jump to navigation

Even Obama does what Rudd won’t dare February 17, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Author Comment, Hypocrisy.
comments closed

Bolt’s Post 18 February, 2010

The issue of nuclear energy as a low-CO2 alternative is one that I’m completely open about and, given my conviction that we need to urgently do something about CO2, also one I’d advocate for, even if only to demonstrate to ideologues like Bolt that the issue really is serious.

But, let’s look at Bolt’s post and consider what it says about his consistency and integrity on this issue. Bolt says:

Barack Obama says yes to two more nuclear power stations:

To meet our growing energy needs and prevent the worst consequences of climate change, we’ll need to increase our supply of nuclear power. It’s that simple.

But somehow it isn’t simple to Kevin Rudd, the alarmist who claims global warming ”is the great moral challenge of our generation” yet is too much the timid populist to do the only useful thing that could slash our emissions by what he wants:

Our policy is that Australia has multiple other energy sources and we will not be heading in the direction of civil nuclear power.

Setting aside the fact that the USA likely has very different energy needs to Australia’s, consider the fact that the chief obstacles in implementing a nuclear energy program in Australia would be:

  1. Public concerns over safety and radioactive waste disposal;
  2. Changes and job losses associated with the change from a coal-based energy system to nuclear.

Whilst I would expect that any government, Coalition or Labor could change public opinion if they really wanted to, I think it’s the latter that would present the real problem.

But now, look at how this issue so readily demonstrates Bolt’s hypocrisy. He’s apparently completely open to the idea of changing our whole energy system and willing to take on all the economic uncertainty and disruption that creates in order to implement a nuclear program but has constantly preached economic doom should we consider such a strategy with using other alternative energy solutions to combat AGW.

Hypocrisy and, given what economic studies have actually shown, misrepresentation. Pure and very simple.


Column – Al gored February 4, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Abuse, Hypocrisy, Misrepresentation, Smear.
comments closed


One of the most absurdly smearing and abusive columns from someone that claims he does not indulge in such and chastises others for doing so:

WHAT a shame Al Gore has left town, trailing gassy contrails…

But, alas, I see the old fraud…

…Nobel Prize-winning guru of global warming…

…I guess there were just too many sponsors Gore had to chat to instead – the green carpetbaggers of wind power, solar schemes and carbon trading who’d paid for him to come scare up more business of the kind that’s made Gore so rich…

So when the Great Green Profit…

…damn Gore as a loose-with-truth fear-monger…

But what of the actual content and context of Bolt’s abusive attacks on Gore?

Two years ago Stuart Dimmock, father of two and school governor, asked England’s High Court to stop education authorities from giving Gore’s film to schools as a teaching aid, since it was political indoctrination and not the mere teaching of science.

True, Justice Michael Burton did technically rule in Gore’s favour by letting the film be sent out, albeit with advice to teachers on its many errors. But Gore deceived the ABC audience by implying the judge ruled “in my favour” on the errors Ewart mentioned.

It’s many errors? 9.

It’s pretty clear that Gore in saying that “Well, the ruling was in my favour”, was actually referring to the fact that the film was not withdrawn.

 I don’t think you have quite told the truth. Not all of it, at least.

Really? Because that’s what Bolt does without fail. Doesn’t he?


Save the planet! Poison Chinese workers February 4, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Deception, Hypocrisy.
comments closed


Every time you switch on an energy-efficient, warming friendly light, a Chinese worker gets sick:

WHEN British consumers are compelled to buy energy-efficient lightbulbs from 2012, they will save up to 5m tons of carbon dioxide a year from being pumped into the atmosphere. In China, however, a heavy environmental price is being paid for the production of “green” lightbulbs in cost-cutting factories.

Large numbers of Chinese workers have been poisoned by mercury, which forms part of the compact fluorescent lightbulbs. A surge in foreign demand, set off by a European Union directive making these bulbs compulsory within three years, has also led to the reopening of mercury mines that have ruined the environment.

Just one in the on-going Bolt “Save the Planet” series. Whilst it is understood these are intended to be tongue in cheek, it does serve to demonstrate that Bolt’s approach to the AGW issue is not sceptically based but one derived from a hatred of the other side.

The green religion has its first baptism February 4, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Hypocrisy.
comments closed


Even a dunking in cold water couldn’t shake her new faith:

TEENAGER Anna Surridge is so passionate about climate change she organised her own eco-baptism….

The Bishop of Llandaff High School pupil worked out that the electricity needed to raise the temperature of a baptistery (for immersion baptisms) to a comfortable temperature could be equivalent to making a thousand cups of tea and that it easily holds more than 1,000 litres of water. So she decided to be baptised in a more green way… during a weekend camp near Brecon in the river Usk…

“The weather was fantastic, but the water was freezing. I was wearing a wetsuit, as was my dad who baptised me, but I most certainly could still feel the cold.”

Worthy of inclusion only because it demonstrates Bolt’s hypocrisy: criticise for perception of hypocrisy and criticise when they attempt to practice what they preach.

Incidentally, the claim that AGW advocates are practicing a religion is yet another demonstration of Bolt’s hypocrisy. Given his scientific backgound or lack thereof and his repeated demonstrations that he doesn’t understand much of it even the basic science, it is logical to conclude that Bolt’s position on AGW is one of faith also.

Unscheduled Earth Hours likely February 4, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Abuse, Hypocrisy, Smear.
comments closed


Picture of Al Gore working in front of several computer monitors:

Al Gore works out on one of his computers fresh ways to cut even more power:

Absurd smearing and abuse.

Seeming green February 4, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Hypocrisy, Smear.
comments closed


This is one of a constant stream of posts where Bolt claims hypocrisy on the part of any AGW advocate should they fly in a plane or happen to be wealthy:

The sacrifices that Gwyneth Paltrow makes for the environment:

For Gwyneth, going green doesn’t mean giving up her designer duds. The actress recommends trying out Stella McCartney’s new Eco Collection, which ranges from US$435 to $1535 and is made from 100 per cent organic cotton and recycled materials, available at Stella McCartney stores.

Even the private jet she uses is recycled, I believe. As is her Mercedes SUV.

The argument is a patently foolish and absurd one but that has never stopped Bolt.

One could ask him the question: Was he a hypocrite because he advocated for the Iraq war but did not give up his job to go off and fight it? Of course, that is an absurd proposition also but no more so than Bolt’s own.

No to Gore February 4, 2010

Posted by BlueGreen in Abuse, Hypocrisy, Smear.
comments closed


Not everyone at green millionaire Al Gore’s latest Melbourne mass for global warmings believers will be a carpetbagger or dupe:

A carpetbagger? A dupe? But smearing and abuse is the domain of the “Left” is it not?

The post links to another post of Bolt’s which in turns links to a Foundation Watch article which sets out how Gore has invested in and made money from “green enterprise”.

Bolt constantly claims that funding sources and smearing are not to be tolerated from his opposition.