They’ve got 18 better than him?

67 comments on “They’ve got 18 better than him? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. James Kearney 1

   29 February 2008 at 2:10 pm

   MP John Carter says the purpose of prison is to punish inmates

   What a filthy old reactionary. It’s ignorance like that that leads to prisoners getting out unreformed and beating up pensioners and the like. But then I guess National would just see that as an opportunity to write another outraged press release…
2. higherstandard 2

   29 February 2008 at 2:11 pm

   James you may be surprised but putting your rhetoric asside I agree with you if they play sport at the prison it has got to be a good thing
3. Tane 3

   29 February 2008 at 2:13 pm

   MP John Carter says the purpose of prison is to punish inmates\

   I always thought the purpose of prison was to protect the community from harm and reform the prisoner so that when they are released they are no longer a threat to society.

   Guess we now know where National’s priorities lie.
4. Steve Pierson 4

   29 February 2008 at 2:15 pm

   Yeah. That quote’s a keeper.

   best captcha ever. $40,000 anon
5. Barnsley Bill 5

   29 February 2008 at 3:01 pm

   I have mixed emotions about this idea. When I first arrived in NZ I lived for 5 years in Raglan and played football (that would be football and not rugby), the sunday league I played in contained a few unusual teams. As well as suburban and country town teams there was Telecom, the Police, Tokanui hospital (staff, not the pyjama wearers), Waikeria prison staff and Waikeria prison inmates.
   The Waikeria staff were filthy bastards and we rarely played them without at least half the team getting injured, the inmates on the other hand were much more gentle and although excited to be doing something other the usual grind were some of the calmest people I have ever met. This puzzled me and I asked our skipper (who was a GP in raglan at the time) why they seemed to be serene. He explained that they were all completely stoned.
   This is the reason carter (who knows more than all of you combined about the population of kaikohe prison) is against them having sports teams visit. The guards seem incapable of keeping drugs out of our jails without allowing bus loads of league players in to mix with the inmates.
   Footnote.
   The Waikato sunday leagues worst team for gratuitous violence and filthy cheating was the Hamilton Police team.
6. Matthew Pilott 6

   29 February 2008 at 3:26 pm

   Somewhat tangential.

   Chuck Norris runs a programme called Kick Start. He teaches troubled kids, well basically he teaches them how to kick arse. Doesn’t sound bright right?

   Apparently, they all stay out of trouble after that. Confidence, team work and so on can help, if done correctly(unlike boot camps…).

   So’s I’m not instinctively against this either – it’s probably a better outlet than sticking a shank in your roommate.

   BB – that’s a great story! Your line before the footnote confuses me – you say they can’t keep drugs out without letting league players in?
7. Occasional Observer 7

   29 February 2008 at 3:35 pm

   And Labour has 18 people better than Judith Tizard? I would bloody hope so!
8. higherstandard 8

   29 February 2008 at 3:47 pm

   Is Judith still alive I thought she died a couple of years ago
9. Steve Pierson 9

   29 February 2008 at 4:01 pm

   OO. “And Labour has 18 people better than Judith Tizard? I would bloody hope so” So would I, I think they do.

   See, you got the joke wrong. You’re meant to be doubtful that there are 18 people better than her, thereby mocking both Tizard and the rest of the party.
10. higherstandard 10

    29 February 2008 at 4:08 pm

    Steve

    Give OO a break it would likely be an impossibility for any sizeable party not to have 18 people better than Judith Tizzard.
11. Barnsley Bill 11

    29 February 2008 at 4:12 pm

    Have a look at where the league teams are from and then you will know where most of the inmates are from. It is a Northland prison full of Northland convicts from the very towns where the visiting league teams will come from. Added to the mix the prison guards are mainly from kaikohe, a town that also provides a good portion of the inmates, highly likely that you have many family connections between guards and inmates which makes for a very difficult dynamic to police and manage.
    I would support the teams visiting if the following conditions are met.

    They unload the bus at the gate, every single person coming through the gate is strip searched and CAVITY SEARCHED. The drug dogs get to go through every item of clothing and kit as well.
    failing that simple procedure the inmates can remain locked up in club med ngawha with there game consoles, heated floors, flat screen televisions and palm trees.

