Archives for posts with tag: climate change

I’ve paid attention to climate change my whole life. In my youth, it was pollution, soot and sulfur compounds, etc., that were causing, not only dirty, unhealthy living conditions, but coming ice sheets as our current ice age deepened and the glaciers reasserted over most of the northern hemisphere. Later, that fear morphed into global warming, now, just change. Of course, change is the only constant, and we hear most everything blamed on this supposedly alarming change in the undefined and undefinable climate.

Trying to keep things simple, I take advantage of the fact we humans are inherently religious. No matter what we are talking about, we frame it in a religious framework. Currently, the high priests, the bishops, and the popes, like Algore, tell us we are sinning by burning things, especially in our motor vehicles, and by eating (which is still burning). The alarmist religious leaders pretend we can be absolved if we drive unsafe tiny cars (and drive less) and if we eat unhealthy foods (meaning only plants grown in manure).

Of course, there are bigger sins, like coal, but that is a slow-motion effort that mostly hurts people directly involved in coal, and less coal does amount to less pollution to deal with for the rest of us.

Since essentially all of us are unwilling to repent of our sinful ways, the powers that be preach that “god” (Gaia, in this case) is punishing us with weather. All of what we used to call weather (which we admitted everyone talked about, but no one could do anything about) is now hailed as proof that we sinners must repent and stop burning anything and stop eating anything.

Again, we humans are going to continue eating. As we grow wealthier (in the developing nations) we will eat more meat. We will burn more fuel. That is the fact. It isn’t going to change. We will consume more and more energy (food is simply our tasty form of energy). It is inexorable. If you oppose it, you espouse death and slavery. Harsh? Not at all. The internalization of the fact that every individual has independent intrinsic value and the fact of the industrial revolution, specifically the burning of fossil fuels in productive industry, have been the significant factors in the reductions of slavery and death and abject poverty in the world.

I think that worth emphasizing: Understanding the worth of every individual as an independent good and the burning of fossil fuels are why things are better now than they were a century ago. We can step that back by century, still seeing progress for a few, but the same cannot be said of a couple millennia ago. Specifically, at that time, only the powerful were valued. All wealth was merely the effective use of enslavement. Life was dirty, brutish, and short unless you were powerful enough to use slaves. Restricting the use of energy, even fossil fuels, is turning to slavery and impoverishment.

The big picture is that energy is the single most important factor to the flourishing of humanity as a whole. Energy causally correlates to societal wellbeing.

Deficient engineers and bad politicians devised means of producing power without directly burning fossil fuels. These so-called renewables meet our religious need of blood sacrifice. These sacrificial altars kill insects by the millions, bats by the thousands, and rare birds by the hundreds continuously. These sacrificial altars provide us self-flagellation as well, at least for those forced to live within proximity. Eventually, the harm caused by renewables will be so self-evident that the religious leaders of environmentalism will turn the tables, and these will be the new sin. (Over and over for over 3,000 years, we have abandoned windmills. We will this time, too, and someone will have to clean up the mess.)

It cannot be over emphasized that the ready availability of energy as inexpensive, reliable electricity and fuel, is the essential requirement for a flourishing human society. It is globally and locally true. We must have more and more reliable energy availability. The alternative is death and slavery. It is harsh, but those are the cold equations (reference Tom Godwin).

Much of what we humans do is not life or death. Energy is.

Such notions as the “green new deal” deny reality and physics.

Such notions as socialism deny reality and human nature.

To deny reality is to invite death.

Is climate changing? Yes. It always has. It always will.

Is climate changing because of our consumption and burning? Is it because of the new sins of the new environmentalist religion? I can’t see that it matters. Climate has changed far more in the distant past than it can in the near future. I don’t think we can define climate in the near-term. I think climate must be defined over several generations. It isn’t useful to define climate in terms less than several centuries. Too many other factors affect all we are considering when looking at averages of various factors of weather.

I assert we are in no danger societally from any pending climate change. Our sins of burning are not going to kill us, and Gaia simply doesn’t care. Climate and earth will not kill us. (That big rock coming our way might, but we can’t say much about when.)

Teach your children the historical fact that fear and alarmism have never accomplished anything good and usually result in grave harm.

Bottom line: We must have more energy. It must be more readily available to all, and it must be reliable.

There is a clear and proven way to make more energy available in an environmentally responsible way, nuclear.

