarre comment in the media recently about the current El Nino causing coral bleaching of Australia's reefs. This makes absolutely no sense since El Nino by definition involves warmer surface waters in the EASTERN pacific. Sea surface Temperatures around Australia are usually completely normal during an El Nino. They are in fact completely normal right now, as you can see by looking at a sea temperature anomaly map. Furthermore even if the sea was warmer it would overall be helpful overall to coral growth as there are many places where coral struggles because the water is too cold and very few places where the water is too hot.

This story looks like a classic example of media failure in this age of low quality journalism. Someone has taken some comment out of context and by interviewing their keyboard and adding a lot of factually incorrect common nonsense about ENSO and global warming off the top of their head has spun an alarming and factually false story out of it. This has then been amplified by lazy journalists writing stories quoting each other and not bothering to check any of the facts.

Mar 2, 2016 at 1:07 AM | Unregistered CommenterIan H

I wonder whether US Immigration will welcome him with Non Violent Direct Action?

Mar 29, 2016 at 4:41 AM | Unregistered CommenterPaykasa bozdurma

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>