Persistence of Vision

Major geekiness

Posted by Eamon Brennan on September 19, 2009, 23:27:37

Corridors????

link...

Re: Major geekiness

Posted by Sue S on September 20, 2009, 13:53:46, in reply to "Major geekiness"

Awesome! Nothing cheers me up quicker than major geekiness, and I confess to being somewhat unwell at the moment

I have been watching Doctor Who since its first broadcast in 1963. What struck me about the first appearance of the Daleks, the Daleks* themselves? No, the triangular corridors!

Sue

* Firefox spellchecker dictionary doesn't have Dalek!!!!!

Respond

"a coveted passage"

Posted by madam doom (we love iran) on September 20, 2009, 15:14:32, in reply to "Major geekiness"

new york times

a coveted passage

by andrew e. kramer and andrew c. revkin

moscow

for hundreds of years, mariners have dreamed of an arctic shortcut that would allow them to speed trade between asia and the west.

two german ships are navigating that transit for the first time this month, aided by the retreat of of arctic [sea] ice that scientists have linked to global warming...

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/climate/greenpeace-admits-bbc-got-it-wrong-about-arctic-sea-ice-melting-20090820

Respond

Re: "a coveted passage"

Posted by Sue S on September 20, 2009, 17:15:00, in reply to ""a coveted passage""

"
for hundreds of years, mariners have dreamed of an arctic shortcut that would allow them to speed trade between asia and the west.

two german ships are navigating that transit for the first time this month, aided by the retreat of of arctic [sea] ice that scientists have linked to global warming... "

Except it isn't of course. Like so much AGW alarmist propaganda this statement is total bullshit . Surely the fact that two ice breakers were required would have rung alarm bells as far as using this story as 'evidence of global warming' was concerned? Also, given that the ships were delivering cargo to the Siberian city of Surgut , they really didn't have much choice over their route.

Always check MSM stories, even when they pander to your prejudices.

Sue.

Respond

well, at least we're still on "responding terms"

Posted by madam doom (we love iran) on September 20, 2009, 17:39:48, in reply to "Re: "a coveted passage""

it's all about trying to use news narrative paradigms from the past in an attempt to convey new meaning.

everyone seems to have heard of an arctic ocean "passage". that's why it's been used for the literally scores of articles on the matter this week.

the question is : did they use icebreakers, then ? some say not.

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/commercial-arctic-passage-nearing-goal/

"Dr. Brigham said that to a large extent, it is Russian bureaucracy more than sea ice or icebergs that is impeding international use of the Arctic route along its coast, which has in theory been open to such transit since 1987."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32800658/

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE58B01K20090912

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2096

http://www.examiner.com/x-4648-Atlanta-Weather-Examiner~y2009m9d6-Arctic-passage-open-without-ice-breakers-first-time-in-history

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=german-ships-successfully

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/Europe/EU_Germany_Arctic_Passage.html

Respond

Re: well, at least we're still on "responding terms"

Posted by Sue S on September 21, 2009, 8:53:54, in reply to "well, at least we're still on "responding terms""

"it's all about trying to use news narrative paradigms from the past in an attempt to convey new meaning. "

Why don't you just say 'lying':

“To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest.”

Stephen Schneider, Discover, October 1989 (p47)

Sue.

Respond

what about the "no icebreakers were used in the making of this passage" claim ?

Posted by madam doom (we love iran) on September 21, 2009, 19:03:55, in reply to "Re: well, at least we're still on "responding terms""

you surely know about "branding" ?

climate change really turns people off. something has to be done to paint the picture in a vivid way. that's not to say that people are lying - just contracting the timespan a little - fast forwarding to the future damages because they mistakenly think that th current damages are not already big enough.

if you look at climate change reporting *this* year, you'll find evidential reporting, not forecasting. the narrative has become reality. there's no need for propaganda or any kind of sales job.

the real deal :-
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0918/p06s04-wome.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza/2009/09/mexico-heavy-rains-cant-beat-the-drought.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/6190033/Droughts-force-Indian-farmers-to-sell-wives-to-pimps.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29028406/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/09/090921-kenya-animals-drought-water.html

sales jobbing :-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/17/public-bored-climate-change
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/07/david-miliband-global-warming-tour
http://www.greenmuze.com/blogs/green-light/1572-climate-change-rebrand.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/sep/21/climate-change-ozone-hole

Respond

«Back to thread

[ Persistence of Vision ]