Nuclear fission power production is our only long-term option.

Repeating the bottom line: We must have more energy, and nuclear is the only realistic way to do it.

I happened upon wattsupwiththat.com nearly a dozen years ago in its beginnings. I’ve been a fan and regular reader ever since. If you are concerned about the future, as regards the climate, there is no more thorough source of information than WUWT. Given my devotion, and effort, and the fact I have been unable to read all the articles, much less all the discussion and comments, I know no one can review the entirety of the contents archived here, but if you do so with an honest heart and determination to consider all things, you will be an expert. (You’ll need some other research sources as well, of course.)

I encourage anyone and everyone to regularly visit https://wattsupwiththat.com/ and learn. Scott Adams asserts it is too hard to become an expert in a field without actually earning your living in it, but I am confident he’s wrong. I think he is, too, but that isn’t persuasive, and persuasion seems to be Adams’ core.

I can’t persuade you. Anthony can’t either, but you might grow and change if you try to educate yourself, if you try to prove assertions wrong by looking at the actual data rather than putting your faith in the high-priests of the technocracy. I say persuasion is an illusion. The only true persuader is pain, the pain of trying and failing, not the pain of coercion or force. Humanity seems to have abandoned the false alarm of climatism, but the alarm wails on. The sirens are funded by autocratic billionaires, but even more so by our governments. I’m worried the alarms will be loud enough to continue the failing efforts too long. Money corrupts science, government money even more. Humanity seems to be reluctant to let go of alarmism, and it seems determined to try all the failed and failing efforts. Humanity seems always ready to try anything rather than do nothing, no matter the likely suffering resulting from ill-conceived plans. The efforts for environmentalism accomplished the good they could. Then they went past. Now, they cause more harm than good. The efforts now called “Green” are causing suffering. Gradually, people are realizing the facts. “Green” is now a synonym for unnecessary suffering and coercion by force, the monopolistic force of the state. Eventually, the pain caused by “Green” will become too much, and people will turn on it. I hope we can walk away from “Green” with excess suffering resulting from a lust for revenge upon the needless suffering caused by the perpetrators of “Green.”

I’ve refrained from saying much about the new Cosmos. I’ve written a bit here https://gottadobetterthanthis.wordpress.com/2014/05/04/cosmos-good-grief/

I really am not pleased with it overall. They had such an opportunity.

I record my exasperation. I really think it ought to be possible to sue Neil and company for such gross negligence. Of course, who am I, a lowly engineer, to question such a preeminent physicist? Well, I’m the same guy that is willing to question the Pope (though I usually find myself agreeing with him), the President (and it has been decades since I’ve agreed with one of them), and even the local pastor. I question all authority. I try to question myself and my own biases.

The global warming episode is utterly emotional and fact-free. A stereotypical Jewish mother has nothing on Neil when it comes to guilt trips. I guess he wants everyone, especially the children, to feel guilt and shame that they are not doing their part and suffering now so that the future generations can have something in the distant future.

It borders child abuse in my opinion.

Solar power and wind power are pipe dreams! Read the rest of this entry »

How many episodes of Cosmos so far? I don’t care. Only one good episode, last week. This week sucked bad.

Overall, I love what they are doing, but they are such bullies and so arbitrary!

Alarmism is alarmism whether delivered by a fire-and-brimstone preacher, or a snake-oil salesman, or by Neil deGrasse Tyson. Yes, I’m comparing the three together, equating them. Neil is simply acting to scare people when he ridicules religion or tries to scare us into killing each other in order to stop burning fuel. Yes, the greens, the climate alarmists, the “Agent Smiths” of the world are calling for mass murder when they call for the ending of the fossil fuel era. Neil is simply lying when he pretends solar power can run our industrial, technological world. Part of why we were able to end the heinous crime, the sin, of slavery, is because of the inexpensive availability of fossil fuel and our innovation abilities to turn chemical energy into mechanical energy and production.

The alarmists and greens claim they are calling for the greater good but what will result, if they get what they want, is tyranny, murder, and slavery.

Learn. Study. Seek truth. ALWAYS question authority.

When it comes to Cosmos, be as smart as an old cow; eat the hay, and spit out the sticks. Many aspects of each show are good, but some of it is rotten. Throw it out.