    And yes I have been there and seen all those items listed above. They are far more luxurious than most of the inmates are accustomed to.
12. Steve Pierson 12

    29 February 2008 at 4:16 pm

    BB. So, the players who were stoned were the best to play against, the least needlessly violent. Why was them being stoned a bad thing?
13. Barnsley Bill 13

    29 February 2008 at 4:25 pm

    I never said it was a bad thing Steve, but then I would happily see most of the country castrated and force fed valium. However while they are in prison they should be denied the simple pleasures of electric puha.

    They were the best to play against because our team of out of shape poms and unreliable surfers did not win many games and played even less where one or two of our team wasn’t sent directly to hospital after getting kneecapped by a poorly coordinated neanderthal rugby player.
    Being able to run around single toothed tattooed mouth breathers like the very best sardine eating Brazilian felt good.
14. burt 14

    29 February 2008 at 5:42 pm

    Matthew Pilott

    Somewhat tangential.

    Chuck Norris runs a programme called Kick Start. He teaches troubled kids, well basically he teaches them how to kick arse. Doesn’t sound bright right?

    Chuck is onto it. I’ve seen many angry young men (and the occasional woman) wanting to take on the world turn into respectful controlled reasonable people through participation in martial arts. Basically when you boil it down aggressive behaviour is more often linked to low self esteem than it is to high. Both men and woman benefit from learning to stand their own ground if they are attacked. People can annoy you but they can’t physically intimidate you when you just know that you could kick their ass.

    I don’t know how you can say ‘Boot camp’ is a bad thing. If you look at it simply, getting the population fitter and stronger while providing team and individual goals can only be a good thing. Very very few people will get ‘nothing’ out of it, and they will be identified – more than can be said for the status quo or simply employing more truancy officers to deal with angry 16 & 17 year olds.

    Hey perhaps Chuck Norris could run some self defense courses for teachers!
15. Murray 15

    29 February 2008 at 9:24 pm

    Hey have any of you Labour supporting dim fuckwits seen the photo of HC shaking Owen Glen’s hand over on kiwiblog. Taken in 2005, you know around about the same time he gave the party half a mil.
16. Murray 16

    29 February 2008 at 9:25 pm

    I hope the horrible press don’t see it.
17. Murray 17

    29 February 2008 at 10:05 pm

    No Rob – do you have nightmares about the “hollow men”
18. r0b 18

    29 February 2008 at 10:03 pm

    Do you have nightmares about Owen Glenn Murray? Is he the boogie man?
19. r0b 19

    29 February 2008 at 10:08 pm

    The hollow men tired to steal an election Murray. What exactly did Owen Glenn do again?
20. Tane 20

    29 February 2008 at 11:45 pm

    Murray I’m confused. I saw this photo too – so what?
21. Whaleoil 21

    29 February 2008 at 11:55 pm

    The Hollow men tried to steal an election? Perhaps but Owen Glenn and Labour actually did exactly that. Five hundy from Owen, another hundy loan plus the eight hundy illegally absconded with from You and me.
22. r0b 22

    1 March 2008 at 12:27 am

    Whale, quite apart from the fact that you’re a bit confused about the timing of events, and you’re trying to spread long disproved lies about “stealing”, you don’t seem to have a point.

    The Hollow Men had far more money to spend than Labour – a $1.2 Million handout from the brethren, a couple of million in donations from cronies laundered through “anonymnous” trusts. All that money to spend, and they still messed it up. Bummer.

    Captcha: gathers bases (I think I got ayb’s by mistake!)
23. AncientGeek 23

    1 March 2008 at 3:51 am

    burt:

    I don’t know how you can say ‘Boot camp’ is a bad thing. If you look at it simply, getting the population fitter and stronger while providing team and individual goals can only be a good thing.

    I think it is a good thing – BUT it is really effective when people do it voluntarily. There is bugger all evidence that it is effective when people are coerced into it.

    Putting resources into programs like outward bound, recruiting drives for the armed forces, community based martial arts programs, etc is generally a good idea. But in the end people have to make the decisions to change themselves. You can provide the means, but not the motivation. For some strange reason people tend to resist having motivations force fed to them.

    I am definitely against trying to get the military to run a coercive training programme. They have more than enough on their plate at present, and trying to add that kind of mission is just stupid. Personally I found my military training has been very useful, but I did it voluntarily.
24. higherstandard 24

    1 March 2008 at 8:22 am

    Ancient

    Don’t usually agree with you but you are spot on with your insight here.

    Coercion is the poor cousin of voluntary participation.
25. Whaleoil 25

    1 March 2008 at 11:14 am

    Hardly disproved. The Attorney General, no less, found the money inappropriately taken which is civil servant speak for brazenly nicked.
26. Robinsod 26

    1 March 2008 at 12:00 pm

    Hello Cameron. You doing ok?
27. Inventory2 27

    1 March 2008 at 2:38 pm

    Hollow men? Hollow men??

    Labour better think very carefully before going down that road again, especially with THIS skeleton in their closet:

    http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2008/02/hollow-woman.html
28. higherstandard 28

    1 March 2008 at 3:37 pm

    Yes pity really who would have guessed that the Labour government and their henchman would have the gall to rob the public purse and be more devious than the ultimate evil of the Hollow men.

    Rob you and the rest of your left leaning nutjobs main difference from the rump in the middle and those on the right of the spectrum is that you believe the present government is any less frugal with the truth and manipulative than governments of the right of centre.
29. r0b 29

    1 March 2008 at 3:24 pm

    And the roots of that crisis go all the way back to the truly disastrous economic crisis inherited by the Lange government in 1984, which were kept secret by the outgoing National administration of Rob Muldoon. And so on, and so on.

    Bolger’s National government of 1991 had many choices (hint, they could have raised taxes). They chose to lash out at the poorest members of society in the mother of all budgets. That was their choice, one they can’t blame anyone else for (no matter how much Fran would like to). Bolger never planned a “decent society”. That was a meaningless electioneering catch-phrase, much like “ambitious for New Zealand”.

    Meanwhile, back in the 21st century, The Hollow Men tried to steal the 2005 election, and the resulting public outcry took down Don Brash.
30. r0b 30

    1 March 2008 at 3:50 pm

    Yes pity really who would have guessed that the Labour government and their henchman would have the gall to rob the public purse and be more devious than the ultimate evil of the Hollow men.

    Ummm – yeah – ok.

    Rob you and the rest of your left leaning nutjobs main difference from the rump in the middle and those on the right of the spectrum is that you believe the present government is any less frugal with the truth and manipulative than governments of the right of centre.

    I have trouble making sense of that HS, but I think I can work out what you mean. Politics is an ugly, confrontational business that brings out the worst in people (as well as, sometimes, the best). Both sides make mistakes, say silly things, and indulge in tactics that they shouldn’t. Labour is far from perfect (but it isn’t my job to tell you what their shortcomings are!).

    But in recent memory the most egregious political sins committed by either party were those of the Hollow Men / National party in the 2005 election campaign. This isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s a matter of the historical record. The resulting public outcry took down the party’s leader, Don Brash, which had never happened before in NZ (to my knowledge). You and the Kiwiblog Right can try and muddy the waters all you like, but the historical record has already been written.
31. higherstandard 31

    1 March 2008 at 6:03 pm

    Your memory seems as crapulent as your comments today Rob.

    Both the repeal of Section 59 and the EFA appear to be far more … as you put it… egregious political sins or haven’t you seen the poles recently ?
32. higherstandard 32

    1 March 2008 at 7:06 pm

    The public’s boredome with a third term government … Yes that must be it.

    And I would most humbly suggest that passing legislation in the face of overwhelming public distaste for said legislation is a sin – at least in the public’s eyes.

    Fair point regarding National’s support of Section 59 it will be interesting to see what the say about it pre-election and do about it post election.

    Captcha – loon score – are you trying to tell me something ?
33. higherstandard 33

    1 March 2008 at 7:11 pm

    I’d like to blame the bad spelling on the current education system – unfortunately I can’t judging by my kids’ school their teachers are far better than when I was in the education system.

    I’ll check bfore I captcha next time !
34. r0b 34

    1 March 2008 at 6:32 pm

    Your memory seems as crapulent as your comments today Rob.

