Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Dr. John J Ray On The Green Movement
#1
The Green Movement

‘Global warming’ has become the grand political narrative of the age, replacing Marxism as a dominant force for controlling liberty and human choices. -- Prof. P. Stott


The modern environmental movement arose out of the wreckage of the New Left. They call themselves Green because they're too yellow to admit they're really Reds. So Lenin's birthday was chosen to be the date of Earth Day. Even a moderate politician like Al Gore has been clear as to what is needed. In "Earth in the Balance", he wrote that saving the planet would require a "wrenching transformation of society".


"The improver of natural knowledge absolutely refuses to acknowledge authority, as such. For him, scepticism is the highest of duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin." -- Thomas H. Huxley


Al Gore won a political prize for an alleged work of science. That rather speaks for itself, doesn't it?


For centuries there was a scientific consensus which said that fire was explained by the release of an invisible element called phlogiston. That theory is universally ridiculed today. Global warming is the new phlogiston.


Motives: Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is generally to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else, truth regardless.


Policies: The only underlying theme that makes sense of all Greenie policies is hatred of people. Hatred of other people has been a Greenie theme from way back. In a report titled "The First Global Revolution" (1991, p. 104) published by the "Club of Rome", a Greenie panic outfit, we find the following statement: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself." See here for many more examples of prominent Greenies saying how much and how furiously they hate you.


"The desire to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it" -- H L Mencken


Time was, people warning the world "Repent - the end is nigh!" were snickered at as fruitcakes. Now they own the media and run the schools.


Against the long history of huge temperature variation in the earth's climate (ice ages etc.), the .6 of one degree average rise reported by the U.N. "experts" for the entire 20th century (a rise so small that you would not be able to detect such a difference personally without instruments) shows, if anything, that the 20th century was a time of exceptional temperature stability.


Recent NASA figures tell us that there was NO warming trend in the USA during the 20th century. If global warming is occurring, how come it forgot the USA?


Warmists say that the revised NASA figures do not matter because they cover only the USA -- and the rest of the world is warming nicely. But it is not. There has NEVER been any evidence that the Southern hemisphere is warming. See here. So the warming pattern sure is looking moth-eaten.


There goes another beautiful theory about to be murdered by a brutal gang of facts. - Duc de La Rochefoucauld, French writer and moralist (1613-1680)


The latest scare is the possible effect of extra CO2 on the world’s oceans, because more CO2 lowers the pH of seawater. While it is claimed that this makes the water more acidic, this is misleading. Since seawater has a pH around 8.1, it will take an awful lot of CO2 it to even make the water neutral (pH=7), let alone acidic (pH less than 7).


The chaos theory people have told us for years that the air movement from a single butterfly's wing in Brazil can cause an unforeseen change in our weather here. Now we are told that climate experts can "model" the input of zillions of such incalculable variables over periods of decades to accurately forecast global warming 50 years hence. Give us all a break!


If you doubt the arrogance [of the global warming crowd], you haven't seen that Newsweek cover story that declared the global warming debate over. Consider: If Newton's laws of motion could, after 200 years of unfailing experimental and experiential confirmation, be overthrown, it requires religious fervor to believe that global warming -- infinitely more untested, complex and speculative -- is a closed issue


I am not a global warming skeptic nor am I a global warming denier. I am a global warming atheist. I don't believe one bit of it. That the earth's climate changes is undeniable. Only ignoramuses believe that climate stability is normal. But I see NO evidence to say that mankind has had anything to do with any of the changes observed -- and much evidence against that claim.


A "geriatric" revolt: The scientists who reject Warmism tend to be OLD! Your present blogger is one of those. There are tremendous pressures to conformity in academe and the generally Leftist orientation of academe tends to pressure everyone within it to agree to ideas that suit the Left. And Warmism is certainly one of those ideas. So old guys are the only ones who can AFFORD to declare the Warmists to be unclothed. They either have their careers well-established (with tenure) or have reached financial independence (retirement) and so can afford to call it like they see it. In general, seniors in society today are not remotely as helpful to younger people as they once were. But their opposition to the Warmist hysteria will one day show that seniors are not completely irrelevant after all. Experience does count (we have seen many such hysterias in the past and we have a broader base of knowledge to call on) and our independence is certainly an enormous strength. Some of us are already dead. (Reid Bryson and John Daly are particularly mourned) and some of us are very senior indeed (e.g. Bill Gray and Vince Gray) but the revolt we have fostered is ever growing so we have not labored in vain.


Scientists have politics too -- sometimes extreme politics. Read this: "This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism... I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child." -- Albert Einstein


Global warming has taken the place of Communism as an absurdity that "liberals" will defend to the death regardless of the evidence showing its folly. Evidence never has mattered to real Leftists


Seeing that we are all made of carbon, the time will come when people will look back on the carbon phobia of the early 21st century as too incredible to be believed


The intellectual Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) must have foreseen Global Warmism. He said: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."


The Holy Grail for most scientists is not truth but research grants. And the global warming scare has produced a huge downpour of money for research. Any mystery why so many scientists claim some belief in global warming?