Dr. Spencer reports here:

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/03/the-next-great-famineor-age-of-abundance/

From Dr. Spencer’s page

Worth noting! Dr. Motl comments here: http://motls.blogspot.com.au/2014/02/gestapo-like-adl-raid-on-roy-spencer.html

Anthony has updated. It gets uglier and uglier.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.

Sadly, it is often the Jews who will not speak out today.

Watts Up With That?

Boy, this is ugly, and I hope this boils down to simply an error in judgement by a lower tier administrator because this is like some bizzaro-world episode; on one hand the Anti-Defamation League is coming down against the “…type of comparison diminishes and trivializes the Holocaust.“, while on another they are giving a “get out of jail free card” to the people who have repeatedly done that very thing over several years.

Two telephone calls and two emails today requesting comment from ADL’s Southeast Interim Regional Director Shelly Rose have gone unanswered. She’s aware of my calls. I asked for her directly, gave my name and affiliation, and after a pause on hold her assistant asked if it would be OK to “send you to voice mail”. Ms Rose did provide a copy of the press release below, after I queried the main organization in New York…

View original post 803 more words

I ran across a post from three years back, where physicist Luboš Motl from Pilsen, Czech Republic, takes on some misleading and errant statements from one of the global warming propagandists. (One of the better ones, I might add.)

Anyway, Dr. Motl is one of the truly big brains, Einstein level. He is a string theorist, the kind of guy who works with mathematics that scare even mathematics professors. A real life Sheldon Cooper.

http://motls.blogspot.com.au/2011/08/sciam-gavin-schmidt-despise-climate.html

The truth is out there, and it has been written up well for long enough that most anyone that prefers to be correct, rather than self-confident, should know by now.

Over at AmericanThinker, Thomas Lifson comments on some absurd propaganda.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/01/how_global_warming_makes_it_warmer_and_colder.html

It would be somewhat humorous if there were any possibility it was supposed to be, satire, hyperbole, and such, but no, they (at least Oleg) really seem to think people will accept such drivel. Sadly, some will.

Anthony Watts rightly makes fun of the Mann-child and the Lewandowskyites here, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/01/mann-and-lewandowsky-go-psychotic-on-skeptics/

Anthony correctly states that the alarmists are losing the argument so they are now trying to suppress dissent. (Not new, actually. It has been part of their tactics from the beginning.)

Anthony correctly points out that this is the tactic the soviets used where they asserted that only crazy people would disagree with them, so those who disagree must be locked away and medicated into oblivion and silence.

I agree with Anthony that the likes of Mann and Lew need professional counseling and help. If they are not yet dangerous to themselves or others, they are likely to be soon. They really seem to need help. The paper sited is truly sad. Emotionalism, not science.  Read the rest of this entry »

Here is another interesting looking book:

How to Cure a Climate Change Denier (Kindle Edition)

by Paul Caruso

Amazon is selling it as a Kindle edition for four bucks.

Anthony points it out on his most-excellent blog, Watts Up With Thathttp://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/30/how-to-cure-a-climate-change-denier/.

The “Look inside” selection has a passage that caught my eye. Since the text is configured to protect it, I’m typing from memory, and my quote below is inexact. Mr. Caruso points out that the “97% consensus” lacks force, and he explains what it is, then he says (approximate quote), “Even if the majority of climate scientists believe in global warming, the majority of priests believe in God.” He then asks what this proves? Does it prove God exists? He wonders if it rather indicates that those who believe in God are more likely to enter the priesthood.

Seems an apt analogy. I like it.

I’m pretty sure that nearly 100% of all holy men (and women) believe in god. They are experts in most every regard, and they are true authorities in the matter. Of course, this variety of holy man disagrees with that variety, but we can major on the similarities for the moment.

What has me irked is I am likened, in anti-Semitic fervor, to a Holocaust denier, while evangelical atheists strut smugly as skeptics, as though the label can only be used in their special sense, as the “It” religion of the day.

Mr. Caruso also points out that researchers follow available funding. At least clergy don’t generally do that. (With some exceptions, of course, some even horrid. That is why the Lord cautioned that one cannot serve both God and money.)

Regarding the Gleick fraud and defaming of Hearthland Inst. in the “cause” of global warming:

“That is the message of Gleick’s theft and Horgan’s equivocations. Together, they shine a spot light on the moral swamp that climate science has become.”

via Lying for the Cause? » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names.

To anyone reading Mr. Spinney’s article, take with a grain of salt. He does make some solid points.

%d bloggers like this: