"10:10" anti-AGW org threatens to blow opposers up?

[Grunthos]

I couldnt believe this was for-real when I first heard about it... but I looked into it and it was the real deal - - though after the (seems to me obvious) backlash hit, the originators took the video down.

sSTLDel-G9k

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film

I'm just left speechless.

[Tonus]

I thought it was a hysterical ad, and I'm sure that the guys that made it are a truly inspired bunch. But I can't believe that the 10:10 people didn't stop to realize that it would be an absolutely awful idea to green light this for any sort of promotional campaign. The implication is so obvious that it's simply inexcusable.

The worst part for the AGW crowd is that there hasn't been much news or coverage of climate-change issues recently, so this comes out of the blue and it will paint them as desperate. This will be used to make it seem as if AGW supporters as a whole have run out of facts or data in favor of their agenda, and have thus turned to... death threats?

The movement has officially begun to implode, IMO.

[Grunthos]

Its release coming almost simultaneously with this little gem of a news story just puts a patina of surreal on top of the general macabrity of the intent:

DUBAI, Oct 1 (Reuters) - Osama bin Laden criticised relief efforts in Pakistan and called for action against climate change in what appeared to be a new audio tape from the al Qaeda leader issued on Friday in an Islamist forum.


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE6901DG20101001


Considering that the British Royal Society has recently decided to back away from the certainty of "settled science" with regard to AGW, the only people who don't realize that the 'movement' has followed all good movements down the swirling gurgler would be those same supporters.

The Royal Society’s Toned Down Climate Stance
Posted on September 30, 2010 by Anthony Watts

The statement and document from the Royal Society follows this press release
The Global Warming Policy Foundation, 30 September 2010

LONDON, 30 September – The Global Warming Policy Foundation has welcomed the Royal Society’s decision to revise and tone down its position on climate change. Its new climate guide is an improvement on their more alarmist 2007 pamphlet which caused an internal rebellion by more than 40 fellows of the Society and triggered a review and subsequent revisions.

The former publication gave the misleading impression that the ‘science is settled’ – the new guide accepts that important questions remain open and uncertainties unresolved. “The Royal Society now also agrees with the GWPF that the warming trend of the 1980s and 90s has come to a halt in the last 10 years,” said Dr Benny Peiser, the Director of the GWPF.


Dr David Whitehouse, the science editor of the GWPF said: “The biggest failing of the new guide is that it dismisses temperature data prior to 1850 as limited and leaves it at that. It would cast a whole new light on today’s warming if the Medieval Warm Period, the Roman Warm Period and the Bronze Age Warm Period were as warm as today, possiblity even warmer than today. A thorough discussion of the growing empirical evidence for the global existence of the Medieval Warm Period and its implications would have been a valuable addition to the new report.”

In their old guide, the Royal Society demanded that governments should take “urgent steps” to cut CO2 emissions “as much and as fast as possible.” This political activism has now been replaced by a more sober assessment of the scientific evidence and ongoing climate debates.

“If this voice of moderation had been the Royal Society’s position all along, its message to Government would have been more restrained and Britain’s unilateral climate policy would not be out of sync with the rest of the world,” Dr Peiser said.

###

The statement and document from the Royal Society follows:

Climate change: A Summary of the Science

The Royal Society, 30 September 2010

Climate change continues to be a subject of intense public and political debate. Because of the level of interest in the topic the Royal Society has produced a new guide to the science of climate change. The guide summarises the current scientific evidence on climate change and its drivers, highlighting the areas where the science is well established, where there is still some debate, and where substantial uncertainties remain.

The document was prepared by a working group chaired by Professor John Pethica, Vice President of the Royal Society and was approved by the Royal Society Council.

Download the guide here (PDF).


Nice of them to decide to agree with the established fact of recent and accurate measurements, huh?

Links at the link:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/30/the-royal-societys-toned-down-climate-stance/#more-25613

[Reserv*ir]

Just got done with being ill, and now I see this. Warning please?

Nonsensical, very threatening, and in plainly poor taste. Can't imagine how they thought that'd be good to air.

[Dr. L]

Was that a satire? I certainly hope so. The Earth needs preservation for more than aesthetic reasons, but they're only painting themselves as nutjobs and alienating more people. This is really counter-productive =/

It was fine when they tied themselves to trees. Tying themselves and/or their enemies to bombs... they're just plain daffy now. Americans are supposed to use ideas as their weapons, words as their ammunition. That right is outlined for us. Whatever happened to that old "Make Love, Not war" slogan they used to champion?

The only solution for peace: Blow up everyone with an argument.

Barbarians. :confused:

[KB.]

Was that a satire? I certainly hope so. The Earth needs preservation for more than aesthetic reasons, but they're only painting themselves as nutjobs and alienating more people. This is really counter-productive =/

It was fine when they tied themselves to trees. Tying themselves and/or their enemies to bombs... they're just plain daffy now. Americans are supposed to use ideas as their weapons, words as their ammunition. That right is outlined for us. Whatever happened to that old "Make Love, Not war" slogan they used to champion?

The only solution for peace: Blow up everyone with an argument.

Barbarians. :confused:


Um, I didn't see any 'Americans' in that commercial. Unless accents have changed dramatically over the past few weeks.

[Dr. L]

Um, I didn't see any 'Americans' in that commercial. Unless accents have changed dramatically over the past few weeks.

...Shit. Methinks my train of thought crossed to a different railroad.


:smithshotgun:

[Grunthos]

Was that a satire? I certainly hope so.

It was not.