Home
> AGW, Catastrophism, Climate Change, Global Warming, Omniclimate > Revisiting The 10/10/10 Global Work Party – An Unmitigated Disaster
Revisiting The 10/10/10 Global Work Party – An Unmitigated Disaster
Nevermind children getting blown up by their teacher and other similar amusements, nevermind the pre-packaged, obnoxiously boring “press releases” by 350.org, nevermind the minimalistic reporting on solidly-warmist outlets such as The New York Times, nevermind the barebone Wikipedia page….the best evidence that the 10/10/10 Global Work Party has been an unmitigated disaster is how little there is about it, in the Guardian’s 10-10 microsite.
One has also to wonder why the microsite sports two pictures of Eugenie Harvey. Has she got relations at the newspaper, one wonders?
Categories: AGW, Catastrophism, Climate Change, Global Warming, Omniclimate
10/10/10, 350.org. Bill McKibben, Culture, Global Warming
The Unbearable Nakedness of CLIMATE CHANGE 
hro001 – “low-carbon lifestyle for thee, but not for me”
I guess touring the world and living in-between five-star-hotels for free, away from the dirty little people one calls “emitters”, that’s another very very good cure for “mild depression”
And/ or very, very wild (fantasies of) suppression.
But I must register a protest …
“hro001 – “low-carbon lifestyle for there, but not for me”
What I had written was:
“low-carbon lifestyle for thee, but not for me”
So, that’s your typo, not mine 😉
Typo? What typo? 😎
Furthermore…the prospect of spending some time on expenses in Cancun in December, _that_ I could use to prevent mild depression from happening to me at least until the summer…
Indeed! Which reminds me … I was rummaging around on the site containing the documentation supposedly reviewed at the Korean confab.
There was a line item in the 2009 Budget for “Webconferences” CHF6,000 … of which they spent CHF0.
They’ve doubled the amount for this year … it will be interesting to see how much they actually spend!
Click to access doc03_p32_progr_and_budget.pdf
Have just blogged about the Psychiatrists.
Hopefully nice men in white coats won’t show up in the morning…
The response to the 10/10/10 “work party” in the media does indeed appear to be on the sparse side. Most of the coverage is in the Guardian, but even that looks underwhelming. The Independent put out an article about it beforehand on 4th Oct (optimistically entitled “Communities pull together for Global Work Party 2010”) but on the 10th itself published an article entitled “Green fatigue hits campaign to reduce carbon footprint: Car sales, flights and waste all increase as the recession takes its toll on consumers’ motivation” which told a different story entirely.
Reuters has a piece “10/10/10 Global Warming “Work Party” in 140 Characters or Less” dated 11th Oct, but this was written by the co-founder of a decidedly warmist-leaning site called solveclimatenews; even so, there is some ambivalence: “”#101010 rally in downtown Philly sparsely attended at best (120 ppl?). Why such apathy about #climate change?” tweeted Miranda Spencer, who described herself as an independent journalist and media critic.”
And that’s about it; the print media plus TV/radio might have mentioned it – personally, I heard nothing in the UK broadcast news the following week.
hro001, re the RCPsych quote, the RCPSych web site has this quote from Professor Dinesh Bhugra: ” “People who engage in active, low-carbon activities, such as walking or cycling more often, are not only cutting emissions but keeping their bodies and minds healthy. For mild depression, physical activity can be as good as antidepressants or psychological treatments such as cognitive behavioural therapy.”
True, walking and cycling are healthy activities in that they promote physical fitness and may help to ward off mild depression. That they are also “low carbon” is irrelevant, however; the RCPsych and Guardian asserting that “a low-carbon lifestyle could improve mental health” is thus stretching the claim a bit too far, to put it politely!
A low-carbon lifestyle surely improves the mental health of people convinced that a low-carbon lifestyle is needed to save the planet.
Except that from what we’ve seen thus far (e.g. Gore, Armstrong, McKibben), it would appear that in order to “save the planet” it’s very much a case of “low-carbon lifestyle for thee, but not for me”.
Alex, the extended quote you found certainly makes more sense than the Guardian’s “synthesis” thereof. Knowing of the Guardian’s penchant for viewing the world through green-tinted glasses, I really should have known better 😉
Perhaps the Guardian wants to maintain the illusion of “onwards and upwards”?! Seems that “4 medical organizations” must have missed the No Pressure boomerang, considering Harvey’s euphoric Oct. 18 announcement.
By the looks of things, in addition to the “biodiversity” threat being drummed up by the current UNEP offspring’s confab, according to the Guardian, climate change could pose the “biggest global health threat of the 21st century”. But there is some “good news” – according to this same article:
“One of the bodies, the RCPsych, said that research showed a low-carbon lifestyle could improve mental health.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/18/10-10-climate-campaign-medical-associations
Amazing. Simply amazing.