[Please note update below -hro]
Canada’s (taxpayer funded) CBC has a long history of unquestioningly promoting Big Green’s agenda. As I’ve noted previously, they seem to be following in the footsteps of Auntie Beeb (the U.K.’s BBC).
As I’ve also mentioned previously, I rarely watch (or listen to) CBC programs. But I do subscribe to their twice daily “News Digest”. Some days when an item catches my eye, I’ll take a look. And this sometimes leads me to a featured article (demonizing Israel or promoting the agenda of Big Green).
Yesterday was one of those days. Here’s what appeared as a “feature” on the March 25 10:00 p.m. National News:
Hidden cameras tell a tale of two lunchrooms
A group of students wanted to know whether nice digs mean better recycling habits
After dutifully watching this video, I posted the following in the comments (of which at the time of my posting there were none!):
Interesting story, but … what are the “demographics” of those who frequent the two cafeterias? How far apart are their physical locations? What are the most likely courses of study of those who frequent these cafeterias?
Could these non-attributed factors have had some influence on the recycling behaviours of the students studied?
Until we have these additional details, it seems to me that one should add this “study” to the ever-increasing list of papers that claim an influence of “climate change” – without acknowledging that even if this is the case, there is absolutely no empirical evidence that whatever “climate change” – formerly known as “global warming” – may or may not be occurring is primarily “caused by” human generated C02 (known to be a very small percentage of the total 3% of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere).
For those who mistakenly believe that the output generated by (the increasinngly ubiquitous) “computer models” = data, it isn’t. Furthermore, those who describe such exercises as “experiments’ [as such modellers, including Canada’s green-heart-on-sleeve Andrew Weaver**, are inclined to do] can only do so if they have arbitrarily redefined “experiments”.
As I said, an interesting story.
But I do so miss Barbara Frum who would most certainly have questioned the “fudge” factors in this lightweight contribution to the sad, long history of CBC’s annals of promoting Big Green’s agenda.
[Posted 03/25/2013 11:24 PM PDT]
It’s most unfortunate that Peter Mansbridge, who introduced this particular piece of pap, seems to have forgotten what he wrote a few days earlier about Frum, from whom he could have learned much. Quoting Frum he wrote:
“I listen for something that sounds so authentically right and dead on, and so fresh, and so unpatterned and unlikely, that it’s got a ring of truth,” [Barbara Frum] once said. “That’s what I look for because there is so much fudge in this world today. Everybody is so polite, everybody says things that kind of throw you off the course.”
But it’s also interesting to note that in this particular “report”, climate change -formerly known as global warming – is not even mentioned. Could it be that CBC is signalling a shift of gears from “all climate change all the time” to “sustainable development”? The United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) seems to be making such a shift, one should not expect the CBC to be too far behind, eh?!
I’ll let you know if/when my comment passes the CBC’s antiquated “pre-moderation”.
UPDATE: 03/26/2013 11:50 AM PDT The “pre-moderator” appears to have approved my comment. One of the others who commented on this post has provided a link to the actual paper:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0053856
Why the CBC could not have provided this link in their original article is left as an exercise for the reader.
The View From Here 
Don’t hold your breath waiting for the gate keepers at CBC to post any comment they might find challenging. I’ve submitted a few in response to that idiot Bob McDonald, their supposed science guy and they never saw the light of day.
Randy, as I’ve just noted in an update to my post, my comment actually did pass “pre-moderation”. Although the timestamp is rather odd: “2013/03/25 at 11:26 PM ET” – which is actually almost 3 hours before I even saw the post, let alone commented on it!
But I know what you mean about McDonald’s quirks! When the CBC switched to their new, improved website a year or so ago, they succeeded in not only breaking any links one might have to McDonald’s blogposts past, but also in “purging” most of the comments that had followed. How convenient, eh?!
McDonald’s new blog does not allow comments. Well, at least it didn’t last time I checked!