For many people, global warming seems to have taken the place of "The Jews" -- a convenient but false explanation for any disliked event. Prof. Brignell has some examples.


Global warming skeptics are real party-poopers. It's so wonderful to believe that you have a mission to save the world.


The "precautionary principle" is a favourite Greenie idea -- but isn't that what George Bush was doing when he invaded Iraq? Wasn't that a precaution against Saddam getting or having any WMDs? So Greenies all agree with the Iraq intervention? If not, why not?


There is an "ascetic instinct" (or perhaps a "survivalist instinct") in many people that causes them to delight in going without material comforts. Monasteries and nunneries were once full of such people -- with the Byzantine stylites perhaps the most striking example. Many Greenies (other than Al Gore and his Hollywood pals) have that instinct too but in the absence of strong orthodox religious committments they have to convince themselves that the world NEEDS them to live in an ascetic way. So their personal emotional needs lead them to press on us all a delusional belief that the planet needs "saving".


A classic example of how the sensationalist media distort science to create climate panic is here.


There is a very readable summary of the "Hockey Stick" fraud right here .


The Lockwood & Froehlich paper was designed to rebut Durkin's "Great Global Warming Swindle" film. It is a rather confused paper -- acknowledging yet failing to account fully for the damping effect of the oceans, for instance -- but it is nonetheless valuable to climate atheists. The concession from a Greenie source that fluctuations in the output of the sun have driven climate change for all but the last 20 years (See the first sentence of the paper) really is invaluable. And the basic fact presented in the paper -- that solar output has in general been on the downturn in recent years -- is also amusing to see. Surely even a crazed Greenie mind must see that the sun's influence has not stopped and that reduced solar output will soon start COOLING the earth! Unprecedented July 2007 cold weather throughout the Southern hemisphere might even have been the first sign that the cooling is happening. And the fact that warming plateaued in 1998 is also a good sign that we are moving into a cooling phase. As is so often the case, the Greenies have got the danger exactly backwards. See my post of 7.14.07 and very detailed critiques here and here and here for more on the Lockwood paper and its weaknesses.


As the Greenies are now learning, even strong statistical correlations may disappear if a longer time series is used. A remarkable example from Sociology: "The modern literature on hate crimes began with a remarkable 1933 book by Arthur Raper titled The Tragedy of Lynching. Raper assembled data on the number of lynchings each year in the South and on the price of an acre’s yield of cotton. He calculated the correlation coefficient between the two series at –0.532. In other words, when the economy was doing well, the number of lynchings was lower.... In 2001, Donald Green, Laurence McFalls, and Jennifer Smith published a paper that demolished the alleged connection between economic conditions and lynchings in Raper’s data. Raper had the misfortune of stopping his analysis in 1929. After the Great Depression hit, the price of cotton plummeted and economic conditions deteriorated, yet lynchings continued to fall. The correlation disappeared altogether when more years of data were added." So we must be sure to base our conclusions on ALL the data. In the Greenie case, the correlation between CO2 rise and global temperature rise stopped in 1998 -- but that could have been foreseen if measurements taken in the first half of the 20th century had been considered.


Relying on the popular wisdom can even hurt you personally: "The scientific consensus of a quarter-century ago turned into the arthritic nightmare of today."
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#2
Interesting opinion.

I happen to think that will all the pollution done in West Virginia and the water so bad you can light it with a match, hundreds of miles of fishing streams buried and forests where families used to hunt for food, that pollution is not an asset to our nation.

With the oil fire in CA, which sent many to the hospital and the pollution in the Gulf stream and off the coast of Alaska, that we need to begin to stop this destruction of our land. And of our water. And of our air. At least, I take it seriously when God says I should be the caretaker of what it is he created for me. All this damage. Not a very good evalution for us, really.


Optimism is the faith that leads to achievement; nothing can be done without hope.

HELEN KELLER, Optimism


t's not that optimism solves all of life's problems; it is just that it can sometimes make the difference between coping and collapsing.

LUCY MACDONALD, Learn to Be an Optimist
Reply
#3
(08-23-2012, 06:28 PM)Mrs. J. Jones Wrote: Interesting opinion.

I happen to think that will all the pollution done in West Virginia and the water so bad you can light it with a match, hundreds of miles of fishing streams buried and forests where families used to hunt for food, that pollution is not an asset to our nation.

With the oil fire in CA, which sent many to the hospital and the pollution in the Gulf stream and off the coast of Alaska, that we need to begin to stop this destruction of our land. And of our water. And of our air. At least, I take it seriously when God says I should be the caretaker of what it is he created for me. All this damage. Not a very good evalution for us, really.

S13

It was far worse decades ago than now but you make it seem like it is really bad now.1970 was a pivotal year and do you know what that was Mrs. Jones?

The oil flow in the gulf was actually caused by bleeding heart environmentalist activism by pushing the drilling platforms much farther away from the shoreline thus increasing the difficulty of drilling in the deeper waters.Increasing engineering difficulties make it more likely to have a catastrophic event.

