As the World Burns
| Fri Nov. 20, 2009 6:31 PM PST
Just the other day I was whinging about a photo on the BBC website of an ice sculpture of a penguin (it's in this slide show) surrounded by well-dressed, admiring urbanites. I thought: How cool, what better way than a melting sculpture to highlight the plight of polar animals. Then I read the caption. Something along the lines of: "An ice sculpture of a penguin as part of a campaign to encourage shopping in London’s West End." Not a trace of irony there.
Now I see on Designboom the perfect, icy riposte. The thousand (give or take) ice figures of "Melting Men" by Brazilian artist Nele Azevedo has been appearing around the world since 2005, according to GreenMuze. Azevedo originally intended the installation of disappearing men as a critique of monuments in cities: replacing stone with ice, immortality with ephemeron.
Not hard to see why the installation has been reinterpreted, hijacked really, by those concerned for our warming world.
More photos of the melting men on this Flickr thread.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
Am I a bad person for
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri Nov. 20, 2009 7:23 PM PST.
Am I a bad person for thinking there should be some of those with boobies and then melting men and women ice cube molds made with green plastic and shipped in green containers to green bars all over the green planet woud buy them up in a green minute?
Anyway, it would be cool to have one with boobies sitting on the side of my drink.
Theories are theories for a reason.....
Submitted by avannavon on Fri Nov. 27, 2009 10:28 PM PST.
Please, please, enough of the global warming concept? It has been DEBUNKED, thoroughly, rigorously, deliciously, absolutely DEBUNKED.
As ALL the temperature data centers on earth show, the earth has been COOLING and DRYING for the past decade, not warming at all. That's why Al Gore suddenly stopped talking about "global warming" and starting talking about "climate change"---the empirical facts weren't there to support the theory.
And when the empirical facts don't support a theory, what do we normally do with that theory? Normally, without the help of politicians and disreputable "scientists" like the playboys at Hadley CRU, theories that don't agree with the observable facts are discarded. The real scientists return to the drawing board and try to come up with a theory that DOES explain what is being observed.
Those poor polar animals and their disappearing icefields? The icefields aren't melting. They aren't being replenished with new snow pack, because there is less water vapor in the atmosphere and less high latitude precipitation. Ditto the droughts in Africa: loss of atmospheric water vapor means that temperatures during the day are hotter and ALSO colder at night. That's what we are observing. If it were global warming both night and day temperatures would rise, but that isn't what is happening.
So it's not an excess of carbon dioxide, it's a dearth of water vapor that accounts for the "climate change" data we are actually seeing.
Check out the Hadley CRU scandal for yourself to see the spurious nature of the data and the dishonesty of these "scientists" on public display.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
