Reefer madness subsiding
Um...well maybe the...um...Great Barrier Reef isn't going to disappear after all.
That plus it's really chilly out, for a July 13th, and I'm pretty much through with "global warming".
Here's my favorite passage from Swift, which (allowing for a dose of mutatis mutandis) sums up the climate-change mindset:
These People are under continual Disquietudes, never enjoying a Minute's Peace of Mind; and their Disturbances proceed from Causes which very little affect the rest of Mortals. Their Apprehensions arise from several Changes they dread in the Celestial Bodies. For Instance; that the Earth by the continual Approaches of the Sun towards it, must in Course of Time be absorbed or swallowed up. That the Face of the Sun will by Degrees be encrusted with its own Effluvia, and give no more Light to the World. That, the Earth very narrowly escaped a Brush from the Tail of the last Comet, which would have infallibly reduced it to Ashes; and that the next, which they have calculated for One and Thirty Years hence, will probably destroy us. For, if in its Perihelion it should approach within a certain Degree of the Sun, (as by their Calculations they have Reason to dread) it will conceive a Degree of Heat ten Thousand Times more intense than that of red hot glowing Iron; and in its Absence from the Sun, carry a blazing Tail Ten Hundred Thousand and Fourteen Miles long; through which if the Earth should pass at the Distance of one Hundred Thousand Miles from the Nucleus or main Body of the Comet, it must in its Passage be set on Fire, and reduced to Ashes. That the Sun daily spending its Rays without any Nutriment to supply them, will at last be wholly consumed and annihilated; which must be attended with the Destruction of this Earth, and of all the Planets that receive their Light from it.(Gulliver's Travels, A Voyage to Laputa etc.)
They are so perpetually alarmed with the Apprehensions of these and the like impending Dangers, that they can neither sleep quietly in their Beds, nor have any Relish for the common Pleasures or Amusements of Life. When they meet an Acquaintance in the Morning, the first Question is about the Sun's Health; how he looked at his Setting and Rising, and what Hopes they have to avoid the Stroak of the approaching Comet. This conversation they are apt to run into with the same Temper that boys discover, in delighting to hear terrible Stories of Sprites and Hobgoblins, which they greedily listen to, and dare not go to Bed for fear.
9 comments:
Oh please. Being a conservative shouldn't mean you have to stick your head in the sand. Climate change is a scientific fact. You might as well tell us the world was created 6000 years ago. Honestly, the drummed up scepticism about climate change is so transparently funded by people who have a financial interest in business as usual (Big Oil). They're interested only in diverting attention for as long as they can while they're creaming it for as much as possible.
Are you really sceptical or is this still part of your policy of not bailing on Bush (from a few posts back)?
Climate has always changed in one way or another, so I suppose that CC is a fact. It could be that human activity is contributing in some way to some kind of change in climate right now. Probably it is. What I'm sceptical about is that this is really a problem that we need to get worried about or that won't just be "solved" along the way by normal adaptation, if it actually pans out into anything. I am old enough to remember when the "New Ice Age" was upon us, followed shortly by the Nuclear Winter that Reagan was bent on bringing about. There was also the Population Bomb and the inevitable extinction of global oil supplies by 1990. So, yes, I'm sceptical of doomsday scenarios in general, particularly since it's the same sort of people that seem to take up these causes sequentially, as though their views are more of a psychological phenomenon than a response to reality.
The Big Oil industry is really the Big Energy industry and can profit from global warming just as easily as from no global warming.
The predictions of world-ending disaster are intended to be self-falsifying prophesies. If enough people get enough concerned to change their behaviour then the predictions won't come true. Since they're based on scientific models, the best way to make them come true is just to ignore the warnings and carry on with business as usual. There's more than a hint of the 'dilemma of the commons' here, since as individuals it's easiest to leave the lifestyle changes to others to do.
I doubt the earlier warnings of a new ice age were as thoroughly researched and substantiated as the current models are. But we non-scientists have to just accept the judgement of more qualified people. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was unanimous that there is warming and that it is anthropogenic.
In principle, Big Oil can make money out of global warming too. BP has tried to reposition itself as "Beyond Petroleum" in the UK for example. But these points don't change the fact that they are fighting a rear-guard action to retain the status quo and hinder a multilateral political response to the danger. It could be something as simple as that the leaders of these big companies are dinosaurs of the old school and simply can't be bothered changing their ideas on these things (they lived through the warnings of the ice age too), or it could be that they don't want stop early and see the competition keep drilling and making all that money.
You may be right that a certain portion of society is always quick to jump on doomsaying bandwagon, but the warnings about global warning are coming out of dry and sober science departments.
I don't want to commit the "genetic fallacy" ("what X says is wrong because X's reasons for saying it are bad"). But I haven't really seen much that convinces me of anything more than there could be some human contribution to an apparent phenomenon the consequences of which could be virtually anything from zero (or positive) to moderately negative over a time range of a few decades to thousands of years. That we need to take specific, immediate and drastic actions in response to such vague suppositions seems doubtful to me.
You mean that the planet will not be an overpopulated snowball in ten years?
Anyhow, Andy, given all your past posts predicting the imminent demise of the West thanks to declining birthrates in Europe, I can only say: "Doctor, heal thyself!"
Mine is more an analytic truth -- no births, no West. Unless we complicate the picture by inserting robots into the mix, as some are wont to do.
Andy said: "no births, no West"
And your own contribution has been ... what?
Anyhow, I live in Europe, and I've seen lots of kids and pregnent chicks. (Maybe not 2.2 per married couple at this moment, at least outside of Ireland, but gosh, history has a funny way of changing.)
My original charge still stands. You're happy to 'poo-poo' other people's doomsday scenarios, while holding your own beyond criticism.
That's plain unsporting.
I was born. I did my bit.
The difference is that I'm not asking anyone to do anything in aid of avoiding my doomsday. As far as I can see it's unavoidable unless history changes more than it's likely to. In contrast, the ecofreaks are always badgering me about my SUVs and that really sticks in my craw.
Andy, you'll be interested in this story in the guardian. A Canadian Blogger has uncovered errors in NASA calculations that show that 1931 was actually the hottest year on record in the USA and not 1998 as they had reported.
Post a Comment