1) The carbon taxers/limiters have lost. Carbon-dioxide emissions have been the environmental issue of the past decade. .... Here's a reality check: During the same decade that Mr. Gore and the IPCC dominated the environmental debate, global carbon-dioxide emissions rose by 28.5%. ....Take that! The stupid tree-hugging people who wanted to cut emissions to save of from "the climate catastrophe" lost, and the rest of humanity won! Anyhow, whether there is a problem or not, we still need more energy. That is still much more important than any alleged climate threat. Other countries are increasing their emissions, so why would we have to do anything? Devices are becoming increasingly more energy efficient, so we are going to want more devices and hence more energy in the future and cannot reduce emissions even if we wanted to. Finally, if Einstein - who was a bloody genius - can be wrong, why would we believe anything that those pesky climate scientists say? Or any scientists for that matter.
2) Regardless of whether it's getting hotter or colder—or both—we are going to need to produce a lot more energy in order to remain productive and comfortable.
3) The carbon-dioxide issue is not about the United States anymore. Sure, the U.S. is the world's second-largest energy consumer. But over the past decade, carbon-dioxide emissions in the U.S. fell by 1.7%. ... Meanwhile, China's emissions jumped by 123% over the past decade and now exceed those of the U.S.
4) We have to get better—and we are—at turning energy into useful power. .... Nearly all of the things we use on a daily basis—light bulbs, computers, automobiles—are vastly more efficient than they were just a few years ago. ....
5) The science is not settled, not by a long shot. Last month, scientists at CERN, the prestigious high-energy physics lab in Switzerland, reported that neutrinos might—repeat, might—travel faster than the speed of light. If serious scientists can question Einstein's theory of relativity, then there must be room for debate about the workings and complexities of the Earth's atmosphere.
The whole thing reminds me about the discussion of pros and cons of slavery (before it was abolished). Now, I know that what I'm about to write might seem a bit politically incorrect, and I want to emphasize that I'm not advocating slavery (though I think it is important that we are allowed to discuss the issue). That most people think that slavery is wrong today is besides the point - we are considering the perfectly valid perspective of slave owners in the past. So here are five truths about slavery, as they might have been seen during the first half of the 19th century:
- The abolitionists have lost! There are actually more slaves that 10 years ago!
- We are going to need more slaves in order to remain productive and comfortable
- Slaves are not just about the United States. Other countries, like Russia, have them too.
- We are getting better at breeding and using the slaves.
- Newton has been proven wrong so the science is not settled about slavery. (I couldn't write "Einstein" here, because he wasn't born yet.)
However, if we would try to reduce emissions, it would likely destroy industrialization, and we would have to resort to slavery again. So to be against Al Gore is actually to be against slavery!
Delighted to see you are still alive and kicking, Mr. Baron. While you were away there were scary stories about sea ice that were uncritically taken over by the media and on teh internets. We really missed your guidance and I started to fear the climate Maffia had silenced you forever.
ReplyDeleteOn to the topic of climate slavery. If you allow me, instead of seeing the issue from the perspective of slave owners, try to see it from the point of view of the slaves themselves. Have they really won that much? In former times, they were assured of a good life, a secure job, food and healthcare, and they could rely on a good, Christian American to make the important decisions in their life. Nowadays they're all out of job, addicted to heroine, cocaine, and sex, and do not contribute anything positive to the American society.
Likewise, ordinary people have nothing to gain from a reduction in "emmisions". In fact, it worries me that we're no longer first when it comes to "emmisions". We should not let the unchristian Chinese dominate the world. We should become nr. 1 again! WE WANT MORE EMMISIONS!
Mr. Bryce's article makes very important points: If you identify a so-called "problem", and you propose a solution to it, and the solution is not implemented, then there never was a problem in the first place. Also if things get worse, but people don't believe they are getting worse, then they are getting better. I am also glad to see that as ideas become old, they automatically pass their best-before date and become wrong, like climate change, Adam Smith and that annoying song "Don't Worry, Be Happy".
ReplyDeleteYour hypothetical musings on slavery are prescient. Corporations are always searching the globe for places where people are willing to work for less money than anywhere else. Some enterprising country will lower that wage to zero. I'm sure there are people who would gladly accept room, board and a warm place to work 100 hours a week in exchange for staying alive. Sounds to me like a fair deal for them. As the WSJ article said, our comfort is more important than anything else. There are over 6 billion people on the planet, but there are not yet 6 billion electric-powered L-Z Boy recliners with built-in drink coolers. That is an atrocity. The wage-free workers will fill our orders for this necessity.
Just sayin' **
** Note: Adding "Just sayin'" at the end of a blog post absolves me of all responsibility for the convincing, dangerous, immoral, well-argued arguments I've just made.
Steinein's theorickity of Relhalativitee wuz provin rongg. I am relaytid too mah syster but sheeze also mah wife.
ReplyDeleteGlobble warnin' ain't right cuz Steinein wuz rongg.
Hoo niidz sighunce anyhow? Nuthin gudd everr caym of it. Sumwun haz too stand up tu thuh expertz beefour they tayk away our Buybles!
Funny that it looks like it's not Einstein who was wrong, but rather the OPERA researchers failed at understanding special relativity (which, admittedly, IS a bitch) and made the most stupid noob error imaginable:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/10/mundane-explanations-neutrinos/
But considering Bryce seems to like empirically unsound hypotheses like Lindzen's Iris, I'd guess that this doesn't matter: "Relativity, schmelativity. Einstein was wrong so YOU are wrong and I am right!"
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteSo the OPERA researchers were wrong about the neutrino? If all those researchers with their fancy lab coats and their fancy titles and fancy billion-taxpayer-dollar equipment even cannot get a small tiny thing as the nutrino right, how can we trust them about such a large and complicated thing as the climate?
The point is: if any scientist is wrong, it throws doubt on all of science (and climate science in particular).
Wow. People like you really exist, eh? I guess that must prove that evolution is wrong, otherwise how did such an unevolved brain get born into the world in the 20th century? (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are, in fact, older than eleven years of age. But that would make more sense.)
ReplyDeleteIt's really scary that Americans are so incredibly ingnorant about science and the scientific method. We rank a stellar 25th in that subject among the 34 richest countries in the world. It's a big reason why we're going to continue to slide down the list along with our standard of living as other nations out-perform and out-compete us. Not only are so many Americans ignorant - they're mighty proud of it, too!
Is it any wonder that with historic unemployment here companies continue to have to import scientists and engineers from overseas? But hey, keep spreading the ignorance.
That is really scary. Even ignorant people know how to spell ignorant correctly more than once in a post. No doubt evolution will deal with you long before climate change, unless you suffocate in your own smog!
DeleteMr. Sneeral (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are, in fact, a man, although the stupidity of your remarks seem to suggest that you could be a woman). Which European countries did you mean are outperforming America? They're all, without any single exception, bankrupt! People there live in poverty! Amerika, Gods Own Country, has no need to import more "sceintists". What we need to do is to pray more! Only by following the Word of the Lord can America remain the richest country in the world, obliterate all those heathen people, and remain nr.1 in carbon emissions!
ReplyDeleteI see what your doing, trying to stir people up so they will start actually doing something about the industrial dependence on outdated inefficient technology. That we will make better technology that can be used for longer periods of time with less energy and will be condensed into a singular form which will accomplish the tasks we do with 2 or 3 devices we now have. Well guess what, we are doing those things. and even if we were not your method of manipulation is quite ineffective, a single blogger is not going to make a significant enough difference until an act of violence provokes people to pay attention. Go break some glass. just don't hurt people, human lives are worth more than these petty disagreements.
ReplyDelete