-
Global Warming on 15-Year Hold
April 2, 2012 | 12 comments
-
Suddenly This Summer
March 31, 2012 | 8 comments
-
FakeGate: Just Another Day at Team Green
February 22, 2012 | 7 comments
-
"Climate" and the Campaign
January 12, 2012 | 8 comments
-
Germany's Green Bubble Follows Spain's; Will Congress Waste More Billions on Ours?
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Radical green activist Bill McKibben cleverly responds in today's Washington Post to Glenn Beck having called McKibben a communist. Cleverly, that is, up until about halfway through.
[The U.S. Chamber] submitted a petition to the Environmental Protection Agency arguing that it should avoid regulating carbon emissions because, in the event of global warming, "populations can acclimatize to warmer climates via a range of behavioral, physiological, and technological adaptations."
To me that sounds absurd.
This would be amusing except the guy's a college professor. Who apparently has little clue about that to which he has dedicated much of his life.
This inanity can only be the result of someone spending a little too much time feverishly staring at fudged computer model projections of the future, at the expense of reality. Reality is evidence, models are not. And yet this haughty foolishness passed not only Mr. McKibben's typing fingers and mental editing process, but also the Post's system of review (whatever that may be).
It's not just that the most vibrant modern economies ranged from chilly Iceland to steamy Singapore. Which one meets Goldilocks' vague intimations of the ideal, 'proper' climate? Can't be both, we know that. Either? Far more likely it's neither. Maybe those people aren't really there. At least, maybe not in a computer model.
But, further, more than people adapting to whichever climate they live in being self-evident, people always have adapted to something that's always taking place: climate change.
Mr. McKibben, you're not going to, erm, 'deny' that, are you? Because it seems you do.
In fact, this is implicitly and sometimes expressly denied by these folks, who I suppose really are the "climate change 'deniers''' they speak of so often -- climate, rewritten in the IPCC Third Assessment Report, was now shown to have been stable (pause wait for laughter, but they really do say things like 'stabilize the climate') until the horrors of industrialized society.
That's called the 'Hockey Stick' revision, by a computer model, of one thousand years of accumulated knowledge of observed history as even the first UNIPCC assessment had affirmed. Climate changes, always has, always will, evidence of which is found everywhere, from geology to diaries to agricultural records to cultural works of a given age.
So climate's always changed, mankind has always adapted, and the wealthiest societies have adapted best. McKibben boasts of his leisure activities: baseball in the Spring and summer and snow skiing when conditions allow. Fairly adaptable, I'd say. And fairly wealthy.
Rationing energy or otherwise adopting McKibben's preferred agenda would, I suppose, make it somewhat 'absurd' that man could adapt as well to that which will always occur. Worse, you ultimately slow down development of the poor who are most vulnerable to climate. And change.
More Florida, less Bangladesh is the better option.
Anyhow, remember that you cannot reason people out of a position that they were not reasoned into. Global warming alarmism is an emotional stance, one so many adopt because they apparently need it, need it to be true, need their worldview 'affirmed' by something. And are greatly disturbed by those who argue in a way upsetting this mental and emotional framework.
And as with any doomsday cult, that's also why they're so eager to accept whatever happens, however implausibly, as further evidence of their faith.
View all comments (28) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Chris Horner
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/03/01/climate-change-deniers
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- All the Angry Liberals
- Laughing on the Wrong Side
- Tenured and Powerless
SPONSORED LINKS
Special Feature
Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:
FLASHBACK TO: 1984
-
The Fairness Delusion
The speech our President should make.
-
Media Smears: One Man’s Experiences
A noted economist fires back.
-
Chuck Colson vs. The Fundamentalists
How political can you get?
-
The Reagan Doctrine
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
-
The Woman Problem
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
JP| 3.1.11 @ 8:46AM
The Alarmists do not even try to make sense anymore. At least when thier meme was AGW they attempted to keep up the guise of respectability. Now it is nothing but unc0-ordinated spin, vitriol, and anger. You know the game is up when even a (formerly) respected professor like Jeff Masters let slip the term "denier". Not even that paragon of "middle of the road" climate science, Dr Judith Curry can stand in such putrid waters anymore.
Ross Kaminsky| 3.1.11 @ 9:21AM
Chris, as you well know, the alarmists also need it because their budgets and salaries depend on it. It's hard to make money by saying "everything's basically fine."
Tom Osterman| 3.1.11 @ 10:38AM
It's also hard to impose "change" and "shared sacrifice" on an unwilling and unbelieving public with "everything's fine."
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.1.11 @ 11:24AM
Exactly, its strikingly similar to this debacle with the unions. We, as taxpayers, take a recommendation on whether or not to spend money on research from the guys that the money is going to. I'm willing to be they don't recommend to end their own cushy deals with the govt.
Mark Lokowich| 3.1.11 @ 10:47AM
"Global warming alarmism is an emotional stance," As I witnessed when this carpetbagger came to Mn. His pablum, dumped out in our suburban high school's forum, was unfortunatly almost swallowed whole. When he comes back again ; I will NOT let him off the hook so easily!
