The red team.

If you’ve never heard of the red team concept, it’s a very useful management technique that’s been knocking around in certain organisations for a number of years. In essence, it’s a team of people, internal or external, who aggressively look for faults, flaws and loopholes in whatever an organisation is producing, whether that’s a product, a strategy or even an idea.

Their job is to attack you using whatever means possible as any implacable enemy would. There are no rules, no regulations and nothing is out of bounds. When you get a grudging thumbs up after a good mauling over from a ferocious red team, you know you’ve got something robust.

Let’s do the red team on climate alarmism.

For a moment, assume that the world’s climate is seriously effected by the trace gas Carbon Dioxide, even though it only accounts for 0.04 per cent of the atmosphere. Let’s further assume that the tiny fraction of that tiny fraction attributed to mankind’s activities, such as simply breathing, never mind living in a post-agrarian civilisation, are enough to trigger the fabled tipping point into warmageddon. And let’s even go one further and assume there actually is such a thing as the tipping point.

If it sounds like there are an inordinate number of unverified assumptions stacking up here, it’s because I’m trying to think like a climate scientist.

Anyway, if you concede all those assumptions, you have to accept that unless we reduce the amount of CO2 we produce, the planet is doomed to heat up to a point where life can no longer be sustained on it.

The next part is all assumption free because it deals with political realities.

In the European part of the developed world, even the most formerly infatuated governments are by now deeply disenchanted with the green renewables dream. Record numbers of Germans are having their electricity cut off because they simply can’t afford the huge bills massively inflated by surcharges to cover subsidising renewables. Once fastidiously ordentlich Germans are nipping into forests and stealing caches of logs for heating that in former times could be left stacked and unguarded for months. After the panicked decision closing nuclear generators in the wake of the Fukashima non-disaster, they’ve gone back to building coal generation plants.

I only mention Germany because it was the flag bearer of green energy, and by now it’s well down into the nightmare at the bottom of that particular rabbit hole. It’s the extreme example of what’s happening across Europe. The poor can no longer afford electricity and everyone else equates being encouraged to have a nervous breakdown about the death of the planet as a piss take.

In the Americas, the situation is not as bad if you live outside California. Obama, an ineffectual president frantically casting around for some sort of substantive legacy, decided to use the EPA to kill off whole coal mining communities in places like Kentucky and Virginia using that hideously overreaching bureaucratic arm of government. To a large extent, and despite his efforts, the fracking revolution for oil and gas has softened the unemployment blow, but it’s still bitterly resented by the people of those communities.

The bottom line is, people won’t vote for politicians who’re into green taxes and think it’s okay for other people to lose their jobs, all over an issue those people rank lowest in their list of concerns. Politicians, being at heart mercenary creatures, are listening; the subsidies are being cut, the big fat start-up grants are few and far between nowadays, and the renewables carnival is over.

In short, the developed world, behind a few political fig leaves, has all but abandoned carbon reduction.

The developing world has watched in bemusement an obscenely rich developed world going through a bizarre decade of fashionable navel gazing guilt about somehow destroying the planet with nothing other than thinly concealed contempt. They’d play along with the charade, just as long as there was some possibility of being given a few bucks to salve our stricken conscience.

Mebbe they’d get some money, mebbe they wouldn’t. Whatever was going to happen, they were not going to change strategy. Even if the money had appeared, which it didn’t and never will, they wouldn’t have slowed down their march towards industrialisation by one step, because that was the sure and certain way of raising their populations out of grinding poverty.

Executive summary time, the developing world doesn’t give a damn about carbon reduction.

It’s by now obvious to even the most fervent warmist, that any global binding agreement to reduce carbon emissions is not going to happen. In point of fact, emissions are going to rise inexorably as the developing world gradually industrialises, and they won’t let anyone stop them, as they demonstrated at Copenhagen where they said a flat no to every proposal. They will continue to torpedo any global agreements and they long ago discounted us having enough money to bribe them into not industrialising.

So, the opinion of the red team is there won’t be a reduction in carbon emission, but rather a massive increase, and that means if you’re a warmist, we’re all going to die.

So, from the red team, have a nice green day.


Related articles by Pointman:

People are pissed off.

The loss of faith in the political class.

UK Election 2015 – The car crash of the chatterati against reality.

Click for a list of other articles.