    How gracious you are HS. Your nick name clearly does not describe your manners.

    Both the repeal of Section 59 and the EFA appear to be far more as you put it egregious political sins

    Two points there HS. (1) Passing contentious legislation is not a sin. Trying to buy an election is a sin (for which Don rightly paid with his political life). (2) In any case arguably it was John Key who got Section 59 through.

    or haven’t you seen the poles recently ?

    The poles are largely a reflection of the publics boredom with a third term government.
35. r0b 35

    1 March 2008 at 7:05 pm

    huh – polls – public’s – bad spelling is catchy!
36. r0b 36

    1 March 2008 at 8:11 pm

    The public’s boredome with a third term government Yes that must be it.

    Not a lot of 4th term governments in NZ’s history (or the history of most democracies) – and there’s a reason for that.

    And I would most humbly suggest that passing legislation in the face of overwhelming public distaste for said legislation is a sin – at least in the public’s eyes.

    Such as? Outside Heraldland there never was much interest in the EFA – witness the puny public turnout to the marches. And as for S59…

    Fair point regarding National’s support of Section 59

    HS you have surprised me – is there hope for rational discussion after all?!

    Captcha – loon score – are you trying to tell me something ?

    Yup – vote Labour!

    my kids’ school their teachers are far better than when I was in the education system.

    Agreed – schools these days are fantastic places. Mind you, I was educated in pretty much the Dark Ages.
37. r0b 37

    1 March 2008 at 8:11 pm

    The public’s boredome with a third term government Yes that must be it.

    Not a lot of 4th term governments in NZ’s history (or the history of most democracies) – and there’s a reason for that.

    And I would most humbly suggest that passing legislation in the face of overwhelming public distaste for said legislation is a sin – at least in the public’s eyes.

    Such as? Outside Heraldland there never was much interest in the EFA – witness the puny public turnout to the marches. And as for S59…

    Fair point regarding National’s support of Section 59

    HS you have surprised me – is there hope for rational discussion after all?!

    Captcha – loon score – are you trying to tell me something ?

    Yup – vote Labour!

    my kids’ school their teachers are far better than when I was in the education system.

    Agreed – schools these days are fantastic places. Mind you, I was educated in pretty much the Dark Ages.
38. r0b 38

    1 March 2008 at 8:12 pm

    I have no idea why my comments sometimes appear twice.
39. Dean 39

    1 March 2008 at 10:16 pm

    rOb said:

    “But in recent memory the most egregious political sins committed by either party were those of the Hollow Men / National party in the 2005 election campaign. This isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s a matter of the historical record.”

    Could you actually be any more partisan and biased if you tried?
40. Steve Pierson 40

    2 March 2008 at 4:45 am

    because you’re double awesome.
41. thesprout 41

    2 March 2008 at 9:17 am

    can we make BB’s copmments appear half the time?
42. outofbed 42

    2 March 2008 at 10:18 am

    Sounds like he just got in from a night on the sauce
43. higherstandard 43

    2 March 2008 at 10:33 am

    rob

    I am more likely to vote Labour than Green is that good enough for now ?

    Re schools:I think in general you’re right but it does depend very much on the teachers, Board of Trustees and parents we’re lucky with all three in my kids case.
44. r0b 44

    2 March 2008 at 10:11 am

    All I will confess to is double grumpy with the nonsense trotted out by the Right. But Steve, 4:45am? That’s commitment!
45. r0b 45

    2 March 2008 at 11:04 am

    HS, any vote on the Left works for me, but I suspect that the chances of you voting for either are pretty close to zero.

    I’m a big fan of the Greens. To tell you the truth I sometimes wonder if they’re the only sane party in parliament. It’s a common claim on blogs that unfettered capitalism works much better than the alternatives. Like comparing a speeding V8 sports car with an ambling horse and buggy. Which is true in many respects, until you take note of the fact that the sports car and the buggy are both about to hit a brick wall. I think I’d rather be in the horse and buggy at that point.

    The brick wall in that analogy is finite planetary resources. I’m not convinced that unfettered capitalism is equipped to deal with a world of limited resources and environmental crises. The only people who have recognised this for decades, and done their best to warn us, are the Greens. All power to them I say.

