mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
Global Green Agenda Continues To Fail

Remember when meetings to debate and negotiate an international carbon treaty were big news? The Copenhagen Summit was hailed as the largest assembly of world leaders ever to gather for one event; when it fizzled in waves of shame and confusion, the green movement was shocked and dismayed.

There was a lot of happy talk, of course.  The world remained committed to the treaty, more progress would be made, targets were agreed, blah blah blah.

Then there was the meeting in Cancun: fewer reporters, fewer first rank politicians, fewer hopes. That meeting too ended in disarray on the core issues, and then, too, desperate greens scrambling to maintain some kind of policy relevance tried to spin the meeting as a victory for the “process”. Nobody was paying much attention; the world’s news organizations sharply cut their budgets for green summitry.

By the time there was another meeting, this time in Durban, South Africa, the global green agenda had slithered even farther down the news ladder. Most people simply didn’t notice that diplomats and greens had gathered to discuss The Fate of The World last December. Once again, there was no real progress to report.

Now the latest meeting in this increasingly anti-climactic series has concluded, this time in Bonn.  Yet again, much was said and nothing was done — and yet again even fewer reporters and officials paid attention to this increasingly irrelevant bureaucratic mess.

Those who want to follow the latest stage in the futile march of the global greens can read the BBC dispatch on the global non-summit; the air of despair hanging over the process comes through loud and clear. These are bureaucrats who realize they are becoming so irrelevant that they may soon face the grim possibility of budget cuts: as of now, there are no funds available for the next global green gabfest, tentatively scheduled for Bangkok.

Concern about the climate, we continue to believe at Via Meadia, is not misplaced, but the crazy set of unrealistic objectives, laughable foreign aid boondoggles, Malthusian panic mongering and cockamamie treaty plans made this UN process a clown circus that was doomed to fail — and the sooner, the better.  There was a time — as recently as early 2010 — when the Great and the Good, the Champions of the Conventional Wisdom and the Oracles of the Davoisie identified this forlorn negotiation as the wave of the future and the last best hope of man.

Let the futility and failure to which all this led be a reminder to us and to them: those who guide the world’s destiny aren’t nearly as discerning as they think they are. Between the American housing bubble, the European meltdown and the climate disaster, it almost begins to look as if the Establishment consists mostly of overpaid, egotistical blowhards.

At Via Meadia we enjoy the sight of blushing emperors who suddenly realize how nude they are as much as anybody else, but we’d also point out that the world isn’t in a mess just because the Establishment is too stupid and too stubborn to take obvious steps that would set everything right. The world is in a mess because life is complicated, because both our economies and our societies are going through historically unprecedented transformations and because the interlocking political constraints and priorities of the world’s major players make solutions hard to reach — even in those rare cases where they are easy to see.

Cheap cynicism about Establishment stupidity is fun and not completely unjustified — but the real work before us is hard and in the end, sneering is more of a distraction than a solution.

Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Kansas Scott

    Outstanding post. Condensed: “cockamamie treaty plans made this UN process a clown circus that was doomed to fail” leveled by “life is complicated” and “sneering is more of a distraction than a solution”.

    Thank you for continued clarity and revealing insight.

  • Corlyss

    “Concern about the climate, we continue to believe at Via Meadia, is not misplaced,”

    For heaven’s sake, why???????

    Where’s the credible scientific evidence justifying your concern? Just want to be trendy? Worry about things the Beautiful People worry about, even if they too have no scientific basis for such worry?

    More’s to the point, where’s even faintly reasonable expectation that makes anthropogenic solutions would moderate climate change any more than rain dances and virgin sacrifices have ever done?

    The problem with climate change is that after 20+ years of hysteria, it has yet to be proven real.

  • BillH

    For us little guys: Vote for the most business-like candidate, whether local, state or national. More resource husbandry and less hot air needed.

  • http://secondwindupholstery.com john hughes

    lt would be interesting to see how much resources , how big the carbon foottromp is to hold these various wastes of time. All so some dogooder process jockeys can feel relevant. Look at all its myriad aspects beginning with Big Education down to some regional despot grinding up dissenters to feed his guard dogs. As long as he holds the right views. lts enough to give one a complex. l wonder how many millions of hungry children those squandered resources would feed.