CJohnson| 3.1.11 @ 10:54AM
Global warming must be good for fur bearing animals; I wear fur I stole when it's cold because I lost all mine.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.1.11 @ 11:22AM
Since Walter Williams filled in for Rush yesterday, I thought it was appropriate to share. This is an oldy, but a goody.
http://www.creators.com/opinio.....lists.html
timb| 3.1.11 @ 11:34AM
He's a college professor! No wonder he doesn't know what he's talking about, since everyone knows from Mr. Horner's own CV that to be "climate expert," one needs to be a lawyer and hired gun for a front for oil and gas companies!
Experts who KNOW things are worthless. We need more "experts" who are bought and sold like cheap ladies of the evening by Fred Smith and the folks at API. Fortunately for all concerned, the American Spectator, that award winning publisher of Richard Melon Scaife's brain farts in the 1990's can give voice to the downtrodden folks at Exxon. Kudos, Horner.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.1.11 @ 1:47PM
Temperatures have been dropping since 2001. Whether its for big oil or anyone else, these are the facts, jack.
Alex Mac| 3.1.11 @ 2:00PM
Yeah which world do you live on? Here is planet Earth, by the way.
NoLib| 3.1.11 @ 4:45PM
Yeah this is planet earth and it's not warming, clown. Better find another scam to try to destroy our economy, because this one's not working.
Alex Mac| 3.2.11 @ 1:48AM
Magical thinking.
Jasper| 3.2.11 @ 1:06PM
Yes, we know and we're sick of you moronic alarmists.
Bryan S.| 3.1.11 @ 11:44AM
The alarmists only repeat the science. Inflexible conservative ideologues are unequipped to implement a policy that changes anything, ever. Even if science, which gave us our technology, our huge population, and miraculously comfortable standard of living, says we need to adjust. A simple policy change would move our economy slowly, with little negative impact, and much positive impact long term, to non-fossil energy. Climate denial is anti-science, anti-intellectual, fossil-worship.
Tom Osterman| 3.1.11 @ 11:58AM
The alarmist aren't repeating the science, they're making up the "science."
NoLib| 3.1.11 @ 4:46PM
You got it!
Bryan S.| 3.1.11 @ 11:46AM
Let me clarify, no net negative impact. Only localized to people and utilities that have already sworn allegiance to fossil gods and thus would be behind at that start of any incentivized transition.
james wilson| 3.1.11 @ 1:11PM
To deny what is delusional gives credit to the delusional. No one is a denier of the flat earth society.
Patriot| 3.1.11 @ 1:32PM
I caught you on Neil Cavuto's show yesterday, Chris; the words "Climate Change Skeptic" were emblazoned under your name. It made me laugh.
timb| 3.1.11 @ 1:36PM
I can't figure out what is more hysterical: the idea Horner cares about the poor or the idea that he is unaware that the Chamber of Commerce is insane. "people should adapt" is such a nicer way of noting that the future wars over fresh water will just be part of that adaption.
No, you guys are right, it's not the lawyer's denial of science that is more funny; it's his faking a concern for the poor.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.1.11 @ 1:49PM
This guy "timb" is a propagandist for the "one world order" types. Climate Change legislation is geared toward one thing, a global tax. And as they say, "If you can tax it, you can control it."
@motsatt| 3.1.11 @ 1:54PM
"Anyhow, remember that you cannot reason people out of a position that they were not reasoned into."
What a great line, Chris. It's good enough to steal and thats what I'll do. Thanks.
Alex Mac| 3.1.11 @ 1:58PM
Dear Chris, you seem to conveniently forget that models are based on evidence and all science is based on models. Like the models which predict whether planes will fly and which let the US put a man on the moon.
But never let facts stand on the way of scoring cheap points on the ignorant.
"So climate's always changed, mankind has always adapted". Until it hasn't. And that meant famine, mass migration and death. But hey! It's all right if it happens on the Bangladeshi or the Rwandans as long as you can keep your SUV.
You know what? This way you're only buying the luxury of being the last to starve.
NoLib| 3.1.11 @ 4:48PM
Like you pro-aborts give a damn about people.
What a joke.
All you Leftists care about are power and control.
Go away.
Alex Mac| 3.2.11 @ 1:45AM
And all you're left with is ad-homs.
Jasper| 3.2.11 @ 1:07PM
More magical thinking.
Conservative View| 3.2.11 @ 8:25AM
"All science is based on models?" I fail to agree. Science is based on predictably. That is, I predict that this pen in my hand will fall when I let go. And it does. The stronger the science the more accurate and consistant the predictions.
I challenge anyone to direct me to a site that contains EXPERMENTAL data that concludes AGW is real. Studies are not experments, they are studies. Statistics is not science, statistics are statistics. Only when the statistical model is one for a given event can it be concluded as a scientific fact. That is 100% of the time the effect will match with the cause.
Another real problem with the "science" of AGW is the amount of conflicting data. The polar ice cap is melting, the polar ice cap is at record thickness. Polar Bears are becoming extinct, Polar Bears are at record numbers. Snow is a thing of the past, it's snowing like crazy in the UK. The conflicting data coupled with the loss of anything that remotely comes close to predictably should raise huge questionmarks in the minds of anyone who actually objectively looks at AGW.
john dubose| 3.2.11 @ 9:08AM
From a public policy view in the USA, it does not matter whether anthropogenic CO2 is heating things up or not. Big parts of the world are industrializing at FULL SPEED. They are going to generate a LOT of new CO2 regardless of what we say or do. I can not say that I blame them.