    There you go, have fun with that one. (I’m out in the real world today and can’t reply.)
46. outofbed 46

    2 March 2008 at 2:39 pm

    Exactly Rob
    You can’t keep having growth if you have not got a planet from which to grow. The Tories and the Lab Party are two sides of the same coin in my opinion, just arguing about how to share the spoils.

    It is now undeniable that the planet is in crisis and unless we do something and do something fast , our Grandchildren will face a very different world, to the one we have now
    And Rob is right only the Greens seemed to ones to have recognised this.
    We made the mistake of not listening to them decades ago perhaps we should start now.
47. Phil 47

    2 March 2008 at 2:45 pm

    Taking r0bs analogy a step further, and in a slightly esoteric way…

    The Buggy has no safety systems – hit the wall even at a minor speed, and the occupants are in a world of hurt (not to mention the dearly departed horse…)
    The Sports car, on the other hand, has crumple zones and restraint systems – shock absorbers in an economic sense; free floating exchange rates, interest rates, prices acting in a responsive manner, so on and so forth. End result is that you can have a bigger accident with much much less personal injury.

    Now, for finite global resources you’re absolutely right – it’s untested territory. BUT it’s also untested territory for any other system of political/economic management you care to name or advocate.

    All we can do is look at more localised or less broad crises, and infer from there. In almost every case I can think of, the economically ‘free-er’ nations have come out better off…
48. higherstandard 48

    2 March 2008 at 3:30 pm

    outofbed

    I suggest you go back to bed and take your medication.

    The world has for many generations probably been a different place than ones grandparents remember it. That’s called progress and is why we have higher standards of living and life expectancy than any other time in recorded history.

    Carbon dioxide is produced in far larger quantities by many natural means: human emissions are miniscule in comparison. Volcanic emissions and carbon dioxide from animals, bacteria, decaying vegetation and the ocean outweigh our own production several times over. If you buy into the global warming debate and the desire for carbon neutrality you really have been duped by those in power.

    captcha – to kensington ….but why I ask ?
49. outofbed 49

    2 March 2008 at 3:59 pm

    Higher Standard
    Seems it not just me who has been duped:-
    The “consensus” about anthropogenic climate change entails the following:

    1) the climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability;
    2) the major cause of most of the observed warming is rising levels of the greenhouse gas CO2;
    3) the rise in CO2 is the result of burning fossil fuels;
    4) if CO2 continues to rise over the next century, the warming will continue; and
    5) a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment.

    These conclusions have been explicitly endorsed by:

    Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)
    Royal Society of Canada
    Chinese Academy of Sciences
    Academié des Sciences (France)
    Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
    Indian National Science Academy
    Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
    Science Council of Japan
    Russian Academy of Sciences
    Royal Society (United Kingdom)
    National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
    Australian Academy of Sciences
    Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
    Caribbean Academy of Sciences
    Indonesian Academy of Sciences
    Royal Irish Academy
    Academy of Sciences Malaysia
    Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
    Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

    In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed these conclusions:

    NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
    National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
    State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
    Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
    American Geophysical Union (AGU)
    American Institute of Physics (AIP)
    National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
    American Meteorological Society (AMS)
    Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)

    These organizations also agree with the consensus:

    The Earth Institute at Columbia University
    Northwestern University
    University of Akureyri
    University of Iceland
    Iceland GeoSurvey
    National Centre for Atmospheric Science UK
    Climate Group
    Climate Institute
    Climate Trust
    Wuppertal Institute for Climate Environment and Energy
    Royal Meteorological Society
    Community Research and Development Centre Nigeria
    Geological Society of London
    Geological Society of America
    UK Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment
    Pew Center on Global Climate Change
    American Association for the Advancement of Science
    National Research Council
    Juelich Research Centre
    US White House
    US Council on Environmental Quality
    US Office of Science Technology Policy
    US National Climatic Data Center
    US Department of Commerce
    US National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service
    The National Academy of Engineering
    The Institute of Medicine
    UK Natural Environment Research Council
    Office of Science and Technology Policy
    Council on Environmental Quality
    National Economic Council
    Office of Management and Budget
    The National Academy of Engineering
    The Institute of Medicine
    UK Natural Environment Research Council
    Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology
    Engineers Australia
    American Chemical Society
    American Association of Blacks in Energy
    World Petroleum Council
    The Weather Channel
    National Geographic

