Quotulatiousness

December 2, 2009

For deep greens, this isn’t a bug, it’s a feature

Filed under: Economics, Environment, Liberty — Tags: — Nicholas @ 08:46

The headline says “Green movement in danger of crippling economy“, as if that isn’t part and parcel of hardcore Green philosophy:

A senior Tory attacked the “fixation” of the green movement with imposing ever tougher targets for reducing carbon emissions as having potentially “crippling” costs for the economy.

David Davis, an ex-shadow cabinet member and former party leadership challenger, said the UK was already facing a £55bn long-term price tag for its current policies and warned of a public backlash if more unpopular “green” measures were imposed.

His comments are likely to be seen as a direct challenge to the approach of David Cameron, who has made his commitment to tackling climate change a symbol of the way he has changed the party.

It’s certainly not true of all environmentalists, but it is a common trait among the most deeply committed. If reducing humanity’s impact on the environment is good, then eliminating it is better (and therefore eliminating humanity would be best). Few of them would be willing to state it quite that baldly, but it’s clearly a key factor in their belief system.

Why fearing global cooling makes more sense

Filed under: Environment — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 08:28

With all the recent worries about the Earth warming up, it needs to be pointed out that rising temperatures may be bad but falling temperatures would undoubtedly be much worse:

When the environment is an evolutionary system that is based on adaption and survival of the fittest them how do you define damage? In terms of toxins/poisons its easy to do but in terms of temperature change then life has always adapted to it and either survived or perished depending depending on the ability to relocate. There is also the argument that if you help a species, make it easier then, like man you make them weaker. We are much less physiologically able to adapt than we have ever been because the comforts of our technologies have meant many of our evolutionary traits for survival are not being used. A variation in temperature could cause a change in habitats for many species. For some it will be a reduction of habitat and others an increase in habitat. Historically speaking there is no evidence that any warm period wiped out the earth or life on it. Rather the warm periods of the earth are when life has flourished on earth, vegetation has proliferated and habitats have increased. Whilst much has been made in global warming alarmism about cuddly polar bears becoming extinct (in fact polar bear numbers have increased fivefold), there has been little mention of all the species that would extend and increase their habits further poleward as the earth warmed and thus proliferate. Man likewise has been called a child of the tropics, look at how all our houses are heated to tropical temperatures and again history shows us during the warm periods civilizations flourish as does food supply.

However when we look at the cold this is quite a different story. The cold decimates nearly all life on earth as habitats are restricted, growing seasons reduce, vegetation is covered in snow and civilisations perish — history has given us ample examples of this. If we simply look at a microcosm of nature we see that animals living in cold areas often have to hibernate, their bodies adapted to the lack of food for a large part of the year. This is what the cold is all about.

December 1, 2009

Most ringing endorsement Stephen Harper has ever received

Filed under: Cancon, Economics, Environment, Politics — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 13:33

I never knew Harper had it in him:

This country’s government is now behaving with all the sophistication of a chimpanzee’s tea party. So amazingly destructive has Canada become, and so insistent have my Canadian friends been that I weigh into this fight, that I’ve broken my self-imposed ban on flying and come to Toronto.

So here I am, watching the astonishing spectacle of a beautiful, cultured nation turning itself into a corrupt petro-state. Canada is slipping down the development ladder, retreating from a complex, diverse economy towards dependence on a single primary resource, which happens to be the dirtiest commodity known to man. The price of this transition is the brutalisation of the country, and a government campaign against multilateralism as savage as any waged by George Bush.

Until now I believed that the nation that has done most to sabotage a new climate change agreement was the United States. I was wrong. The real villain is Canada. Unless we can stop it, the harm done by Canada in December 2009 will outweigh a century of good works.

That’s George Monbiot, known to his enemies as “The Great Moonbat”, stumping for wavering Tory voters to rally to Harper’s side. I realize he doesn’t intend it to be read that way, but for Alberta, the tar sand project is their biggest economic project for this century, and any criticism is taken as an attack on their economic future.

“Global warming is like pornography for Big Government addicts”

Filed under: Environment, Media, Politics — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 08:36

The mainstream media is still doing a great job of ignoring or minimizing the potential impact of the CRU data leak. Doctor Zero contrasts the gullibility (or worse) of the political classes with the wariness of business people:

Few recent events have illustrated the ineptitude, and political agenda, of the mainstream media more dramatically than “Climagate.” The revelation of email correspondence from the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, documenting various attempts to suppress data and manipulate scientific “consensus” with thuggish tactics, confirms what critics of the global-warming movement have always maintained: it has a lot more to do with money and politics than science. In fact, the global-warming movement is essentially the opposite of science — the manipulation and destruction of empirical data to support a theory whose accuracy was decided in advance.

[. . .]