  • Mark Michael

    Like Corliss at Comment 2, I too wonder why WRM stubbornly hangs onto his belief that the claims of the pro-AGW climatologists have facts on their side. I can’t possibly fathom it has anything to do with his studying the underlying gas theory, radiation theory, heat theory, molecular behavior of greenhouse gases and concluded that a real threat does exist.

    Is he aware that in the mid-1970s that climate scientists were aggressively claiming that planet earth was entering a new mini-Ice Age and we might have to take steps to counter that? Time magazine ran a special edition with its cover saying, and I quote, “How To Survive The Coming Ice Age – 51 Things You Can Do to Make a Difference”. The date was April 8, 1977. I subscribed to TIME then and recall we had a very severe winter that year – several years actually. Dayton Ohio where I live had a little ski resort that did great business – I learned to ski that year. By the 1980s, that little random cold snap was over and that ski resort went bankrupt. Temps were back closer to normal.

    A simple question a serious journalist could ask is, “If the ‘science’ of the impact of man’s CO2 emissions is settled, how come you guys switched from predicting an Ice Age to an out-of-control heat wave that is so big that it will threaten mankind’s health and well-being in a mere 12 years?!”

    Recall, it was 1988 that NASA/GISS scientist, James Hansen, gave his alarmist briefing to a U.S. Senate committee. His simulation models back then predicted planet earth would be several degrees C. higher today than it actually is.

    I shouldn’t belabor this point, but I’ll quote from a prominent German physicist and meteorologist, Klaus-Eckart Puls, from an interview he gave to a Swiss journal. PowerLine blog linked to it:

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/05/the-belief-that-co2-can-regulate-climate-is-sheer-absurdity.php

    QUOTES:

    factum: You’ve been criticising the theory of man-made global warming for years. How did you become skeptical?

    Puls: Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it. The CO2-climate hysteria in Germany is propagated by people who are in it for lots of money, attention and power.

    factum: Is there really climate change?

    Puls: Climate change is normal. There have always been phases of climate warming, many that even far exceeded the extent we see today. But there hasn’t been any warming since 1998. In fact the IPCC suppliers of data even show a slight cooling.

    factum: The IPCC is projecting 0.2°C warming per decade, i.e. 2 to 4°C by the year 2100. What’s your view?

    Puls: These are speculative model projections, so-called scenarios – and not prognoses. Because of climate’s high complexity, reliable prognoses just aren’t possible. Nature does what it wants, and not what the models present as prophesy. The entire CO2-debate is nonsense. Even if CO2 were doubled, the temperature would rise only 1°C. The remainder of the IPCC’s assumed warming is based purely on speculative amplification mechanisms. Even though CO2 has risen, there has been no warming in 13 years.

    factum: How does sea level rise look?

    Puls: Sea level rise has slowed down. Moreover, it has dropped a half centimeter over the last 2 years.

    So maybe Barack Obama has caused the seas to stop rising after all. Then again, maybe not.

    It’s important to remember that mean sea level is a calculated magnitude, and not a measured one. There are a great number of factors that influence sea level, e.g. tectonic processes, continental shifting, wind currents, passats, volcanoes. Climate change is only one of ten factors.

    factum: What have we measured at the North Sea?

    Puls: In the last 400 years, sea level at the North Sea coast has risen about 1.40 meters. That’s about 35 centimeters per century. In the last 100 years, the North Sea has risen only 25 centimeters.

    More:

    factum: In your view, melting Antarctic sea ice and the fracture of a huge iceberg 3 years ago are nothing to worry about?

    Puls: To the contrary, the Antarctic ice cap has grown both in area and volume over the last 30 years, and temperature has declined. This 30-year trend is clear to see. The Amundsen Scott Station of the USA shows that temperature has been declining there since 1957. 90% of the Earth’s ice is stored in Antarctica, which is one and half times larger than Europe.

    factum: Then why do we always read it is getting warmer down there?

    Puls: Here they are only talking about the West Antarctic peninsula, which is where the big chunk of ice broke off in 2008 – from the Wilkins-Shelf. This area is hardly 1% of the entire area of Antarctica, but it is exposed to Southern Hemisphere west wind drift and some of the strongest storms on the planet. …

    factum: What about all the media photos of polar bears losing their ice?

    Puls: That is one of the worst myths used for generating climate hysteria. Polar bears don’t eat ice, they eat seals. Polar bears go hungry if we shoot their food supply of seals. The polar bear population has increased with moderately rising temperatures, from 5000 50 years ago to 25,000 today.

    factum: But it is true that unlike Antarctica, the Arctic is melting?

