Batshit Crazy Public Debates

I was listening yesterday to the historian David Starkey talking to Brendan O’Neill, and during it Starkey said (circa 22 minutes in) that the British PC elite “regard the people with complete contempt,” particularly the old, the working class, and northerners.

It’s not just Britain. The globalist elites everywhere hold their peoples in complete contempt. In the USA there’s contempt for Donald Trump and Trump supporters. In France, Emmanuel Macron regards the French people with complete contempt. And Angela Merkel regards the German people with equal contempt.

And of course Tobacco Control, which is a global PC elite project, regards smokers everywhere with complete and utter contempt.

After all, it requires complete contempt for smokers to have driven them from the bars and cafes they once inhabited, without a single care for what became of them. It also requires complete contempt for them to hide tobacco packets from them behind closed doors, and cover them with sneering, insulting messages.

Perhaps contempt for smokers is really just one expression of a wider contempt for almost everybody.

From whence does this boundless contempt arise?

David Starkey thought that it was an ancient contempt. He thought it was the same contempt of Virginia Woolf and the Bloomsbury group for the ordinary people of England 100 years ago.

It’s also the contempt by Remainers for the stupid, ignorant people who voted for Brexit.

And it’s the contempt by climate alarmists for stupid, ignorant, climate sceptics or “denialists”.

For the past year or so I’ve been thinking a lot about climate alarmism and scepticism. And I’ve done what I usually do when I think about this sort of thing: I’ve been building my own simple climate simulation model. For I can’t see how I can have an opinion about climate in the absence of a model. In fact I can’t see how anyone can have an opinion about climate in the absence of a model. Or if they do have an opinion it has to be a secondhand opinion that derives from trusting (or distrusting) somebody else’s model – most likely climate scientists’ models.

If someone says that 13 plus 22 is equal to 37, I have no way of checking for myself the truth or falsehood of this assertion if I don’t know how to add. Same with climate science: I have no way of checking whether global warming might be happening if I don’t have my own climate model. In both cases, the honest thing to say is: “I don’t know.” But instead of doing this, most people seem to come down firmly on one side or other. Why? Perhaps they don’t wish to seem ignorant or uneducated?

The plain fact of the matter is that, in the great screaming public argument about climate change, nobody has a model. Everybody is ignorant (and that includes me, because my computer simulation model is incomplete, and will probably never be complete). And even the climate scientists are ignorant. I have a big book by a climate scientist, Raymond Pierrehumbert, called Principles of Planetary Climate, in which he openly and honestly admits to not understanding lots of things. So the simple truth of the matter is that absolutely everybody is ignorant about climate science, including the climate scientists. So why are we having this completely batshit crazy public debate about the climate?

And the same applies to tobacco and smoking. Nobody has a clue whether it’s dangerous or not, and that includes all the doctors and medical researchers. So why the global alarm about smoking? Why all these batshit crazy smoking bans everywhere?

Same also with Remainers and Leavers. None of them have a clue what they’re talking about.

The correct attitude, in all these matters, is perhaps to say: “I don’t know. And I don’t think anyone else knows either.”

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Batshit Crazy Public Debates

  1. Mark Jarratt says:

    Such complete contempt is well illustrated at Gatwick Airport Sth Terminal. I am about to fly to Italia with my wife, who believes the “govt knows best” misinformation. I hope the Italians haven’t swallowed the prohibitionist bullies lies and propaganda to such an extent. There are no airside facilities for smokers at Gatwick, that I can find, and the duty free tobacco is concealed in a special secret sinners area, full of ugly insulting plain pack propaganda product, debased and defaced at the urging of fanatical fascist lifestyle control extremists. I did not even bother checking the price, and my Eastern European suppliers will get my business. This illiberal bullying angers me, evidence that like Australia, the UK has descended into the draconian abyss of prohibition. 🤬

    • smokingscot says:

      You’ll need to search “sala fumatori”, then the Italian for the towns you’ll visit. Smoking rooms are allowed with proper ventilation and a small number of restaurants and bars do have them.

      That plus outdoor areas, where their definition is quite liberal, so screens come down when it gets a bit chilly.

      Tobacco is cheaper by some margin in Italy and as you’re just flying between EU states then you don’t qualify for duty free. Don’t waste your time at Gatwick. That is unless you absolutely must have some brand or other.

      My interest is only in rolling, however I did visit one site that shows they have a good selection of the rolling you find in England. With cigarettes they tend toward American brands with a smaller selection of Brit stuff.

      Anyway, enjoy.

    • Timothy Goodacre says:

      Pity you arent going by Switzerland. Plenty of choice – no plain packaging !

  2. Timothy Goodacre says:

    Well in my opinion O’Neill and Starkey always know what they are talking about. Talking about rabid anti smokers – i was chatting to a close friend of many years in the pub the other night. I only see him once or twice a year. We were discussing the decline of the English pub. I cited the stupid anti smoking laws. He suddenly became a man possessed and said all smokers should be shot. The conversation turned extremely nasty and we nearly came to blows. He had totally swallowed all the anti smoker bullshit. I couldnt believe it !

    • Mark Jarratt says:

      Hey thanks for the tips guys. Just landed. The bans and restrictions are certainly reducing my Camel Blue consumption, whether I like it or not. 🚬

  3. Dmitry says:

    Speaking about “sneering, insulting messages” – look at that long report, full of indignation towards the “industry”… and that’s not the tobacco industry, that’s anyone who dares to sell food without consent of the WHO bastards who hate anything that’s not under their control. And if anyone selling food behaves, then he’ll get these insulting messages all over his product…
    And by the way, this report shows that the WHO is having a lot of problems, not just with tobacco, which is certainly good.

  4. colin smith says:

    These various passionate disputes are not based on objective knowledge or complete models. They are simply people disliking other people. The ‘topic’ is merely the ‘substrate’ on which the tribal dispute grows.

    I don’t know for certain that climate change isn’t mainly man-made or whether it’s a threat, but I *can* see the types of people who are promoting the idea, and their lack of open-mindedness and absence of rationality. I tend towards ‘scepticism’ simply because of the qualities of the people involved.

    (And I also have some knowledge and experience of computer modelling, and I know how easy it is to be seduced by it. In an application with a ‘closed loop’, it is possible to be disabused of this wishful thinking eventually. In an application like climate where, for example, hindcasting is used to extrapolate a forwards projection, there is no hard requirement for the prediction ever to be proved to have worked. The scientists involved never have their illusions shattered. They really can spend their whole careers spinning fantasies that are never checked against reality, thereby arguing “passionately” that what they are doing is meaningful; they are totally sincere in their ignorance and so are invulnerable to argument).

Leave a Reply to Timothy Goodacre Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.