You might want to have a read at
http://home.cogeco.ca/~actater
The problem is much bigger than most people imagine.
I love your site! Globull warming and Israel! My 2 favorite subjects/conundrums. (by conundrum I mean foolish western, current, attitudes). Anyhoo…
In grade 5, my teacher, liberal and progressive, devised an experiment which he conducted in class. It was devised during luch hour when about 6 of us had to stay and eat in class at the school. He spoke to us in an open and grown up manner. We were talking about influence of our classmates over ourselves. (my diction may be off but please note there was NOTHING neferious or coercive in what occured and we all agreed to participate to see what happened). We seniors (the school was K-6) had been warned about running in the halls and mind the little kids, who had been being run over as of late. My best friend was sent to get something from another teacher. In his absence the class was told to cheer when I was yelled at by my teacher for running over and hurting a Grade 1 girl. At first my friend, upon returning to the class, looked around at the other kids cheering as I ‘cried’ and the teacher ranted. As it continued, my friend eventually joined in the cheering.
We discussed the results and all came clean as to our roles (the other 5 kids would punctuate at random words like yeah! or you’re bad during the teachers scolding). When asked why he joined in my friend said firstly that he didn’t know, after some thought he said he was scared he was going to be next.
Groupthink is indeed a powerfull thing… be it recycling environment or moderator authority.
I think groupthink is exactly what is going on here. In any environment, people take cues from other people’s behaviour. I think the green building design is certainly a factor but the group pressure to sort your recycling is probably a more powerful factor.
Groupthink is indeed a powerful thing, take for example the right’s adherence to claims that climate change is not real and man-made despite overwhelming scientific evidence, or that Israel is a morally righteous country when it is clear violation of Palestinian human rights, rights to sovereignty, etc.
In the end you are as brainwashed as those you are accusing of being so.
You know it’s quite amusing that you should mention “groupthink” and “brainwashing”. My experience is that so many who choose to stereotype the views of those who disagree with them in the manner in which you have chosen to do above is that they lack the ability to think for themselves; they seem to prefer to parrot fact-free talking points generated by those who are as ill-informed as themselves.
Few, if any, have ever conducted any independent research regarding either the actual views of skeptics or the actual history (not to mention current day situation) of the disputed territories. Nor do they seem to appreciate the disgraceful role of the United Nations in the origin of both controversies. Although both certainly serve as a distraction from the fact that the UN has so abysmally failed in fulfilling its mandate.
Oh, well, ignorance is bliss, I suppose!
But since there’s a chance that this reply may well fall on deaf ears, here’s a video that I came across which I hope will more than compensate for any time wasted ;-)
May be wrong, but I’ve heard only the metal recycling pays. Mostly the rest is just burned or ends up in the landfills. Could use Plascoenergy’s 100% recycling system, but baseless NIMBY objections have blocked it so far.
Interestingly, this was my impression as well. However, when I discussed this with the “recycling” chap in my municipality (while conducting “due diligence” for Wastelandia: Andrew Weaver et al‘s big green choru$ and $ymphony … in the key of Gore), he assured me that this was not the case!
CBC just censored a comment I made on the article “Dennis Rodman says Kim Jong-un wants to ‘change things'”
I pointed out that words Rodman said after ‘change things’ was ‘around the world’, which CBC conveniently omitted. It’s clear from the full context of Rodman’s statements, if you view video of it in its entirety, that Jong-un simply wants to change the way North Korea is perceived around the world, and he hoped that Rodman would help in disseminating a more positive image of North Korea. But CBC misrepresented Rodman’s statements to mean that Jong-un wants to change things within North Korea. So CBC wants to falsely portray Jong-un as a nice guy who wants to change the horrible conditions in North Korea when nothing could be further from the truth. Why is CBC in the business of propagandizing for a cruel dictator? I wouldn’t have believed it if it hadn’t happened in front of my own eyes…