    Puls: It has been melting for 30 years. That also happened twice already in the last 150 years. The low point was reached in 2007 and the ice has since begun to recover. There have always been phases of Arctic melting. Between 900 and 1300 Greenland was green on the edges and the Vikings settled there. …

    factum: So we don’t need to do anything against climate change?

    Puls: There’s nothing we can do to stop it. Scientifically it is sheer absurdity to think we can get a nice climate by turning a CO2 adjustment knob. Many confuse environmental protection with climate protection. it’s impossible to protect the climate, but we can protect the environment and our drinking water. On the debate concerning alternative energies, which is sensible, it is often driven by the irrational climate debate. One has nothing to do with the other.

  • Otiose

    As bad as it was for the individuals concerned I look back on the sins of priests as the good old days of scandals. For the amount of news space they took up the activities of those priests seem almost benign compared to the havoc of late done by central bankers to our savings/currencies, politicians to our fiscal situation, and these climate scientists. Actually because they failed to really follow through with their intentions the climate scientists may have done the least harm of the three.

  • Gary L

    Come let us mock at the great
    That had such burdens on the mind
    And toiled so hard and late
    To leave some monument behind,
    Nor thought of the levelling wind.

    Come let us mock at the wise;
    With all those calendars whereon
    They fixed old aching eyes,
    They never saw how seasons run,
    And now but gape at the sun.

    Come let us mock at the good
    That fancied goodness might be gay,
    And sick of solitude
    Might proclaim a holiday:
    Wind shrieked – and where are they?

    Mock mockers after that
    That would not lift a hand maybe
    To help good, wise or great
    To bar that foul storm out, for we
    Traffic in mockery.

    – WB Yeats, Nineteen Hundred and Nineteen

  • http://facingzionwards.blogspot.com/ Luke Lea

    The whole global warming issue was conceived in bath faith by ex-student radical with a hate affair for capitalism. First Marx and now this god too has failed them.

  • Jacksonian Libertarian

    “Concern about the climate, we continue to believe at Via Meadia, is not misplaced,”

    Is there any evidence that would sway you?

    There isn’t any of the so called science behind this that isn’t contaminated by out right criminal fraud. These greens should all be charged with crimes against humanity by the world court, for defrauding the taxpayers of research grants, green energy subsides, and Trillions of dollars in higher energy prices due to greens blocked energy development.

    How much growth has mankind sacrificed to the wishes of the eviro-misanthropes that would just as soon see mankind dead? Perhaps 5%-10% of a $75 Trillion dollar world GDP, $7.5 Trillion Dollars in lost growth over the years? The US hasn’t built a Nuclear Power plant in over 30 years, despite the fact that it is the cheapest source of electricity. The Democrats have been blocking oil drilling both off shore and on for just as long. Considering the fact that there is an energy cost for literally everything our civilization does or makes, the losses our civilization has incurred may be even much larger.

  • Gary L

    In the Yeats poem I just posted, note all the meteorological imagery: wind in the first stanza, seasons and sun in stanza 2, wind again in stanza 3, and foul storms in stanza 4. And they say the hockey stick is just a hoax!

  • http://www.motorgood.com rolly

    The whole global warming issue was conceived in bath faith by ex-student radical with a hate affair for capitalism.

  • Brendan Doran

    @ Luke/Lea — “bath faith”?

    Is that a reference to Nobility traffiking in Post Divine Progressive theology?

    It’s a classic.

  • Butch Knouse

    I’ll start believing in “Climate Change” when Al Gore moves into a studio apartment, has his 4 mansions converted to homeless shelters and has his private jet dismantled for recycling.

  • Steve

    I have a Small Simple Question (Pat. Pend.)

    What is the climate we should be trying to achieve?

  • Randy

    Always love it when Dr. M eviscerates the greens. It’s like intellectual candy.

  • Jim.

    Part of the problem is our belief that things are so terribly different this time around.

    So, one poem from 1919 deserves another poem from 1919…

    As I pass through my incarnations in every age and race,
    I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market-Place.
    Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall.
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.

    We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn,
    That water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
    But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision, and Breadth of Mind,
    So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.

    We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
    Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market-Place;
    But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
    That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.