10 Responses to “The red team.”
  1. Graeme No.3 says:

    There is the further gain for the developing countries that the gullible politicians of the industrialised countries are causing their manufacturing companies to head off-shore to them and generate jobs.
    Those gullible politicians don’t care for “nasty dirty industry” anyway and imagine that everybody will survive in airconditioned offices passing pieces of paper around. One day they will find out that the service economy needs something to service, and it too will follow the money.


  2. “If it sounds like there are an inordinate number of unverified assumptions stacking up here, it’s because I’m trying to think like a climate scientist.”
    Don’t take many prisoners, do you? :))

    The earliest example of the red team concept I know of was during the Whig supremacy, when the parliamentary opposition was provided by the “Opposition Whigs”. As people were educated in those days, the idea probably came from the ancient world. More recently, when the party I supported at the time swept the board in the district council elections, I convinced the Leader, who was my councillor, of the merits of a red team which allowed her to give meaningful jobs to all councillors so that no one got bored and started plotting out of sheer ennui. It worked very well and meant when the green team members fell by the wayside from the usual causes there was a knowledgeable councillor to fill in.


  3. Blackswan says:


    No doubt Trump has a red team (or two) of his own and I suspect neither he nor they take kindly to The Donald being given dire warnings and threats of a “black eye” (political or otherwise) if he dismantles Oh Bummer’s Climate Fraud deal.

    In February Todd Stern, Obama’s special envoy for climate change, warned ” … Republican presidential hopefuls including Donald Trump and Ted Cruz that any attempt to scrap the Paris climate agreement would lead to a “diplomatic black eye” for the US.”

    Obviously Stern was ignored because now that Trump has trumped Cruz, the French foreign minister Laurent Fabius, is whining “If a climate change denier was to be elected, it would threaten dramatically global action against climate disruption.”

    Poor old Fabius – he thought he had that Scam all stitched up.

    “Mon Dieu! Oh, pauvre de moi !” (sob, sigh)

    Global warming, catastrophic global warming, climate change … now “climate disruption”.

    Are there any other euphemisms for “load of poppycock”?


  4. Pointman says:

    People, WordPress seems to be slinging a lot of your comments into the spam or trash dungeon. Don’t repost, I’ll keep diving in and fishing them out.



  5. JohnTyler says:

    “……………………The bottom line is, people won’t vote for politicians who’re into green taxes and think it’s okay for other people to lose their jobs, all over an issue those people rank lowest in their list of concerns…………………..”


    There are millions of voters eager to see Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders as president; both true believers in the greatest scientific hoax in world history, the fraud of human caused catastrophic global warming and that CO2 is a pollutant.
    And these same voters had no problem voting for Obama, TWICE, despite his very clear plan to un-employ thousands of workers in the mining and energy business that extract, process, transport or use coal. These voters DO NOT CARE about putting tens of thousands of people out of work.

    The true believers will support ANY CAUSE, ANY MOVEMENT regardless of the cost imposed on society, a segment thereof or any ethnic group. Their belief trumps absolutely everything.

    And because the entirety of the democratic, liberal progressive, socialist, academic, communist movement (political parties, the media, the elites, etc) are all in on this scam, many within the general public believe the scam is no scam at all.

    Europe may have scaled back their ambition to become “green” ( read, destitute, self-destructive, incredibly stupid) , but the scam is part and parcel of the socialist dream of a government of, by and for the ruling elites, responsive only to the elites and created to “control” to the greatest extent possible, the unwashed masses, while providing the impression (the fiction) that the unwashed masses are free.

    The Europeans, with their Stalinist/Fascist Brussels based, un-elected, unaccountable bureaucrats – all living off the public dole while contributing nothing to society – are just getting started. The tougher things get, the more excuses they will have to generate “solutions.”
    The end result, will be very like that of the “final solution,” minus the gas chambers (if the people are lucky).


    • Pointman says:

      The rules about commenting here are really blindingly simple. You don’t have to agree with anything I write, but as long as your comment is A) Lucid, B) Honest & C) Polite, it’s in the discussion which I welcome.

      Lose the screaming caps and dial back the rant, or you’re out on your ear.

      First and final warning.



  6. asybot says:

    It’s by now obvious to even the most fervent warmist, that any global binding agreement to reduce carbon emissions is not going to happen. In point of fact, emissions are going to rise inexorably as the developing world gradually industrialists, and they won’t let anyone stop them, as they demonstrated at Copenhagen where they said a flat no to every proposal.

    Paris just affirmed that as well. Nothing but hot air. (Pun?).


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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

%d bloggers like this: