|
|
|
|
October 12, 2007
Global Warming Is Socialist Science
Lubos Motl at The Reference Frame is discussing Al Gore and his movie An Inconvenient Truth. Left-wing people are rarely right in politics. If they were right, they wouldn't be left. But this audio is a remarkable exception. A self-described mildly left-wing professor criticizes the British conservatives at their CPS Fringe Event and he is quite right.The audio Lubos mentions, along with a number of others can be found here. Or if you prefer, here is a direct link to the Lord Nigel Lawson - Audio. For the "plasma TV ban" link visit the Reference Frame. The audio opens with Windows Media Player so ignore any error messages that come up when you try to open the file with that player. I haven't tried any other players. I'd like to discuss one of the more interesting quotes from the audio. Let me note that the speeches are delivered in British House of Commons style which I have always enjoyed. I am absolutely amazed that the Conservatives above all others have been tempted to fall for the hubristic idea that we can control climate predictably, and I will return to that word "predictably", by big government. By taxes that are injurious to industry and to business. By taxes that are retrogressive on the poor and by attempting to micro-manage every single aspect of people's lives.And that is just at the beginning of the Philip Stott segment of the audio. You should go and listen to the whole thing. We are seeing this same push in America to bring in totalitarianism through the back door. By the Global Warming hysteria, with Medical Totalitarianism and of course with the control mechanism that is the grand daddy of them all The Drug War. Two themes are predominant: "for the children" and boy do they love to whip that one. The other of course is "we are trying to do something about a problem so serious that it imperils life on the planet". Take the DDT scare. Cecil Adams of Straight Dope has this to say. While DDT is highly toxic to insects and fish and can poison other animals in large enough doses, in moderate amounts it's not especially harmful to birds and mammals, including humans. (Ironically, the EPA's own judge agreed, but was overruled by its chief administrator.) No one has conclusively proved that DDT can give you cancer. The cause of eggshell thinning is likewise poorly understood.These hysterias get ginned up every so often and the there is always one and only one solution proposed. More government control. The end goal of course is to free the world to follow exactly the dictates of government. My answer is that the best protection for all men is Liberty. Let me quote a few of our founders: "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Archibald Stuart - 1791) "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson (attributed to Jefferson, by his contemporaries) "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania - 1759) "I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." -- James Madison (attributed to Madison, by his contemporaries) From the list at Action America Cross Posted at Power and Control posted by Simon on 10.12.07 at 07:26 AM
Comments
"When a man must do what he is told to do by the party, only then is he absolutely free." -- Mao Eric Scheie · October 12, 2007 11:40 AM To be perfectly frank, I'm a conservative who has reviewed the evidence and concluded that the scientists are in the right. There is a very serious problem here. The idea that thousands of climate scientists are in some kind of vast socialist conspiracy is extremely unlikely. We have allowed the real socialists to monopolize what solutions to seek for far too long, and it's going to bite us in the behind. They have a head start measured in years. The American public is increasingly concerned about this problem. Hell, Reason science correspondent Ronald Bailey is convinced. He followed up on why he changed his mind, here. I realize that I'm not going to convince you in the space of a few short paragraphs. That's not my intent. I'm just trying to show you that there are conservatives who do agree with the science. Cervus · October 13, 2007 03:11 AM Cervus, This will take some time (assuming you are up to the task). But spend some serious time at Climate Audit and tell me the Climate "Scientists" are not cooking the books. This is a real Gem: Climate Insensitivity and AR(1) Models Don't just read the entry. Read all the comments. This will take time. Once you have done that roam around. Then come back here and tell me climate science can make pronouncements of anything. M. Simon · October 13, 2007 04:57 AM Blogs are valid scientific sources now? Who knew? Boris · October 13, 2007 01:32 PM Boris, Truth is the truth no matter where is comes form. Or didn't they teach you that in school? Well my condolences. BTW if blogs have no truth why are you wasting your time here. Don't you have something more important to do? M. Simon · October 13, 2007 03:06 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
October 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
October 2007
September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSALLAMERICANGOP See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
obsessive people write obsessive morality
The NRA is the cause of crime? Class War Treatment vs Recreation Canada's Harper - Kyoto Is Socialism Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week Ron Paul - Communist Sympathizer? Impossible for a girl to have too many Hsus graves and graven images Classical liberalism is for kooks!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
What do you mean by "Socialist Science"? I can see that socialists might grab onto scientific theories like anthropogenic global warming and other tragedies of the commons, but surely the properties of carbon dioxide and other GHGs in the atmosphere are apolitical, as are the objectives accounts of what problems lie ahead in a rapidly warming world.
As for Cecil Adams' piece on DDT, he makes some factual errors. He states "a few public health experts are campaigning to bring DDT back.." but DDT was never banned for insect control and is widely used for indoor spraying. Also, Adams' barely mentions resistance, which has made DDT ineffective in many places. DDT did help to nearly eliminate malaria, but as malaria made a comeback, DDT proved ineffective in curbing it. Mosquitoes evolved a resistance to it, just as they have to every insecticide, especially those that are overused.
As for "No one has conclusively proved that DDT can give you cancer," this is true, but the research does indicate a link to breast cancer:
http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2007/10/new_and_good_paper_on_ddt_and.php