An objective media would respond to this blockbuster news story with front-page headlines and “special report” television treatment. By now, the authors of the incriminating Climate Research Unit emails would be infamous around the world. Top operators of the global warming racket, such as Al Gore, would be hiding in their mansions, afraid to face the mob of angry reporters gathered outside. Liberals love to accuse big corporations of manufacturing crises and taking advantage of consumers with false product information and deceptive advertising. Here is the paramount example of those offenses, on a scale that would widen the eyes of the greatest titans of industry. If a private corporation had conducted a scam as vast, and as destructive to the prosperity of nations — and the aspirations of the working poor…

… but no private corporation could do anything like this, could they? The global warming scam is the kind of crime that only Big Government can mastermind.

Private industry makes plenty of mistakes, but the global warming scam is defined by its utter contempt for costs and benefits — the laws of gravity that hold businesses in orbit around the free market. The global warming cult maintains that no chances can be taken — we must ignore all reservations and contrary evidence, and proceed as if the worst possible outcomes are inevitable, unless we take drastic action. We have to take this action immediately — not even the slightest delay is acceptable. Members of the global warming cult provide constantly shifting dates for environmental doomsday, painting dire pictures of coastal cities becoming aquariums after the polar ice caps melt.

Australia’s Liberal Party dumps leader

Filed under: Australia, Environment, Politics — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 08:16

After losing a number of shadow ministers over a proposed carbon tax, Australia’s Liberals have replaced Malcolm Turnbull with AGW skeptic Tony Abbott.

Australian conservatives have shown the way by dumping the party leader who was in favour of massive carbon taxes and replacing him with one who stated last month that AGW is “crap.”

This makes Malcolm Turnbull, the suddenly-ex-leader of Australia’s Liberal party, the first major political victim of the Climategate furore. And his replacement Tony Abbott, the first politician to reap the benefits of the world’s growing scepticism towards ManBearPig. Of the three candidates, he was the only one committed to delaying the Australian government’s proposed Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).

The trouble began last week when Australia’s opposition Liberal party began haemorrhaging frontbenchers, all of them preferring to lose their jobs than be railroaded by their leader into voting with the Government on Kevin Rudd’s new carbon tax.

November 30, 2009

CRU’s fall from Mount Olympus

Filed under: Bureaucracy, Environment, Science — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 12:53

Andrew Orlowski finds the “shocked, shocked!” reactions to the Climate Research Unit’s systematic perversion of the scientific process to be a bit overdone:

Reading the Climategate archive is a bit like discovering that Professional Wrestling is rigged. You mean, it is? Really?

The archive — a carefully curated 160MB collection of source code, emails and other documents from the internal network of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia — provides grim confirmation for critics of climate science. But it also raises far more troubling questions.

Perhaps the real scandal is the dependence of media and politicians on their academics’ work — an ask-no-questions approach that saw them surrender much of their power, and ultimately authority. This doesn’t absolve the CRU crew of the charges, but might put it into a better context.

[. . .]

The allegations over the past week are fourfold: that climate scientists controlled the publishing process to discredit opposing views and further their own theory; they manipulated data to make recent temperature trends look anomalous; they withheld and destroyed data they should have released as good scientific practice, and they were generally beastly about people who criticised their work. (You’ll note that one of these is far less serious than the others.)

But why should this be a surprise?

Well, it’s quite understandable that the folks who’ve been pointing out the Emperor’s lack of clothing for the last few years are indulging in a fair bit of Schadenfreude . . . but it’s disturbing that the mainstream media are still trying to avoid discussing the issue as much as possible. This is close to a junk-science-based coup d’etat which would have had vast impact on the lives of most of the western world, and the media are still wandering away from the scene of the crime, saying, essentially “there’s nothing to see here, move along”.

Doctors urged to advise patients on reducing their carbon butt-print

Filed under: Britain, Bureaucracy, Environment, Health — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 09:20

The Climate and Health Council in Britain is urging GPs to provide their patients with information on how to reduce their carbon output:

The Council has been recently formed to study the health benefits of tackling climate change and promotes a range of ideas from reducing your carbon footprint by driving less and walking more to eating local, less processed food.

It wants to raise ‘health’ on the agenda of December’s UN Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen.

They believe that offering patients advice on how to lower their carbon footprint can be just as easy and achievable as helping them to stop smoking or eat a healthier diet.

Other proposals include for all developed nations to pay an extra five dollars a barrel on oil and a tax on airline tickets. This would go into a special fund to develop low-carbon alternatives to existing technologies, they say.

So, after waiting for however many weeks to get that precious 2.5 minutes of actual patient-doctor interaction, two minutes will now be composed (in a Freudian slip, I originally mistyped that as “composted”) of Climate-Puritan hectoring. That’ll do wonders for both the environment and for doctor/patient relations.

