Written By:
Guest post - Date published:
1:30 pm, September 1st, 2009 - 51 comments
Categories: act, climate change, humour, science -
Tags:
ACT Party Press Release 1/4/2010: ACT has now identified the number one threat to personal freedom, to unbounded economic growth and to vast wealth for all who deserve it. It is “science”. “Science” creates nothing but trouble.
“Science” causes climate change. The essence of the matter is that New Zealanders are being asked to cut their incomes on the grounds that “science” has proven beyond reasonable doubt that future human-induced climate change is likely to be dangerous. The solution is obvious — get rid of the “science”. No “science” no problem.
“Science” causes petrol shortages. If it wasn’t for “scientists” and their communist graphs “proving” that you can’t suck infinite amounts of oil out of a finite planet then there would be cheap petrol forever. “Science” causes pollution. If “scientists” would just put away their test tubes and logarithms and go out and get real jobs then pollution would remain mostly colourless and odourless and therefore obviously harmless. And “science” causes disease. Before “scientists” invented “germs” as a way of perpetually sucking taxpayer funding from the Socialist state no one got sick, men were real men, property rights ruled supreme, and everyone was truly truly free (unless they were locked up in prison because we’re very keen on law and order).
We’re not sure how they manage it, but we’re pretty sure that “science” is also responsible for Paris Hilton, earthquakes, Mondays, the global financial crisis, rap music, gang patches, baldness and impotence. “Science” confuses people so much that only 1% of them vote for ACT. Get rid of the “science” and New Zealand will have an ACT government from now until the end of the Earth…
— r0b
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Science is responsible for rap music???
I thought it was young New Zealand rappers who for some reason think they are African Americans because they can put a blue or red scarf around their heads, and scream “Whats up” down Colombo street.
anyone who has actually visited the USA, will know how far off the beaten track, these rappers are, when it comes to knowledge of gang life in America.
You’re opening a can of worms there brett. Be careful – Maori have had over a century of Europeans telling them what cultural practices they should be living.
While I’m not a huge fan of hip hop, I’d have to say in all fairness to hip hop artists, they don’t seem guilty of the cultural confusion that you seem to want to pin on them, Brett. They’re pretty clearly trying to own their genre in a different way to American rappers- even if they have often inherited the bragging-based culture that seems to pervade most of hiphop. (with a few notable and enjoyable exceptions)
…they don’t seem guilty of the cultural confusion that you seem to want to pin on them, Brett.
Certainly no more so than any of the other musical forms and associated subcultures we’ve “imported” such as hmm, let’s see – rock music, breakbeat, punk, reggae, that godawful psytrance the hippies play, jazz, blues, and even (gasp) Brett’s beloved inbred redneck country & western music.
Perhaps Brett thinks we should stop doing all of that and limit ourselves strictly to indigenous instruments and forms.
You seem to be confusing rap and hip-hop. I’d prefer to not see you doing that again.
A.C.T
vs.
S.O.A.D
Science fails to recognise the single most
potent element of human existence
letting the reigns go to the unfolding
is faith, faith, faith, faith
Science has failed our world
science has failed our mother earth
Hmm – they seem to have a fair bit in common, but their idea of ‘faith’ might vary a bit.
nooo Maynard – leave S.O.A.D out of this – i’d prefer them to remain a distant memory of my teenage years thanks.
a “science” ate my baby!
Judging by what ACT said in the link that was provided, they are big believers in Personal Responsibility, which I guess would make them an enemy of the left.
It is a pity that they haven’t taken their personal responsibility seriously enough to learn enough science to understand the issues.
Hiding with your head stuck in their collective navels like ACT has doesn’t sound like they’re taking responsibility to me. It sounds more like avoiding responsibility.
I would’ve thought polluters paying for their emissions is the height of personal responsibility, Brett- tell me, why do you think the Act Party opposes such responsible behaviour?
It makes ACT the enemy of progress. Modern societies depend upon all sorts of insurance schemes, both private and public. Such schemes create moral hazard, but we keep them because everyone ends up better off overall. Given that fundamental fact, it is largely pointless to go on about personal responsibility.
It’s a silly concept anyway.
Fell over laughing at Federated Farmers comments on the ETS.
Do you know, they advocated a research levy? This would pay for some serious science to study the question. Great idea.
But I seem to recall they marched on Parliament to stop this proposal, when it was $300 per farm, per year….one bloke even drove his tractor (without cab) up the steps. Same bloke now has a job inside the building, wonder what he is thinking.
But it’s always a great idea when some one else is paying…..
I take it you have never heard of DairyInsight, Dexcel or DairyNZ, wool and meat have similar things but I forget thier names. What the farmers were protesting was the government getting control of something that was already inplace and working well.
These organistions have been/are putting more money into research for the environment then any other NZ group that I know of
Of course ACT dont like science, it has the disarming charm in that it makes empirical judgements based upon evidence. ACT have plenty of theories, just no evidence that any actually work.
I have come to conclude that every time someone mentions ‘personal responsibility’ it is newspeak for some ploy for people to shirk their responsibilities, or freeload off those who do not.
They really have found a niche in fruit loop land, haven’t they.
FFS.
Toad, coming from the Green’s that is rather funny especially when you consider what your former co-leader said regarding the conservation estate… care to remind us what that was?
Something about even mining 100 hectares would be like saying “if you have six kids and you lose one it doesn’t mater”… ring a bell?
So is ACTs policy a metaphor then Lukas?
If so what does it mean?
PB, I have not seen any metaphors in ACT policy.
Do you think the Green’s equate the value of a few trees to that of a human life?
Jeez lukas, that’s the metaphor Pb was referring to – do you need everything spelled out for you?
It were you who drew a parallel between a literal statement and a metaphor from the greens. Are you really so dim that you could miss that not only as you typed it but even hours later when your error was so very gently pointed out to you by Pb?
Perhaps it’s past your bedtime anyway lukey pookey.
wrong Felix.
I was referring to Toad’s comment “have found a niche in fruit loop land”
Orly?
God you’re slow. Toad talks about a literal actard statement. You compare it to a green metaphor. Pb points out the error. Wukey gets confused and still is.
Poor wittle wukey.
wrong again Felix, I was simply pointing out the lunacy in Toad’s statement given what Jeanette has said. For the “green” Party to be accusing ACT of finding a niche in fruit loop land is hypocritical
Because the greens used a metaphor?
a metaphor comparing mining the conservation estate to losing a child…do you not find that a strange metaphor to use? Do you think Jeanette would retract it if given the chance?
No I don’t find it strange Lukas. But then I don’t take it literally, on account of it being a metaphor.
I wouldn’t have a clue if she’d take it back. If a bunch of morons started bleating ridiculous shit about “omigod, she sed trees are excatly like teh babeeez”, then she might feel it politically wise to take it back. But that’s politics, and it would reflect more on the morons than her, in my view.
Oh, so it’s ok if New Zealand, you know, the country bit, warms up a little bit, as long as it isn’t as warm as the rest of the world, and is beneficial to us directly?
Obviously Act don’t care if all of our major trading partners suddenly can’t afford to buy our exports if they have to spend so much money at home to relocate their people due to rising waterlines, or if their economies go to crap due to droughts and floods…
It’s very trivial to see those affects in the current environment – NZ itself hasn’t done too badly the last 12 months or so, yet we’re in recession simply because the rest of the world also is in recession…
I do wonder just what Rodney is playing at given that he has a University background and I think specialised in um Land use of some sort. It is hard to believe that he is honest about denial. So why would he take this direction?
Why indeed. Surely he entered politics for a change of climate.
Is this really helping?
This is just going to be put next to the Kiwiblog post of the fake Green party abortion policy.
As I recall James it wasn’t the presence of humour that was the issue with the kb abortion post, rather the tastelessness of said humour.
James. The opposition to Farrar’s abortion post wasn’t anti all satire. Come on dude, think about it.
Is what really helping James? Which sentence in the piece is a direct quote from ACTs ETS minority report? Is it satire if ACT said it itself?
Except this is satirising Act’s actual policy. I’m not a huge fan of political satire, but at least this one approaches the task with some sense of honesty.
The sky is falling – the sky is falling – pay taxes and vote green now to save the planet.. Don’t worry that Bush did a better job of reducing emissions in the US than Klark did in NZ, she’s the bomb and the UN love her…. Must be great being a self serving lefty, you can forget the facts and claim science is on your side.
um. the science is on our side.
what facts are we forgetting?
Burt makes the case so much better than I did.
We all know that Helen Clark only tried marginally harder than John Key to reduce emissions burt, give it up. This isn’t a partisan football and you can’t make it into one.
Coincidentally, the security word for this one was DUMB. Heh. 🙂
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
So the science is settled then ?
It never is – it isn’t in the nature of the beast.
However for the people who actually know what they’re talking about, the weight of proof is overwhelming that dumping lots of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is going to change the climate and it isn’t going to be pleasant. Now they’re simply arguing about how bad and how fast the problems will happen and how reversible the change to climate will be..
Its just ACT pandering to thier 3% and hoping to pinch however many deluded Nat voters that still believe this tripe
………..move along, nothing to see here
To be fair, every party in parliament has done their fair share of evidence denial. It’s just that this one is on a more major issue than a lot of others.
@Ianmac
“…So why would he take this direction?…”
Try corruption:
http://deepclimate.org/2009/08/01/meet-alan-gibbs-builder-of-amphibious-humvees-and-climate-science-coalitions/
If it wasn’t for climate crank Alan Gibb’s money, ACT would be discussed in the past tense now. Alan Gibbs purchased a political party, lock stock and climate change policy.
Thanks Tom. I just hope that it isn’t so. It would be a disaster for NZ if Gibb’s money is able to buy.
Well, it wasn’t just Gibbs’ money, lanmac. The SST bought a minority share, too, don’t forget.
A delightful bit of nonsense by Guest writer … wonderful 🙂
A bit of news to ensure the Nats and Act take the ETS seriously.
Air NZ under pressure from EU to reduce emissions.
Air New Zealand is among thousands of operators which must join the European Union’s emission trading scheme by 2012 or face penalties flying there.
This makes the Act party arguments irrelevant and a wakeup call for Johnny boy. Should the EU extend this to trade we could be in deep shite, but then I think Johnny boy knows that.
How can you take National seriously
They are building more Roads
Energy saving lighting ?
Coal fired power stations anyone ?
Mining Lignite anyone interested?
And a watered down ETS?
WTF
Rob A argues about the farming community: These organistions have been/are putting more money into research for the environment then any other NZ group that I know of
Reply Well, Rob A, it’s a pity that the rivers I fly-fish in Taranaki don’t show more benefit from the research. They are congested with algae all summer, turbid and soupy whenever the rains depart. And the maize monoculture that has sprung up over recent years makes things worse.
There has been a lot of riparian fencing and planting, heavily subsidised by the Regional Council, but even then in a lot of places you find ‘gates’ let into the electric fencing to let the cows graze the banks when feed gets short in late summer.
The ‘responsibility’ of the farming community is largely imposed by Fonterra, and there are many flagrant breaches.
I was disgusted with the ‘fart tax’ rebellion then, for it’s calculated disinformation and personal attacks, as much as I am disgusted now when I hear Fed Farm spokesmen defending indefensible single bottom line economics and adding to the climate of climate denialism.