You are in a maze of twisting little think-tanks, all different

cite as: F. Bi. 2009. You are in a maze of twisting little think-tanks, all different. Intl. J. Inact., 2:81–82

Well, a while back when I was exploring the network of ‘policy think-tanks’ which oppose global warming regulation, I floated the idea of writing a computer program to collect information about the think-tank web sites and their IP addresses so that they can be cross-referenced. I then wrote up an initial version of the program and uploaded it, but unfortunately I managed to stash the hyperlink into an excerpt of Milton’s Paradise Lost.

Anyway, I say all this because Brian D just asked me for the program — so I thought I’ll now provide a link to the latest version, and stash it in another excerpt of Milton. :)

But what if better counsels might erect
Our minds, and teach us to cast off this yoke?
Will ye submit your necks, and choose to bend
The supple knee? Ye will not, if I trust
To know ye right, or if ye know yourselves
Natives and sons of Heaven possessed before
By none; and if not equal all, yet free,
Equally free: for orders and degrees
Jar not with liberty, but well consist.

– Satan to his angel-followers, in John Milton, Paradise Lost

Anyway, some notes on the program:

I am not a wingnut, but…

cite as: F. Bi. 2009. I am not a wingnut, but… Intl. J. Inact., 2:47–49

A novice monk once asked the High Priest of the Goracle, “Great Master, does the global warming skeptic movement have the Wingnut Nature?”

The High Priest let him listen to an audio mash-up of Christopher Monckton’s speech at the Heartland conference.

Upon this, the novice was enlightened.

* * *

Still, the raving wingnuts are still trying to convince, well, some people, that they’re not actually raving wingnuts, but merely reasonable-minded defenders of the Plain Truth or something. How? By using euphemisms, that’s how. Witness an essay by Susan Easton in Human Events about the Heartland climate ’science’ conference:

Andrew Revkin is the Völkischer Beobachter of Liberal Fascism?

cite as: F. Bi. 2009. Andrew Revkin is the Völkischer Beobachter of Liberal Fascism? Intl. J. Inact., 2:39–40

Update on the take-home message of the Heartland Institute’s self-styled 2009 International Conference on “Global Warming Is A Scam And Al Gore Is Fat” Climate Change: it seems that the take-home message turned out to be something between

████ ██████ ██ ██████ ████ Czech President Václav Klaus █████ ███ █████████ █ ███!

and

███ ██ ███████ █ ███ James Hansen ███ █ ███ ungood █ ███!!! ^{1, 2, 3}

No real prizes for you if you got it right (sorry), but if there’s a demand for web stickers or some such, perhaps I can come up with some.

Besides James Hansen, the ‘conference’ supporters are also particularly angry at another person: New York Times reporter Andrew Revkin. He’s supposedly guilty of such high crimes as “support[ing] and defend[ing] the liberal editorial policies of his employers” — which is weird, because (as I said before) he didn’t really say anything bad about the ‘conference’ outright. Oh well.

Footnotes

1. Let me know if you disagree.
2. In comments at his blog, Greenfyre asked me how I did the ‘redacted’ thing. Well, it’s a character in the Unicode character encoding, specifically U+2588 FULL BLOCK. You can obtain it with the HTML code █ or █.
3. Speaking of character encodings, please please please don’t do what’s shown in the picture.

Climate alarm is falling! Climate alarm is falling!

cite as: F. Bi. 2009. Climate alarm is falling! Climate alarm is falling! Intl. J. Inact., 2:26

Via Michael Tobis, a story over at Daily Kos :

Perhaps the best innovation in the 2008 [US] presidential campaign was the advent of the post-debate snap poll. For years, we had heard the usual lineup of right-wingers on cable news tell us how bold and impressive their candidate had been in the debate, and somehow, these jokers were allowed to determine the winners and losers of the debates.

In 2008, those snap polls made fools of the talking heads until the last debate, when they finally shut their traps and let the snap polls determine the winners. [...] But the lesson hasn’t been learned, and we’re once again seeing this huge divide between the out-of-touch DC chattering class and, well, everyone else.

And guess what, we have the same type of chattering heads in the global warming ‘debate’! Just check out, say, the fact-free garbage that Pielke Jr. is spewing and the International Climate ‘Science’ Coalition is spreading. Maybe they’re thinking that, if they create a “reality” that’s convincing enough to their pet Congressmen, it’ll become true — for their practical purposes, at least.

We are really, really suing Al Gore really, and here is a silly graph

cite as: F. Bi. 2009. We are really, really suing Al Gore really, and here is a silly graph. Intl. J. Inact., 2:14–16

The inactivist New Zealand Climate ‘Science’ Coalition just made a grand announcement, with lots of pomp and fanfare, about the upcoming lawsuit against Al Gore or something. In Viscount Christopher Monckton’s own words:

There are now serious discussions afoot to lodge complaints against Gore to the federal financial and legal authorities, in that he fraudulently talks up the imagined “climate crisis” in the hope that he and his “green” investment corporation can profit by the baseless alarm that his falsehoods generate.

There are “serious discussions”… “now”? I wonder if this means that the “discussions” in the last 10 months or so about suing Al Gore were, in fact, not “serious”? (That sounds about right, since I can see no trace of the “notable attorneys” discussing this supposed case who Coleman claimed exist. In the meantime, you can sign the “Sue Us” Petition to get them to sue Al Gore for real.)