    With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch.
    They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch.
    They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings.
    So we worshiped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.

    When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
    They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
    But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “Stick to the Devil you know.”

    On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
    (Which started by loving our neighbor and ended by loving his wife)
    Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “The Wages of Sin is Death.”

    In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
    By robbing selective Peter to pay for collective Paul;
    But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “If you don’t work you die.”

    Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew,
    And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
    That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four —
    And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.

    * * * * *

    As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man —
    There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: —
    That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her mire,
    And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
    And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
    When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
    As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
    The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!

    Rudyard Kipling

  • ClydeS

    Bonn? Snicker! Bonn hasn’t been relevant since there was a Soviet Union (and two Germanies), long before the warmists came along. If they’re having their shindig in Bonn instead of Berlin, I’d have to say that like Spinal Tap, their appeal has become more selective.

  • Guest

    Of course, now that nobody’s paying attention, people can take their government-sponsored boondoggles all over the world. I can get a free trip to Germany, South Africa, etc. without anybody saying anything about my expense. They’re too busy sneering at the folly of it all.

  • Mike

    WRM pretty much has it nailed, except for his abiding concern for climate change. But no matter, this is a nit. The greens and progressives are wedded to a 19th century industrial view of economics and politics so it is no wonder that they continue to fail. They are not progressives in any meainingful sense, they are reactionaries longing for a mythical golden age.

  • http://facingzionwards.blogspot.com/ Luke Lea

    bad faith, not bath faith. You know what I mean.

  • Rabitt Run

    ” begins to look like….” ?? As Glen Reynolds says, wrorst political class in more than a generation. I’d say, throw the bums out, and then don’t replace them

  • Ernie G

    The pattern of these climate change meetings parallels the declining fortunes of the rock group Spinal Tap. Perhaps the next meeting will be held in the free entertainment pavilion at Busch Gardens.

  • Steve S.

    Kyoto
    Copenhagen
    Cancun
    Durban
    Bonn
    and soon to come: Bangkok

    If the budgets for these conferences get cut, where are all these Beautiful People going to do their trendy shopping?

  • Mark S.

    “Now the latest meeting in this increasingly anti-climactic series has concluded, this time in Bonn.”

    Shouldn’t that be “anti-climatic”?

    On a more serious note, isn’t the key point here that only wealthy societies care about the environment? We should exploit our energy resources now (coal, shale oil, natural gas) in order to increase wealth — even though that will increase greenhouse gases — so that there will be the resources later to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or otherwise to deal with the climate change that may occur.

    A nice side-effect of exploiting US energy resources now is that it would slow the flow of money to regimes that present the most serious dangers to continuation and expansion of free and open societies.

  • betsybunds

    I too would very much like to know why, exactly, “Concern about the climate, we continue to believe at Via Meadia, is not misplaced, . . .” It seems to me to be as misplaced a concern as any I’ve seen in my lifetime, and I’m curious as to why Via Meadia believes otherwise. It seems to me like nothing else so much as a species of bull-headedness; an explanation would be very nice.

  • Neo

    As if the world economy isn’t in bad enough shape, if the US Congress hadn’t slowed things, and if China & India had given in at Copenhagen in Nov 2009, just image just how totally screwed up the world could be today.

  • klem

    The beautiful people always know where to shop: Jersey Gardens of course, New Jerseys largest outlet mall.

    Can’t wait to see Ban Ki-Moon snarfing a cheeze burger at the food court.

  • DavidK

    When someone tells me that “the science is settled” I know that I am dealing with a scam artist. The science is never settled. People once thought that Newton settled the science of gravity, until Einstein came along and now he is being reconsidered. THE SCIENCE IS NEVER SETTLED. PERIOD.

    Here in Canada we have a province called Alberta, famous because it floats on oil. It is also famous as a dinosaur graveyard. That means it once had a tropical climate. It is possible to stand near some of those dinosaur digs,look west to the Rockies and see glaciers left over from the last ice age.

    So Alberta went from tropical to frozen over, it apparently did this several times and it did this before there was any human input into climate change. The fact is that the Earth’s climate has never been stable. So maybe we are warming up. But there is absolutely no evidence that human activity is responsible for climate change, that part is pure conjecture.