    The following companiesagree with the consensus:

    ABB
    Air France
    Alcan
    Alcoa
    Allian
    American Electric Power
    Aristeia Capital
    BASF
    Bayer
    BP America Inc.
    Calvert Group
    Canadian Electricity Association
    Caterpilliar Inc.
    Centrica
    Ceres
    Chevron
    China Renewable
    Citigroup
    ConocoPhillips
    Covanta Holding Corporation
    Deutsche Telekom
    Doosan Babcock Energy Limited
    Duke Energy
    DuPont
    EcoSecurities
    Electricity de France North America
    Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
    Endesa
    Energettech Austraila Pty Ltd
    Energy East Corporation
    Energy Holding Romania
    Energy Industry Association
    Eni
    Eskorn
    ETG International
    Exelon Corporation
    ExxonMobil
    F&C Asset Management
    FPL Group
    General Electric
    German Electricity Association
    Glitnir Bank
    Global Energy Network Institute, Iberdrola
    ING Group
    Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
    Interface Inc.
    International Gas Union
    International Paper
    International Power
    Marsh & McLennan Companies
    Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company
    MEDIAS-France
    MissionPoint Capital Partners
    Munich Re
    National Grid
    National Power Company of Iceland
    NGEN mgt II, LLC
    NiSource
    NRG Energy
    PG&E Corporation
    PNM Resources
    Reykjavik Energy
    Ricoh
    Rio Tinto Energy Services
    Rockefeller Brothers Fund
    Rolls-Royce
    Societe Generale de Surveillance (SGS Group)
    Stora Enso North America
    Stratus Consulting
    Sun Management Institute
    Swiss Re
    UCG Partnership
    US Geothermal
    Verde Venture Partners
    Volvo

    In addition, the scientific consensus is also endorsed by the CEO’s of the following companies:

    A. O. Smith Corporation
    Abbott Laboratories
    Accenture Ltd.
    ACE Limited
    ADP
    Aetna Inc.
    Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
    AK Steel Corporation
    Alcatel-Lucent
    Allstate Insurance Company
    ALLTEL Corporation
    Altec Industries, Inc.
    American Electric Power Company, Inc.
    American Express Company
    American International Group, Inc.
    Ameriprise Financial
    AMR Corporation/American Airlines
    Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
    Apache Corporation
    Applera Corporation
    Arch Coal, Inc.
    Archer Daniels Midland Company
    ArvinMeritor, Inc.
    AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP
    Avery Dennison Corporation
    Avis Budget Group, Inc.
    Bechtel Group, Inc.
    BNSF Railway
    Boeing Company
    Brink’s Company
    CA
    Carlson Companies, Inc.
    Case New Holland Inc.
    Ceridian Corporation
    Chemtura Corporation
    Chubb Corporation
    CIGNA Corporation
    Coca-Cola Company
    Constellation Energy Group, Inc.
    Convergys Corporation
    Con-way Incorporated
    Corning Incorporated
    Crane Co.
    CSX Corporation
    Cummins Inc.
    Deere & Company
    Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
    Delphi Corporation
    Dow Chemical Company
    Eastman Chemical Company
    Eastman Kodak Company
    Eaton Corporation
    EDS
    Eli Lilly and Company
    EMC Corporation
    Ernst & Young, L.L.P.
    Fannie Mae
    FedEx Corporation
    Fluor Corporation
    FMC Corporation
    Freddie Mac
    General Mills, Inc.
    General Motors Corporation
    Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
    Goodrich Corporation
    Harman International Industries, Inc.
    Hartford Financial Services Group
    Home Depot, Inc., The
    Honeywell International, Inc.
    HSBC – North America
    Humana Inc.
    IBM Corporation
    Ingersoll-Rand Company
    International Textile Group
    ITT Corporation
    Johnson Controls, Inc.
    JP Morgan Chase & Co.
    KPMG LLP
    Liberty Mutual Group
    MassMutual
    MasterCard Incorporated
    McGraw-Hill Companies
    McKesson Corporation
    MeadWestvaco Corporation
    Medco Health Solutions, Inc.
    Merck & Co., Inc.
    Merrill Lynch & Company, Inc.
    MetLife, Inc.
    Morgan Stanley
    Motorola, Inc.
    Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc.
    National Gypsum Company
    Nationwide
    Navistar International Corporation
    New York Life Insurance Company
    Norfolk Southern Corporation
    Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company
    Nucor Corporation
    NYSE Group, Inc.
    Office Depot, Inc.
    Owens Corning (Reorganized) Inc.
    Pactiv Corporation
    Peabody Energy Corporation
    Pfizer Inc
    PPG Industries, Inc.
    Praxair, Inc.
    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
    Principal Financial Group
    Procter & Gamble Company
    Prudential Financial
    Realogy Corporation
    Rockwell Automation, Inc.
    Ryder System, Inc.
    SAP America, Inc.
    Sara Lee Corporation
    SAS Institute Inc.
    Schering-Plough Corporation
    Schneider National, Inc.
    ServiceMaster Company
    Siemens Corporation
    Southern Company
    Springs Global US, Inc.
    Sprint Nextel
    St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc.
    State Farm Insurance Companies
    Tenneco
    Texas Instruments Incorporated
    Textron Incorporated
    Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc.
    TIAA-CREF
    Tyco Electronics
    Tyco International Ltd.
    Union Pacific Corporation
    Unisys Corporation
    United Technologies Corporation
    UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
    USG Corporation
    Verizon Communications
    W.W. Grainger, Inc.
    Western & Southern Financial Group
    Weyerhaeuser Company
    Whirlpool Corporation
    Williams Companies, Inc.
    Xerox Corporation
    YRC Worldwide Inc
50. outofbed 50