The event in Alaska was examined by the NTSB indicating it was massive human error that caused the spill.Today the damage is all gone and life is back to normal.

Quote:Causes of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill:
The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the Exxon Valdez oil spill and determined five probable causes of the accident:

The third mate failed to properly maneuver the vessel, possibly due to fatigue and excessive workload;
the master failed to provide a proper navigation watch, possibly due to impairment from alcohol;
Exxon Shipping Company failed to supervise the master and provide a rested and sufficient crew for the Exxon Valdez;
the U.S. Coast Guard failed to provide an effective vessel traffic system; and
effective pilot and escort services were lacking
.

LINK


But the Gulf was never pristine anyway with the numerous oil seeps and the biota that is there to handle it.

Petroleum seep

and SCIENCE REPORT:

Scientists Find That Tons Of Oil Seep Into The Gulf Of Mexico Each Year

I understand that the rare disaster is upsetting but not conductive to be making sweeping comments because of it.The fact is that the pollution problem is less and less over the decades as we learn to prevent them much better than in the past.

The irony is that the recent NEW forms of pollution are cause by environmentalist morons who fail to see the results of their often stupid attempts to push alternative solutions because they are wedded to the idea that know better and the rest of us must follow and the results are not pretty.

Do know what some of them are Mrs. Jones?
Reply
#4
Just to add my 2c here about hydrocarbons that seep out of the earth's crust. I'm betting that the amount seeping out on to the ocean floor is considerable, since the ocean floor is much closer to the inner mantle.

And all this seepage occurs because oil is not a fossil fuel as such. Its abiotic in nature, and is formed from the heat within, where it makes its way up to the surface. And a lot of it does leak out, where the oceans do a magnificent job of cleaning it all up very quickly. Bacteria and enzymes are there to do all the heavy lifting and all part of the hydrocarbon cycle thats been going on for billions of years now.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#5
Quote:Evidence never has mattered to real Leftists ...

It will if the Mann-Steyn feud goes off as planned. S5
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#6
Lets hope that our "best loved comedy figure in the entire field of climate science" doesn't allow his back to become all wobbly, so as to drop the suit after having second thoughts. If he does keep his spine, we will most definitely be entertained to one of the best shows around. S13
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#7
(08-28-2012, 11:50 PM)John L Wrote: Lets hope that our "best loved comedy figure in the entire field of climate science" doesn't allow his back to become all wobbly, so as to drop the suit after having second thoughts. If he does keep his spine, we will most definitely be entertained to one of the best shows around. S13

It will be a pretty good barometer of how much he actually believes in his own 'work'. Stay tuned.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#8
(08-28-2012, 10:25 PM)mr_yak Wrote:
Quote:Evidence never has mattered to real Leftists ...

It will if the Mann-Steyn feud goes off as planned. S5

The comments are a hoot especially to read uber warmist Clyde_davies fallacy after fallacy comments and at the same time show that he knows not a damn thing about the AGW brouhaha...
Reply
#9
Who is this 'Clyde Davies' fellow? He seems to be a regular poster there.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#10
This is off topic, but, I didn't want to start a totally new thread. With all the goofballs in human history, with all the human sacrifice( and if you check, it was massive and across the globe) and such idiocy, there cannot have been a more devastating movement than Marxism.

http://rantburg.com/poparticle.php?D=09/...&ID=351566
Reply
#11
(09-08-2012, 07:47 AM)Palladin Wrote: This is off topic, but, I didn't want to start a totally new thread. With all the goofballs in human history, with all the human sacrifice( and if you check, it was massive and across the globe) and such idiocy, there cannot have been a more devastating movement than Marxism.

http://rantburg.com/poparticle.php?D=09/...&ID=351566

The real truth is eventually going to come out, as the article is showing. There are others in China, who are more than willing to remind people of really what happened, not what they want others to think.

Right now Uncle Adolf is still the number one villain, because information was so readily available, and there are so many worshipers of Marxism. But as more real information keeps filtering out, a larger number of people are finding that he had nothing on the likes of Uncle Joe, or Grandfather Mao, or perhaps lesser others such as Pol Pot.

I've no doubt that eventually they will slide into their real position of importance within the 'Human Monster' Hall of Shame. That is also when the lesser followers, who actually did the dirty work, will become every day known characters as well.

Its just going to take some time. S5
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#12
(09-07-2012, 07:50 PM)John L Wrote: Who is this 'Clyde Davies' fellow? He seems to be a regular poster there.

He is a typical leftist lemming for the IPCC,Consensus and the never verified AGW conjecture propaganda.

What else can it be?
Reply
#13
(09-08-2012, 12:02 PM)sunsettommy Wrote:
(09-07-2012, 07:50 PM)John L Wrote: Who is this 'Clyde Davies' fellow? He seems to be a regular poster there.

He is a typical leftist lemming for the IPCC,Consensus and the never verified AGW conjecture propaganda.

What else can it be?

Its just that his 'handle' seems so familiar.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)