  • Jacksonian Libertarian

    Carbon Dioxide is good for the planet. Due to the increase in Carbon Dioxide over the last century, experimental evidence indicates plants are now building 15% more biological material, and in addition are more water tolerant (need less water). Plants being the bottom of the food chain, that means there is at least 15% more food for higher life forms to eat, and therefore 15% more life on the planet. And while there isn’t any untainted evidence that carbon dioxide warms the planet, a warmer planet would mean larger growing areas for feeding the Humano-centric ecology (Mantric). The Mantric is Mother Nature’s greatest achievement.

  • J. Pulley

    Via Meadia continues to believe “concern about the climate is not misplaced.

    I would worry less if more were to recognize that nature is not influenced by our beliefs, and that only repeatable and honest measurement of nature serves to guide responsible actions.

  • teapartydoc

    It’s our turn to sneer. You sneer when you are given the chance. It may be a long time before you get another chance. I’m sneering.

  • Pat

    In a world where everyone is getting richer without much effort politicians and bureaucrats will seek causes to make themselves relevant, and the populace will take wealth for granted and support them. Such a world we in the west inhabited until about 2008. Once unemployment starts to rise, pay rises cease to be, and material concerns grip the people all these causes fade into insignificance- which is what we are seeing now. Would that they could fade quicker.

  • Swearjar

    While I agree with the good Professor, we in Australia continue to be stuck with a dog of a carbon tax from 1 July. You’ll be surprised to hear that nothing of Bonn outcomes, or process, or anything, was reported here. A bit of breathlessness about Durban (this was going to result in a global emissions treaty, we were assured), and nothing since. Very selective reporting here – please keep it up as there’s very little in the way of counterpoints in Australia, certainly among the government-influenced media.

  • JimC

    This issue jumped the shark when the Copenhagen airport had to fence off about 10 acres to park all the private jets flying in for a conference on reducing carbon emissions. They ARE stupid and should be laughed at. The celebrities for the most part can’t help it but the rich people have no excuse.

  • John Nelson

    Conservation of the environment is a conservative position.
    Attempting to roll-back the industrial revolution in order to placate leftist luddites is not.

  • Renfield

    The comments on this article are right on target. I would like to think the game is finally up for the hysterics.

    Still, a brief sampling of cable TV “science” documentaries reveals that looming anthropogenic catastrophe is still the “correct” view of the media.

    “The warming of the earth over the past several decades now threatens Booga Wanga’s crops . . .”

    “Since 1982, global warming has destroyed 42% of the habitat of the northern polka-dotted fox.”

    “Leading scientists are concerned that if warming trends continue . . .”

    Now some egghead from Princeton warns that since 1987, clear days have become clearer, and overcast days more overcast.

    He’s not certain this ominous trend is caused by SUVs, but I ask, Can we afford to take a chance?

    Just imagine what life might be like if somewhere down the line, there’s a “hockey stick” in that trend! The very possibility scares the hell out of me.

  • JuddL

    I read nothing here about taxing carbon, which motivates this argument politically. To fund a progressive agenda, one must have sources of revenue. Income and business taxes are limited, so governments turn to other sources. VAT and carbon use taxes are already in place in Europe. Once carbon taxes are implemented, the control extended by government has no practical bounds, as carbon use is central to created the energy needed to power every aspect of our life. That is why this issue will not die, despite the repeated stakes being driven through its heart.

  • mnjam

    “the Establishment consists mostly of overpaid, egotistical blowhards.” Mead being one of them.

  • teapartydoc

    Comment #37 nails it. This part of the issue is why Anthony Kennedy’s question about whether government can create commerce in order to control it during the Obamacare oral arguments was so piercing. It totally exposed the entire progressive agenda to a light that the liberals would rather not see shining on it.

  • don

    You just aptly described the deflation of a bubble that was blown up by the state educational and industrial complex.

  • N_Oh

    Do not crow to much, until we start to reverse the damage that the Greens have done the past quarter of a century, they are still winning.

    Look to PJM Interconnection’s 2015 electrical capacity auction. $16/MW jumping to $136/MW average and $357/MW in my state.
    That is real damage that, if not reversed, will cripple the economy.

  • MikeB

    “sneering is more of a distraction than a solution’

    Sneering is appropriate until the time that these pompous blowhards are completely discredited.

  • JDComments

    “but we’d also point out that the world isn’t in a mess just because the Establishment is too stupid and too stubborn to take obvious steps that would set everything right. The world is in a mess because life is complicated…”

    You miss the point-it is because of that complexity, and their refusal to acknowledge or respect it, that the Establishment’s solutions, or lack thereof, are indeed “stupid”.

