Bishop Hill The Royal Society's latest green campaign
Feb 12, 2015 Royal Society As I think I've mentioned before, when I wrote my Nullius in Verba report on the Royal Society's curiously unscientific approach to the climate change question, there was apparently outrage in the upper echelon's of the organisation at my suggestion that they had now been reduced to the lowly status of a left-wing campaigning organisation.
What then to make of this post on the Royal Society's "In Verba" blog on the "sustainable development" agenda:
One of the things that makes 2015 so important is the Sustainable Development Goals, or SDGs, a new set of globally-applicable goals that will be agreed at a UN summit in September. Their aim? To be sustainable development’s zeitgeist, addressing the most pressing global challenges of our time – from climate change to healthcare to food security.
Sustainable development is of course an overtly political idea, if one that is so lacking in definition that it manages to take in the whole range of state-planned idiocy from morally repugnant to completely illogical. Doesn't this make my point for me?
Reader Comments (28)
Yes it does. The post is by an RS employee in the position of Senior Policy Adviser. She describes her work thusly:
Why would you hire someone to do such work if it was not in accord with your organisation's campaigning objectives?
Indeed it does, Bish! I always thought that as one uses raw materials new ones would be found. Fossil fuels are ok for the time being, perhaps a couple of hundred years, say, but new fuel sources will be developed, it is in Man's nature & we don't necessarily destroy the planet in the process. Personally I can't think of anything resource-wise we have actually run out of, we stopped using whale oil because we discovered crude oil! I was reading a timber book a few years ago, all about the structural & aesthetic & durability qualitites it possesses, etc. It noted that in the UK alone, we needed to remove some 7 million tons of timber from our woods & forests each year, just to keep them healthy!
I don't know what they're smoking at the Royal Society and I can't decide if they've got hold of a really good or a really bad batch.
There is often a difference between those that head organisation such has the RS and those that are members, becasue the type of working done by these heads is one that most members simply do not wish to do .
Instead it attracts those that love to sit-in on meetings and who can make writing in happy birthday in birthday card spread over 20 pages with appendix and references. The type whose career has finished or has never taken off but still want their time in the sun.
For these politics ,of one form of another, is their natural habitat with all that means when it comes to speaking out of the side of their mouths.When you look at recent heads of the RS you see exactly this type of person at play. Sadly has its an approach that has proved so rewarding , it is hard to see this changing any-time soon. .
Who has decided what will be agreed in September?
What is the point in meeting in September, to agree what has been already decided?
Irrespective of who is paying, how much will it cost?
Is this a good example of how unsustainable, sustainable deveolpment has become?
Why doesn't some journalist working for a national newspaper ask the Royal Society why it is involved in political campaigns?
Alan the Brit on Feb 12, 2015 at 12:17 PM
"Personally I can't think of anything resource-wise we have actually run out of"
I was told, in 1976, by a high achieving Geologist/Geophysicist, that the only two scarcities were human intelligence and political stability. I suppose we don't 'run out of them', but they can be scarce, especially where they are most needed.
the NHS Sustainability day March 26th 2015 which by coincidence 4 hours ago I added to the events thread (a couple more links there)
... "one day in a sustained campaign, yet it provides a focus for organisations to participate on that day in initiating or continuing progress on achieving better sustainability practice."
- "The campaign of regional road-shows gives health-workers across the country the chance to participate in networking, learning about best practice and innovative ideas. The national awards scheme recognises and publicises this achievement. "
Next roadshow
25th Feb Guys Hospital LONDON
Starring Greg Barker : Muppet for Energy and Climate Change @ the Controversial DECC
I was paid for several things in the course of my working life.
"Musing" was never one of them.
I see Emma was on a panel and moderating at Lima COP 20 / COP 10...... http://www.iisd.ca/climate/cop20/enbots/12dec.html
" Panelists responded to questions on: ways of engaging with different institutions; the importance of the media in advocating the role of ecosystems; finding solutions from, and empowering the community, particularly through integrating ethno-ecological knowledge systems; the role of education; and the potential of reaching a climate agreement that includes ecosystem-based adaptation in Paris in 2015."
So - engaging institutions - media advocating - community empowered solutions - integrated ethno-ecological knowledge systems - ecosystem based adaptation - ...........boggles my mind for sure! A sophisticated version of BS bingo?
What is 'Sustainable development', I hear you cry...?
