Louise Gray of the Telegraph reports:
Speaking in Copenhagen on Sunday Tony Blair, the former prime minister, said the world must take action on climate change even if the science is not correct.
What the deuce?
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Some time ago, there was all this talk about the earth’s magnetic poles flipping. And how that might effect us all. More than just screwing up all the compasses, I’m sure. But it still hasn’t happened. And there isn’t even any evidence that it might be starting. Like the earth’s polarity weakening or the poles moving about more. So with that doomsday threat on hiatus, they came up with climate change, to scare us into submission of some kind.
If they hadn’t a history of doing this before, I might have been persuaded to believe the doomsdayers now. But I’ve heard their rants so many times before. That it’s not even funny anymore. Things change. But whenever it threatens to upset some wealthy bastards’ apple cart. It becomes a world catastrophe, that the rest of us must try and prevent. Of course they dare not word it that way. It becomes a disaster we all share, if their billions are saved in the process.
Why the hell aren’t these multi-billionaires sacrificing every cent they have? Are they still planning to be alive and rich, if the world gets flooded over? It doesn’t look like very many of them take this as serious as they hope the rest of us will. Why doesn’t Al Gore sacrifice all his millions for his cause, and take up living in a log cabin? He doesn’t have to remain a oil stock rich multi-millionaire, just to be comfortable. Be brave and join the shrinking middle class. Ya big coward.
JimR
Frankly I don’t see the need for me to convince you of anything. Never has mankind’s survival depended on a more precarious balance. Sure we’ve faced climate change before, but never with a population of 7 billion, never with so many cities with over a million. The last time we faced climate change populations were much smaller and more distributed. Food always came from nearby farms cause they couldn’t transport very much or very far without spoiling. The way we have things set up now, it’s like a house of cards. A small breeze and the whole thing comes tumbling down. Nobody’s asking you for a thing. OK, so I’m totally convinced that something nasty this way cometh, because of things I feel. Who the hell cares whose fault it is! I don’t care if the government prepares or not, save for the compassion I feel towards others. I’m not anxious to see people dying in the streets or the breakdown of our civilization. Keep your little pile of crap, don’t let the government tax you unnecessarily over this fairy tale stuff. You’re a winner because you don’t let anybody take from you what’s yours. A fine example of what’s wrong with the world today – from my point of view of course. Surely you think likewise of me and isn’t this what the universe is really all about, testing values? Time will tell. I wish you luck in the pursuit and defense of your material well being and lifestyle.
Makes sense, if the politics is leading the science. They might issue papers saying that the world is doomed unless we reduce emissions by 90%, and the planet will warm by 10 degrees otherwise. This science will be used to push for drastic reductions. Then when the final deal calls for a 50% cut, those same scientists will say that this is something that must pass or the planet is doomed, even though before they were saying anything less than an 80% cut is horrible.
In the end, you have scientists pushing plans that don’t work according to their own science.
You can see this principle in action at RealClimate.
And remember kids, it is not science unless it was done by white skinned Europeans after the 16th century.
Cursor_
#123, Lyin’ Mike,
As usual, a terrible, total bullshit post. Almost. You made a great link to a very pertinent simile. I suggest all read it. Again, it may be found here and does involve a true story of sustainability.
#118 That’s an already known fact. That’s prize is like a child’s mcmenu toy
#122 So how’s that heat doing in Barcelona now? Don’t you feel like a south american beach already?
#120, Glenn,
Some time ago, there was all this talk about the earth’s magnetic poles flipping. And how that might effect us all. More than just screwing up all the compasses, I’m sure. But it still hasn’t happened.
It has happened in the past and is expected to happen again in the future. As far as I know, the schedule is unpredictable and is several tens of thousands of years apart. I don’t know of anyone suggesting a reversal is imminent.
fresh water might replenish the polluted oceans. And frozen wastelands might become useful for growing crops, the world needs.
Nope. The amount of fresh water from runoff is way too insignificant to even be noticed over the next century. Also, the pollution currently in the oceans isn’t going anywhere. With all the fresh water added, evaporation leaves the ocean water at a relative constant.
(Of course, it is stirred up by ocean currents over very long periods of time which has a greater influence over pollutant concentrations)
Frozen lands can not be turned into productive farmland overnight. For the most part, current northern lands have been scrapped clean of soil by the last few glaciers. Drainage would be a problem. The land is very rocky. The existing soil is usually boggy and thus very acidic. There is also the problem of the short growing season although I’m sure agriculture could fix that problem.
#105, If you got your definition of Libertarianism from reading Rand, you are off in the bushes.
#112, The items don’t exist and you are acting irrational in making a decision without them.
Prove they don’t exist.
Your lack of education is showing. It is impossible to prove a negative.
If you would step up and answer the question you posed to me, it would go a long way toward proving your sincerity in conversations such as this. Did you lie to your wife on your wedding day?
#121, Poles shifting[...]But it still hasn’t happened
Actually, it happens on an ongoing basis. Every six months new aeronautical charts come out and the Magnetic North Pole shifts a bit each time. It moves about 20 miles a year.
BTW . . . Happy Bill of Rights Day!
#57 — Each of the pseudo-sciences you cite were fringe theories supported by a minority — not majority — of experts in those various fields. The fact that those outliers are now high profile (because they’re interesting to us now) does not make them equivalent to the peer-reviewed global consensus on global warming. It’s pretty astonishing that anybody would not understand that difference.
#57 … and of course, none of your examples even pretends to address the situation the Deniers are now proposing: A deliberate global scientific conspiracy.
Which global conspiracy were the bloodletters involved in, again…?
#131, Mr. Gnu,
Which global conspiracy were the bloodletters involved in, again…?
Didn’t you know? The leeches were trying to take over the world through draining the human population of blood and thus the will to resist. It’s all right there on page 26 of the Global Warming Deniers Handbook.
Honestly Mr. Gnu, you really should keep up with the latest science on this matter.
#128, Loser,
#112, The items don’t exist and you are acting irrational in making a decision without them.
Prove they don’t exist.
Your lack of education is showing. It is impossible to prove a negative.
The post was directed specifically at someone else, not you. If you wish to weigh in then try to keep yourself updated on the original question and point.
That you are an idiot already is well known, your constant demonstration is unnecessary.
It is not impossible to prove a negative. Every time you start touting your LIEBERTARIAN mantra you demonstrate how it is done.
#128 The first sentence of your Libertarian statement of principles on that link, emphasis mine:
We, the members of the Libertarian Party, challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and defend the rights of the individual.
“The cult of the omnipotent state”??? See, that’s what I mean… you guys are still battling the Soviet Union, just like Saint Ayn. Sorry to break it to you, but the Soviet Union is gone. The omnipotent state is gone. And here’s another news flash: The U.S. has never had anything remotely like an “omnipotent state”. In fact our “state” is remarkably impotent, hijacked by the big corporations and bent to their will.
But it sure must feel good to think you’re battling against some mythical “omnipotent state”. You go ahead and keep doing that, if it makes you happy.
Meanwhile, out here in reality, we’re debating which tasks are best handled by the free market and which are better handled by the government. Don’t let us distract you.
Omnipotent state… I’m still chuckling.
Of course, as long as our government is held captive by the big corporations, it will be difficult for it to do the things it should do to promote the general welfare, etc. So our challenge is to take our government back from the big corporations.
So in a sense I agree with the Libertarians… the government is doing some nasty things to us, but not because it’s some “omnipotent state”. The problem is not tyrannical government control (like the old Soviet Union), it’s good old fashioned American greed and bribery.
The lefty loons here are so desperate that they’re willing to support Dumbya’s pal. Pathetic!
#133, It is not impossible to prove a negative.
Sigh. You really need to get an education.
#134, Omnipotent state… I’m still chuckling.
Chuckle all you want. It’s a fact. It may not be there yet, but it is heading that way. You can’t do anything in this country without a license. If that isn’t omnipotent, I don’t know what is.
Re: #106, bobbo, thanks for the civil reply. I understand your concerns about the possible negatives… I agree with them… just not as strongly as you. Why? because in order to make a rational decision, I have to be presented both sides of the argument.
I see the climate change as a drug which contains hundreds of chemicals. A person of great influence (IPCC) steps up and says that the drug will harm parts of you because of X chemical. Nothing is said about the other chemicals. Someone of almost no influence says “wait a minute”, how does Z interact with X? Does it lesson the effects? Does it change them to to a cure? What do the other elements do? For instance, both R and K repairs part of you. The person of great influence says “shut up” this discussion is over. I am only concerned with X.
Analogies are very difficult to create, but I hope you can see my reasoning. I can tell you that if the IPCC weren’t so secretive with their data, if they weren’t afraid to show the graph I request, if they weren’t so unsure of themselves as to NOT lay all the cards on the table to show that the cons outweigh the pros and that their pan of action is the best course to take… I would be willing to take their side on this.
I’ve been scammed before, to a tune that would make your head spin, by people I trusted and who you would expect to be able to trust. I learned something valuable from that experience.
#137 Chuckle all you want. It’s a fact. It may not be there yet, but it is heading that way. You can’t do anything in this country without a license. If that isn’t omnipotent, I don’t know what is.
Licensure, when done correctly, is a good way to leverage the knowledge of the few to the benefit of the many. With licensure, I don’t have to be an expert at everything from heart surgery to car repair. Instead, We The People hire experts to set up tests, and make sure that everyone that wants to provide a service passes that test. That way, whichever provider I choose I can be confident that they’re competent.
Now, I realize Libertarians hate that. You’d rather we have the “freedom” to go to any provider who hangs out a shingle. And then if our daughter dies because an incompetent doctor botches a surgery, we have the “freedom” to sue him. And in Libertarian world, if a doctor kills enough people and gets sued enough, he goes out of business. Yay.
In the real world, I prefer the proactive, preventive approach. Rather than wait for the doctor to kill lots of people before he’s found out to be a fraud, I’d rather we find out he’s a fraud up front and prevent him from practicing. But I understand Libertarians prefer that the quack be given the “freedom” to kill as many people as he can get away with.
And you wonder why Libertarians are ridiculed.
And of course, if licensure is corrupted by big money, it becomes a way to stifle competition and jack up prices. But that means we fix the corruption, we don’t throw out licensure altogether. Baby, bath water, etc.