    2 March 2008 at 4:15 pm

    So Higher Standard
    My Statement Grandchildren will face a very different world, to the one we have now,
    and this quote
    a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment.

    Can you see the connection?

    And you want ME to take meds … Ye gods
51. r0b 51

    2 March 2008 at 3:33 pm

    Actually Phil, in my version of the analogy, the ambling horse has enough brains to just stop. Good luck with your crumple zones though!

    OOB, I agree that there has been little to choose between Labour and National here in the past. But a while back I chose to join Labour anyway, because I think the Green message is too important to leave to a minority party. It has to go mainstream. The only way to get it main stream is to take over one of the big parties from within!

    And it now gives me cause to hope as I see that green policy has been very much coming up through the Labour party grass roots. In public policy releases Labour has started to at least talk the talk. Now they have a lot more work to do to walk the walk.
52. highstandard 52

    2 March 2008 at 4:34 pm

    OOB

    Perhaps you should reread my post in relation to our post.

    I don’t disagree that ‘anthropogenic’ climate change is due to the factors you state what I take issue with is that anthropogenic factors are the major cause of global warming.

    Posting a list of bodies and corporations who have signed up to this ‘consensus’ suggests to me there are a great many who are looking to make a great deal of money out of any global warming that takes place I sure many of this mob were alos wringing their hands about the y2k computer bug which was going to deliver us back to the dark ages.
53. outofbed 53

    2 March 2008 at 5:02 pm

    HS well you may have had a point , but the first few dozen on the list are scientific academies and respected scientific organizations and they agree that
    the climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability

    I guess the key words relating to your post is “Beyond the range of natural variability”
54. AncientGeek 54

    2 March 2008 at 9:47 pm

    I guess the key words relating to your post is “Beyond the range of natural variability’

    There is no such thing. The climate has varied immensely over the last billion years since it became pretty stable, and that was after it switched from a reducing atmosphere to a oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere.

    What people do not seem to understand is exactly how unnaturally invariable the atmosphere and therefore climate has been during human civilization. What we are doing is well within the ‘natural variability’. However it is well outside what our civilizations have had to endure. The question is if human civilisation will be able to withstand the changes.

    cap: fumble right
    sounds about right to me
55. AncientGeek 55

    2 March 2008 at 10:02 pm

    Have a look at this section of Photosynthesis: Physiology and Metabolism for an overview for the carbon12/13 fractionation in the atmosphere. The book is pretty old, but there has been no scientific challenges that have passed peer review.

