|
Post by StuartG on Oct 2, 2010 17:12:07 GMT 1
If the You Tube version is taken it says ' warning graphic content' so that makes it alright. Perhaps they see that there's a chance that this adverse publicity will do them some good.....? Still didn't view it.
mod: just tap on video pic on « Reply #28 Today at 15:48 »
|
|
|
Post by helen on Oct 2, 2010 17:27:51 GMT 1
What a bunch of prigs! Do you not recogonise satire? It's been extant for hundreds of years and blunt, cruel and subversive as ever. Do you remember Chris Morris's satirical tv series Brass Eye where celebrities (Phil Collins and others), amongst other things were persuaded to denounce paedophililia by wearing t-shirts bearing such slogans as I'm talking nonce sense here; or their successful attempt to have discussed in parliament the lethal and entirely fictitious drug 'cake?' If satire makes a point in its often dark and cruel wit to expose any of the politically driven and unsupported nonsense published in the press and on line as science then it is as perfectly valid a medium as any other.
Of course I know what IEDs can do, I remember the cruelty of the IRA and the UVF; the Death squads operating in the Balkans and Russia - that's in Europe you know! - not two decades ago and all the other terrible things going on in the world. Elevating disagreement with 'scientific extremists' who are merely folk with whom you happen to have a difference of opinion to the extremes of realpolitik is grist to the satirists mill and if it makes you uncomfortable think about your position within the argument.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 2, 2010 17:28:23 GMT 1
Specially for Eamonn, who seems to be hooked on scaremongering "projections" millennia ahead! Here's a quote from Kevin Trenberth
From Max_OK on WUWT a few more words of advice for Eamonn.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Oct 2, 2010 17:37:37 GMT 1
'What a bunch of prigs! Do you not recogonise satire?' Apparently not, I don't as one of the prigs. I do recognise bluster when it happens.
'A person who demonstrates an exaggerated conformity or propriety, especially in an irritatingly arrogant or smug manner.'
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 2, 2010 17:57:58 GMT 1
How about this, Eamonn?
In the Middle Ages experts said, “We don’t know what causes crops to fail: it must be witches.”
Now, experts say, “We don’t know what causes global climate change: it must be emissions from human activity.”
This is the argument from ignorance that Eamonn expects us to swallow.
Back to the drawing board IPCC climatologists! Start collecting and then understanding the EVIDENCE presented by the cycles of the natural world before positing these fatuous "anthropogenic CO2" "explanations" of climate.
|
|
|
Post by helen on Oct 2, 2010 18:04:16 GMT 1
Well you may well conclude that Stuart but I see many antipathetical parallels (forgive the oxymoron there but it is entirely deliberate) in the scary scenarios expressed when art and science coincide and the 'common sense' anti science expressed by the 'all's for the best in this the best possible of all worlds' (apologies to Voltaire) brigades of those who dismiss AGW as an active process in it's entirety.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 2, 2010 18:04:55 GMT 1
Well I hav eben called a racist, homophobe, xenophobe, misogynist, bigot, , b*st*rd, Sh*t, and many other things , but 'prig' is afirst Have you ever been called a prick? If not have this one on me.
|
|
|
Post by helen on Oct 2, 2010 18:15:12 GMT 1
No, I've never been called a prick, not in any in any pejorative sense any how; thorn in someone's side on an occasion some years ago which was a veiled compliment. So thanks for that Naymissus, there's always time for a first!
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Oct 2, 2010 18:49:41 GMT 1
Now now children.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Oct 2, 2010 20:35:47 GMT 1
Helen, 'those who dismiss AGW as an active process in it's entirety.' I don't think there are many who would do that in this country [can't speak for USA] it's not that they disbelieve, they distrust. nuLabour took great delight in deceit and disinformation [bit too political really, but still], please don't tell me they didn't, or that they were 'misunderstood'. [It's a fag to unearth some of their more glaring bits of disinformation.] Suffice to say they did, and that it was learned from the now administration in the USA. It was surprising how many people were conned, and for how long too. It came right in the end, and led to their undoing. Whilst that was happening, the 'AGW' was taken on , with typical disinformation and figure frigging. This was seen through by the General Public, and where it wasn't it was treated with distrust, just in case. {the GP referred to here are the ones who show any concept of AGW.} It was used as a way to give the GP a diversion and also a way of making money. It was done lots of times, Speed cameras, transfer of property, parking, - pass a law, set up operators to use/enforce the new rules, make money. 'Carbon Trust' selling CO2 to the unwary. The same old problem, Gp doesn't see Science, and Scientists don't see anything but the science. They forget the 'every day lore' because they [generally] have not been in the outside world, and the Scientists lost their 'street cred' for the one thing that they were considered good at - Science. You're going to tell me I'm talking rubbish, fine. I've had to 'chaperone' some in the past, great to talk to about science, but they had no 'savvy' and had to be protected.
mod: change insights for deceit
|
|
|
Post by principled on Oct 2, 2010 21:29:10 GMT 1
Helen
Thanks for that Helen. I normally don't like branding people or name calling, but if being a prig means I know where to the drawn the line between satire and pointless graphical violence, then count me in. I'll wear the badge with pride.
BTW, I have no concerns about trying to reduce CO2 by 10%, seems eminently sensible. I would have complained had the AGW skeptics produced the video.
Stuart: I actually got a reply from O2, but not as yet from 10 10. Like you, I can find no way to contact Sony. I've also requested my MP to ask a parliamentary question about the funds given to this entity by gov. agencies. I'll keep you updated.
In the meantime, let's get back to CC science. P
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Oct 2, 2010 22:11:25 GMT 1
Just received an email from Kyocera Mita UK, it was from one of their 'high ups' and was a personal communication. However the gist is .. 'A formal statement will be issued in due course' Stuart
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 4, 2010 22:03:53 GMT 1
Now the parodies!
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 4, 2010 22:09:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Oct 4, 2010 22:12:27 GMT 1
|
|