Also, here’s another gem from Monckton’s missive:

International Conference on Climate Change: The Remix Challenge

cite as: F. Bi. 2008. International Conference on Climate Change: The Remix Challenge. Intl. J. Inact., 1:197–198

Jeepers creepers, I just discovered that the Heartland Institute, which organized the inactivist “2008 International Conference on Climate Change” in March, actually ran a YouTube video promoting the ‘conference’ back in January.

Now, if I have enough time, I’ll probably try to remix it in time for their “2009 International Conference on Climate Change” next year. For one thing, the background muzak is ripped from the opening of A Little Less Conversation, and is too cheesy (in my very very humble opinion). Maybe I’ll replace the background muzak with the opening strains of Richard Strauss’s Also sprach Zarathustra. Or something by Paris Hilton, I don’t know. Perhaps I’ll also work in some references to

• Al Gore and his Fat Fat Fatness;
• the vast conspiracy of THIRD WORLD KLEPTOCRATS!!! that lurks under your bed;
• the prizes and awards which Professor Lindzen and Viscount Monckton so badly need and so clearly deserve; and
• some random stuff, like kittens.

However, I’m somewhat short of time at the moment, so I’ll leave this as a creative challenge to all of you: How would you like to promote Heartland’s conference next year? Remix the promotional video in whatever way you wish, and let us know what you come up with! :-)

Update 2009-01-24: By yours truly. Not a remix, but it does use Also sprach Zarathustra. :)

The Way of the Astroturf V: no nefarious or lobbying connections

cite as: F. Bi. 2008. The Way of the Astroturf V: no nefarious or lobbying connections. Intl. J. Inact., 1:193–194

Dan, commenting at New Matilda, brings up inactivist Tom Harris’s past employment at the Canadian PR and lobbying firm High Park Group. (The same SourceWatch article later points out indications that Harris was in the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP) even while he was still in HPG.) So, what does Harris do? Answer: ignore ignore ignore :

No one has shown I have any nefarious or lobbying connections, for one simple reason – I DON’T. It would be obviously offensive if I asked you the same question since it would imply that your opinion is for sale. Why will you not extend me the same courtesy?

(Also, even if — even if — he were a lobbyist for vested interests and you can prove that, it’ll be very very wrong to point that out. Because it’ll be an ad hominem, which is Latin for “oh lookie I’m being crucified by evil inquisitors who refuse to discuss only what I want them to discuss oh noes”. Note, however, that comparing people to dictators, like so:

dazza complains: “Sometimes one could wish for godlike powers to silence these people” – yes, this is the wish of most of the dictators in history. Thankfully, our countries still allow dissent from the politically correct wisdom of the gods.

…is not an ad hominem attack.)

Climate ‘skeptics’ approvingly cite … Alex Jones

cite as: F. Bi. 2008. Climate ‘skeptics’ approvingly cite … Alex Jones. Intl. J. Inact., 1:175

Skepticism, my friends, skepticism. I’m crying tears of joy already.

Evidence of no evidence

cite as: F. Bi. 2008. Evidence of no evidence. Intl. J. Inact., 1:168

Well, I’ve been busy lately, so I’ll just point you to a cartoon by Australian ‘journalist’ Joanne Nova on the last page of her The Skeptics Handbook. It’s captioned thus:

Duh. After 50 billion dollars it [climate change research] says “Give Up. Go Home. CO₂ didn’t do it”.

Now, I’ve been hearing this “50 billion dollars” figure quite a number of times, but can anyone tell me where it came from and how it was derived in the first place? Well, page 2 of the handbook says,

Non believers [of global warming] don’t have to prove anything.

Oh, sorry. I shouldn’t have asked.

* * *

(Via the inimitable International Climate Science Coalition, who obviously don’t have to prove anything either.)

Tom Harris may need some helium

cite as: F. Bi. 2008. Tom Harris may need some helium. Intl. J. Inact., 1:143

Announcement: Sign the “Sue Us” Petition and urge Monckton and others
to sue Gore and Hansen as repeatedly threatened! 60 signatures so far!

Primo

Well, here’s a (long-overdue) update to my genealogy of climate conspiracy theories. It now includes

• the conspiracy theory laid out by Tom Harris in his presentation at the Heartland Institute’s “2008 International Conference on Climate Change” (specifically, Slides 5–7 and 13); and
• Peter Morgan’s theory, which was discussed by Matthew Dentith.

(As before, you can view the updated genealogy by clicking on the sultry girl.)

Secundo

And, speaking of Harris and Heartland… apparently the freedom-loving Heartland Institute, in an act of supreme inactivist freedom, has now removed the link to the conference proceedings from their web site! The audio recordings are now on a different page, but many of the hyperlinks are broken — including the link to Harris’s speech.

Fortunately, I’ve already archived Harris’s presentation and a section of his speech, so you can still continue to experience the joy of learning about “coordinated local activism” by listening to his mellifluous voice. ☻

Update 2008-09-19: The audios are now back — at different addresses. Perhaps Heartland simply moved the audios and forgot to update the hyperlinks to them.