    Or perhaps the better comparison is with the Greek myth of hubris…

  • moderateGuy

    At the start of any discussion on this, we should acknowledge three undeniable facts:
    1. that “climate change” is a natural phenomenon that has been going on for millions of years and is beneficial/neutral; and consequently
    2. that all the talk of some sort of “climate change/global warming” catastrophic singularity is a politically driven hoax; and
    3. that “concern about the climate” is wholly misplaced, worse every time rational people give into it, it, in the popular on-line phrase, “feeds the trolls”.
    Walter, you are one of the most rational people in existence; stop it!

  • Bob D

    TO your comments I would add today’s news item – Spain has essentially stopped all subsidies for Green energy. Of course, they can’t afford them anymore than the United States, but apparently the bond vigilantes have focused the Apanish bureaucrats attention (foreshadowing intended). The real laugher is that they managed to overproduce electrical generation capacity with their intiative so that they now have more capacity than their peak demand load during healthy economic times. One recalls the Soviet five-year plans mis-allocation of resources, and the old adage about learning from history.

  • JohnR22

    This climate change boondoggle is a perfect example of what’s wrong with the Left. In the 60s, the Left was truly the group with new ideas and most of them were good. But, by the mid 70s, the lunatic fringe had hijacked the Left and pushed the good ideas to such absurd extremes that they aliented most voters.

    By lunatic fringe, I mean the marxist element. As marxism died as an ideology, the hard Left had to find a substitute…and they found it in extreme (key word) environmentalism, civil rights, femminism, etc.

    And why is it so extreme? Because marxism…at its core…was a religion. A counter to the age-old judeo-christian religion. This is why you see today’s Left reacts with hysteria, rage, violence and emotion when challenged. They act exactly as a religious fundamentalist acts when you tell them there is no jesus/allah.

  • chuck

    Comments 37 and 39 both nail it. There are no communists anymore. They’ve just become capitalists whose desired capital is power over the lives of individuals. What better way to monopolize power that to slap a vig on the very stuff of which life is made….carbon.

  • DLeach

    @JuddL

    I agree totally. In the absence of fiscal and political reforms of the entitlement state, the governments must continue to find more sources of revenues and that is the entire reason behind the global warming/climate change alarmists who want a carbon tax. And yet, all those revenues have not solved the European debt crisis nor changed the climate one iota but it has removed monies for spending and savings from the taxpayers thereby depressing their economies further.

  • Howard

    I’ll have you know that MY cynicism is NOT cheap. It’s among the most expensive kind only acquired by experience. It would rather it was not purchased so dearly but that’s the nature of true, died in the wool cynicism.

  • JuddL

    A bit more on my #37 post. I am reminded of a Richard Feinman quote I read recently from his lectures to freshman physics students on the scientific method.

    “First you guess. Don’t laugh, this is the most important step. Then you compute the consequences. Compare the consequences to experience. If it disagrees with experience, the guess is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t matter how beautiful your guess is or how smart you are or what your name is. If it disagrees with experience, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”

    I believe this to be the crux of this entire debate reduced to its core — There can be no such thing as a “scientific consensus” about the accuracy of models that clearly do not work to predict the past, let alone the future. They are just wrong.

    Like red light cameras, its all about raising revenue, although our safety is the cover story.

  • phillip

    Well said, Mark Levins “Ameritopia” captures the essence of the titanic struggle before the American citizens. The constitution has been ever so slowly and methodically chipped away over the last 100+ years so that its effect closely resembles the frog in the pan of slowly warmed water analogy. People consumed by daily life have hardly noticed the the serpentine theft of their liberty. Yet a tipping point will always be reached no matter how stealthy the Utopians try to be. We are now at that tipping point…the question that remains is whether there still enough freedom loving Americans in the electorate to save the Republic. Let’s all pray that there are.#39 teapartydoc..

  • Sergey

    Not only the world is too complex to change it without grim unintended consequencies, it is also too complex to even understand it properly within strictures of scientific method. Rationalism simply does not work any more beyond simple man-made artificial constructs, material or ideal. Theories can not anymore grasp reality, and to cope with real-world complexity we need again turn to revealed truth, intuition and humble acceptance of our utmost ignorance.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service