The Very Definition of America-Hating Liberal Guilt

A letter to the editor in the Jakarta Times:

As a US citizen, I must accept responsibility for my own nation’s abject failure to take responsibility for its actions.

As the world’s largest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases and as the enabler of a consumerist lifestyle which, if left unchecked, is absolutely certain to submerge the planet in giga tons of toxic trash, the United States has been the driving force behind the climate crisis.

Unfortunately, my country’s responsibilities are unlikely to be met any time soon, for we are in the grip of a political crisis brought about by a national exaltation of demagoguery and ignorance.

Thus our governing bodies are riddled with arrogant men and women who dismiss scientific expertise as irrelevant, preferring the comforts of ancient superstition.

Global warming’s realities are terrifying. But as citizens of ocean states can attest, ignoring those facts will surely lead to outcomes beside which our nightmares will pale into insignificance.

Warren Senders
Medford, Massachusetts

So we start off with a line that could be lifted from just about any Barack Oprompter speech outside the US apologizing for their country.

Breast beating about how we use lots of energy since we manufacture and consume so much that our economy is still 20% of global world output.  In other words – we generate more economic activity and energy in 2 days than the entire country of Indonesia does in a year.  Yeah, that’s something to be really sorry about.

Islamic foreigners think the US is Satan anyway – so knocking your own country as “a national exaltation of demagoguery and ignorance” and “riddled with arrogant men and women who dismiss scientific expertise as irrelevant” will make them feel so good about you.  Of course you little knock about ancient superstition – does that include say Islamic beliefs about having 4 wives and marrying off your 9 year old girls?

And here’s the one sure thing Warren – when Islam takes over America you will be one of the first ones up against the wall.  Regardless of how much you grovel from your centrally heated and air conditioned, 24 hour per day electrically provisioned, suburban house that any Indonesian would chew off their arm to live in.

Criminalizing Dissent

I’ve been thinking about this post for a while.  The starting point was this post on the ultra-liberal Guardian website entitled: “Is climate science disinformation a crime against humanity?”  Let’s go with a few of the salient points:

Although there is an important role for scepticism in science, for almost 30 years some corporations have supported a disinformation campaign about climate change science.

Really?  for 30 years?  In fact, 30 years ago the “science” community was screaming and yelling about the coming ice age.

Disinformation about the state of climate change science is extraordinarily – if not criminally – irresponsible, because the consensus scientific view is based upon strong evidence that climate change:

• Is already being experienced by tens of thousands in the world;

• Will be experienced in the future by millions of people from greenhouse gas emissions that have already been emitted but not yet felt due to lags in the climate system; and,

• Will increase dramatically in the future unless greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically reduced from existing global emissions levels.

Before the hysteria of the next ice age, er, global warming, er, climate change – I would almost be sure that for all of human history people have experienced climate change – its called weather.  People are killed every year with hurricanes and typhoons, heat waves cause some to die (mainly the very young and the old and sick), cold weather kills thousands every year, tornadoes, hailstorms, lightning–human beings have been experiencing WEATHER for as long as humanity has existed.  So I will grant the first point – tens of thousands of humans experience climate change every year.  I’d go so far so to say that every human being alive has had weather changes.

Point 2 – people will continue to experience weather.

Point 3 – prove it!  There is evidence that the planet has been substantially warmer than it is today and substantially colder.  Is there any evidence that people were responsible for those changes? There is speculation – but as with all things global in scope, there’s no real proof one way or another.  There is carbon dioxide being emitted by all these people breathing in and out!  Of course, there are ice cores and other scientific evidence showing far higher carbon dioxide levels in the past.  I’m almost certain there weren’t any coal-fired electricity generation plants and SUVs 10,000 years ago.  So the possibility that man has very little to do with the changes is dismissed by the hyteria crowd.

But one thing they want for sure – they want blood:

The corporations that have funded the sowing of doubt on this issue are clearly doing this because they see greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies as adversely affecting their financial interests.

This might be understood as a new type of crime against humanity.

….

We may not have a word for this type of crime yet, but the international community should find a way of classifying extraordinarily irresponsible scientific claims that could lead to mass suffering as some type of crime against humanity.

So just remenber – if you finance any investigations that go against the “scientific consensus” or you question any of the finding of your “betters” who have published “peer-reviewed science” – you could be charged with crimes against humanity!  At least if this little twerp has anything to say about it.

Up Against the Wall Deniers!

Climate Fraud: Humans Are Too Stupid To Prevent Climate Change

This is the stark conclusion of James Lovelock, the globally respected environmental thinker and independent scientist who developed the Gaia theory.  Not that he’s some kind of condescending liberal or anything, but we human beings just won’t listen to all the wonderful people like him.  And the biggest problem is that whole pesky democracy thingy:

One of the main obstructions to meaningful action is “modern democracy”, he added. “Even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.”

Remember – you have to bow down to and worship your betters.  You make up their own data and create crises that aren’t there.

And if there is any doubt we are talking about the religion of science:

“Fudging the data in any way whatsoever is quite literally a sin against the holy ghost of science,” he said. “I’m not religious, but I put it that way because I feel so strongly. It’s the one thing you do not ever do. You’ve got to have standards.”

Intellectual Bubbles

Just a wonderful post over at the blog One Cosmos today:

We all know that there are economic bubbles that inevitably burst and punish investors for their irrational exuberance and willing suspension of disbelief about the laws of economics.

To cite the most recent dramatic example, the climate change industry has been revealed to be a classic intellectual bubble. As with economic bubbles, its worth as a scientific theory became absurdly overvalued, to the point that more and more outrageous claims were required to prop it up. People were willing to pay the price, so long as the illusion of value was maintained. But since the bubble has burst, intellectuals who invested heavily in it are left holding penny stocks that even then no one will buy, for they are essentially worthless.

The whole thing is very much worth your time, but I must include the ending:

Thus, just as investors should have been skeptical of the extraordinary financial claims of a Bernie Madoff, people should have been far more skeptical of the extraordinary scientific claims of the warmists before investing in the theory. It might have passed as a decent intellectual hedge fund, but certainly not one’s core investment.

President Obama is another example of a classic bubble. Why did otherwise sane people invest so much in this cipher? Indeed, why did they ignore all of the evidence that he was absurdly overvalued?