Simple - its - well, its 'development' which is - er - 'sustainable'....innit..?
stewgreen, I fear that sustainability in the NHS involves old people coming in with a bunion and coming out with a wooden overcoat.
Talking of 'sustainable' - I note that wind is providing a magnificent 1% of electricity demand at the moment...
And they're STILL building the bloody things - doesn't anyone in government or the DECC 'get it' yet..?
Aren't; Progressives, the Royal Society, the BBC, screaming left wing extremists [ the labour party], Common Purpose, the Fabians, Public sector Unions, the EU - aren't they all interchangeable and thus, if so desired, a person could not be able to distinguish betwixt any of them?
The RS, left wing advocacy and madhouse has become fused.
Let us see if they censor the comments there.
I left this, it is in moderation:
Come on Andrew, it's only the Royal Society, they're no longer important and to be frank, I doubt they ever were except in their own version of history.
When is the International Day of action against lunacy ?
* (don't tell me this wording is politically incorrect)
@Doubting Rich .perhaps Free Speech is not sustainable as no comments are yet visible
I always liked Beckermann's riposte to the Limits to Growth, pointing out that had we modelled the future of transport in the early 19th century in similar fashion, the conclusion would be that England would be covered in a 6ft layer of horse manure by now.
Stewgreen, the International Day of Lunacy is held every week. It is known as Monday.
Every monday, people go to work, to earn money, so that they, and their employers can build a better future, whilst others dream of building a better future for themselves, which everybody else has to pay for.
Every new technology and change is viewed as "not sustainable" by someone. When everyone was moving to the cities but depended on horses, urban planners and city managers were very worried about sustainability due to all the horse poop. But a solution was found not by getting rid of the people but by getting rid of the horses. Early industrial activity was dirty smelly and dangerous--not sustainable. But it kept improving. The "sustainability" cry is a demand for change to stop, to freeze things the way they are. It is the precautionary principle in other clothing.
Everyone here seems to agree that the sustainability idea is rubbish but the problem is that the government is in thrall to the UN and the UN is driving it forward. Our noble friend (read dipstick) Lord Debben's Committee has recently asked the government to explain how it will respond to the UN's latest 'instructions' on how we should be taking sustainability into account. The government's response will be published on 16th February. I only recently discovered that Cameron was actually the chair of the committee that has come up with the UN's latest goals
I agree with almost every comment here but these idiots are continuing anyway.
Fact: No resource used by humans has ever run out.
Fact: All the natural resources we have ever used are grown on or recovered from The earth's crust.
Fact: The Earth's crust takes up 1.85% of the earth's volume.
Fact: We are nowhere near having identified all the natural resources available in the crust.
Fact: We really have no scientific data on the resources contained within the mantle.
Fact: Advances in technology continue to enable us to grow more crops per square metre.
Fact: Most food shortages are caused by war, terrorism and dictators.
Slightly off topic, but another one! In our weekly local paper today, "Deborah Meadon will wear her heart on her sleeve to tackle climate change. She wants the people of Somerset to wear a green heart to symbolise the actions needed. The campaign is being run by the Climate Coalition, backed by celebrities including Stephen Fry, Emilia Fox and Dermot O'Leary" The piece talks about the UN agreeing a new climate deal in Paris later this year. The website is loveof.org.uk I did don dark glasses and had a quick peak, but had to leave very quickly! I assume as it is a .org, the government is involved somewhere?
Jo
Government is .gov hehe I had a gaming website that was .org ^.^
Doubting Rich: Your comment to the RS: Bloody well said. I commend it to the House!
Thanks to stewgreen's thread on Thomas Sowell I'm reading his book Basic Economics. Quite an eye opener for the counterintuitive yet data driven trends that happen when price interference occurs. Irrespective of politics.
The RS would do well to stick to science. There are many political idiots already.
Alan the Brit on Feb 12, 2015 at 12:17 PM
"Personally I can't think of anything resource-wise we have actually run out of"
Wilfred Beckerman, referenced in the main post's link, also wrote in the context of resource depletion about an ancestor who claimed to have discovered a new element which he named "Beckermanium". Amazingly, the world got by without it with no loss of utility, because it suffered from the ultimate scarcity - it didn't exist. Substitution is driven by relative price changes and the scarcity and technological innovation which drives them, neither of which are predictable at all.
Uses the word Zeitgeist. Therefore total bullshit anyhow.
Doubting Rich (yesterday 2:44 PM), I see the RS blog has published your excellent comment, as well as three others. None of them are supportive of the blog post.