    Unfortunately most of the interesting papers are stored under logins.
56. AncientGeek 56

    2 March 2008 at 10:09 pm

    This is probably more accessible here at How do we know that recent CO2 increases are due to human activities?, especially the added commentary.

    This is such basic science….

    I espcially liked this comment explicitly answering the same objection as highstandard.

    To me the opening sentences of the second paragraph:

    “One way that we know that human activities are responsible for the increased CO2 is simply by looking at historical records of human activities. Since the industrial revolution, we have been burning fossil fuels and clearing and burning forested land at an unprecedented rate, and these processes convert organic carbon into CO2.’

    are not very clear as follows. The addition of carbon into the atmosphere by human activities does not automatically imply that the atmospheric concentration must necessarily increase. Might the natural sinks of carbon at some times be able to absorb the human additions and result in no net increase?

    [Response: If we see CO2 increasing in the atmosphere, and humans emitting enough CO2 to account for that rise, then you have to go through some odd contortions to avoid a connection. You would have to postulate a suddenly increased natural sink (to remove the human CO2) and then a suddenly increased natural source (to increase the atmospheric CO2) – William]
57. AncientGeek 57

    2 March 2008 at 10:28 pm

    This whole debate is so old. The C12/C13 isotope variability due to releasing fossil fuels was demonstrated methematically in my first year earth sciences in the 1970’s.

    Makes me wonder if people actually do learn any science. The downstream effects of increasing atmospheric carbon are even more terrifying than the short run (
58. AncientGeek 58

    2 March 2008 at 10:29 pm

    argghh it lost part of my post…. oh well
59. outofbed 59

    2 March 2008 at 10:44 pm

    thanx for the links interesting stuff .. So much to read so little time
60. AncientGeek 60

    2 March 2008 at 11:46 pm

    Helps if you have my reading speeds. I’m an extreme speed reader.

    My idea of recreation is a clear day to read about 10000 pages of scifi that I haven’t read. Secondary is a pile of scientific papers or 2-3 history books.

    But I never really get the time. But I usually kill at least a book a day
61. AncientGeek 61

    2 March 2008 at 11:51 pm

    Make that about 5000 pages… I just added up the pages in the last dose of books. Guess I’m slowing down
62. r0b 62

    2 March 2008 at 11:52 pm

    Damn! I wish I could read like that. Did it come naturally to you, or did you teach yourself somehow?
63. AncientGeek 63

    3 March 2008 at 8:42 am

    Naturally – been doing that forever. Of course there is a downside. They don’t write books fast enough..
64. Santi 64

    3 March 2008 at 9:50 am

    What’s wrong with this impartial and ponderous blog?

    Why aren’t you publishing the latest polls which indicate socialist Labour is winning by a healthy margin and on the verge of securing a fourth term. The Nats are doomed are you should be celebrating.

    Where is the winning spirit of Tane & co?
65. r0b 65

    3 March 2008 at 9:06 am

    Jealous! One solution to the downside – you could start writing them…
66. Matthew Pilott 66

    3 March 2008 at 10:24 am

    I’ve heard the argument that anthropogenic Co2 is a miniscule fraction of natural carbon emmissions, and have always wondered how people could be so dim as to believe it. About twenty seconds of considered thought is enough to dismiss such a contention.

    Carbon is sequestered in many ways. As there is a water cycle, a nitrogen cycle and so on, there’s also a carbon cycle. Part of the carbon cycle involves release of carbon through vegetable matter decomposition, volcanic eruptions and so on. This has been going on for four billion years or so.

    Carbon is sequestered (trees, soil and so on) and later released, gradually, naturally and over time (decomposition, eruptions).

    Not part of the natural cycle is the burning of trillions of tonnes of fossil fuels (another form of carbon sequestration. What this means is that millions of years worth of carbon sequestered in the earth (in the form of fossilised carbon-based life forms) has been released within the space of two centuries. Take twenty seconds to consider the implications of a massive unnatural injection of atmospheric carbon.
67. Tane 67

    3 March 2008 at 11:37 am

    Here Santi, just for you:
    http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=1262

    And remember, patience is a virtue.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS