Saturday, November 19

Are we seeing the start of a "preference cascade" on global climate change (formerly "warming")?

I really, really sympathize with most of the people who believe CO2--specifically the CO2 emitted by humans burning oil, gas and coal--is responsible for warming the planet.

Really, I do.

They've been told by the Lying Media--constantly, endlessly--that this is true.  They've been told--relentlessly--that Americans produce more CO2 than any other nation, so Global Warming! is really our fault.

Actually, to be a lot more precise, it's really YOUR fault.  Because the Hollywood crew insist on their right to own private jets to fly to Cannes for an overnight awards ceremony or such. And the corrupt, moronic pols who push this crap insist on their right to order the Air Force to fly them and their families across the country (that would be the ultra-corrupt Nancy Pelosi, endlessly, while she was speaker), because they insist they're way too fucking important to have to rub shoulders with the rest of us peasants on commercial air.

If you're a hard-working American who hasn't been able to afford to fly to a vacation for a decade, these assholes generate maybe 30 times more CO2 per year than your family.  But of course, they're Important People--and to them that makes all the difference.

In case you weren't sure, they don't think you're important enough to even drive an SUV.  Because according to them CO2 is a deadly pollutant that's killing our precious planet!

Not their CO2, of course.  Just yours.

With this background out of the way...we may be seeing the start of a "preference cascade" on this topic.

In case you haven't heard this term, it's like an avalanche:  One day you can't find a single reputable scientist who disagrees that a) the planet is warming at an alarming rate; and b) that this warming is due almost entirely to CO2 produced by energy-consuming nations--like ours.  The Lying Media tells you "the science is settled," and even the tiniest demurral gets you shut out of grants, disinvited from speaking, makes it impossible to get even a solid research paper published.

Cool, huh?  I mean, that's the way real Science works, right?  The Powers decide on the conclusion they like and proceed to shut out any evidence that disagrees, right?  I mean, duh!  Doesn't everyone think that's how it should work?

The preference cascade is when one or two or three really respected scientists have the courage to stick their heads up and say "I think there's a massive body of evidence that this theory is utterly and completely wrong."

These statements give cover to other scientists who believed all along that the theory was crap but weren't willing to say so because of the personal cost (as noted above).  And when these guys go public it provides cover for even more, until it's an avalanche.

For example, Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson says ‘I’m 100% Democrat and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on climate issue and the Republicans took the right side’

Or Nobel prize-winning scientist Dr. Ivar Giaever--another Obama supporter--now says prez is ‘ridiculous’ & ‘dead wrong’ on global warming.

Or Green guru James Lovelock, once a strong believer of AGW (global warming caused by CO2 emitted from fossil fuels), who now says ‘I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy’ – Says green movement ‘a religion, really... totally unscientific’

For years the story from the Left was that anyone whose research debunked AGW was doing it because they were being paid by Big Oil.  This became an unquestioned mantra of the Left, and of course the Lying Media backed 'em all the way.

Then there's the campaign by state attorneys-general from 19 states to *literally* prosecute any company that published any statement debunking CO2 as the cause of global warming.  They had to reach deep into their bag of crap to find a legal theory that would permit such prosecution, but they finally settled on "consumer fraud statutes."

Seriously, this really happened.  Barely a year ago.  And it was a big damn deal at the time.  The Left crowed endlessly about it.

Free speech?  Not if the speech disagrees with the Party Line.  "We Democrats, like, totally support  Free Speech--well, unless you publish something we've said you shouldn't, in which case we'll fine you into poverty.  But believe us, we really, really support free speech.  After all, you're free to burn an American flag.  Doesn't that prove how amazingly tolerant we are?

Of course you can't go to school wearing a T-shirt with a pic of the American flag on it, nor fly the flag on your truck when you drive to school, but that's just...just...well, no one wants to hurt the feewings of normally-very-peaceful latinos who would understandably be compelled to act against your awful display of bigotry and xenophobia!  But other than those, we really support free speech!"

Typical Left/Democrat hypocritical bullshit.

Anyway, I think there's a chance that a preference cascade has started on AGW.  I've been telling my students for years now that 20 years from now it'll be hard to find any scientist who'll admit they believed CO2 from fossil fuels caused global warming--just like after WW2 it was almost impossible to find an ordinary German citizen who would admit to having supported Hitler.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home