November 27, 2009

QotD: Green totalitarianism

Filed under: Environment, Quotations, Science — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 12:43

In other words, despite the fact that science (or history) tells us that the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than today, thus destroying the basis of the AGW myth that we are living through an unprecedented warming of the climate caused by carbon dioxide arising from industrialisation, it cannot be true — because the Hadley CRU Director’s ‘gut’ tells him so.

All the manipulation, distortion and suppression revealed by these emails took place because it would seem these scientists knew their belief was not only correct but unchallengeable; and so when faced with evidence that showed it was false, they tried every which way to make the data fit the prior agenda. And those who questioned that agenda themselves had to be airbrushed out of the record, because to question it was simply impossible. Only AGW zealots get to decide, apparently, what science is. Truth is what fits their ideological agenda. Anything else is to be expunged.

Which is the more terrifying and devastating: if people are bent and deliberately try to deceive others, or if they are so much in thrall to an ideology that they genuinely have lost the power to think objectively and rationally?

I think that the terrible history of mankind provides the answer to that question. Nixon was a crook. But what we are dealing with here is the totalitarian personality. One thing is now absolutely clear for all to see about the anthropogenic global warming scam: science this is not.

Melanie Phillips, “Green Totalitarianism”, Spectator blog, 2009-11-23

November 26, 2009

QotD: How AGW became the majority view

Filed under: Environment, Media, Quotations, Science — Tags: , , , , , — Nicholas @ 12:10

What the CRU’s hacked emails convincingly demonstrate is that climate scientists in the AGW camp have corrupted the peer-review process. In true Gramscian style they marched on the institutions — capturing the magazines (Science, Scientific American, Nature, etc), the seats of learning (Climate Research Institute; Hadley Centre), the NGO’s (Greenpeace, WWF, etc), the political bases (especially the EU), the newspapers (pretty much the whole of the MSM I’m ashamed, as a print journalist, to say) — and made sure that the only point of view deemed academically and intellectually acceptable was their one.

Neutral observers in this war sometimes ask how it can be that the vast majority of the world’s scientists seem to be in favour of AGW theory. “Peer-review” is why. Only a handful of scientists — 53 to be precise, not the much-touted 2,500 — were actually responsible for the doom-laden global-warming sections of the IPCC’s reports. They were all part of this cosy, self-selecting, peer-review cabal — and many of them, of course, are implicated in the Climategate emails.

Now peer-review is dead, so should be the IPCC, and Al Gore’s future as a carbon-trading billionaire. Will it happen? I shouldn’t hold your breath.

James Delingpole, “Climategate: what Gore’s useful idiot Ed Begley Jr doesn’t get about the ‘peer review’ process”, Telegraph.co.uk, 2009-11-26

Red flag checklist

Filed under: Environment, Politics, Science — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 08:28

The recent Climate Change/AGW revelations (which the Climate Czar is still assuring people won’t actually change anything) are of great interest to climate skeptics, but the systematic perversion of the normal scientific methods shows how easy it has been for a particular viewpoint to be lauded as the consensus. Here is a list of suspicious behaviour which could be red flags for scientists trying to circumvent normal checks and balances:

(1) Consistent use of ad hominem attacks toward those challenging their positions.

(2) Refusal to make data public. This has been going on in this area for some time.

(3) Refusal to engage in discussions of the actual science, on the
assumption that it is too complicated for others to understand.

(4) Challenging the credentials of those challenging the consensus position.

(5) Refusal to make computer code being used to analyze the data public. This has been particularly egregious here, and clear statements of the mathematics and statistics being employed would have allowed the conclusions to be challenged at a much earlier stage.

November 25, 2009

QotD: Why Canadian-style healthcare won’t succeed in the United States

Filed under: Bureaucracy, Cancon, Health, Quotations, USA — Tags: — Nicholas @ 12:59

Speaking from immediate personal experience here: Many Americans have romantic visions of Canadian health care but Canadian health care works as it does only because Canadians are deferential to authority and unwilling to complain loudly no matter the situation. The shock of a visit to an ER department will not dent a Canadian’s feckless stoicism. Loud complaints are just another way of drawing undue attention to yourself, this considered extremely rude north of the border; so much so that queue jumpers earn little opprobrium while the man kicking the queue jumper out of line earns frowns of disapproval (again, personal experience as the line enforcer). Consequently, wait times, waiting lists and twelve hours of nothing at the emergency room are just another government thing to be endured.

Like the winter, supposedly.

I am reminded of an observation to the effect an armed society is a polite society. Obama can enact his shitty little elitist plan as he likes; I doubt it will change the American character, at least not before Obama’s shitty little elitist plan is revoked. In the meantime, I pity the fool American medical resident who talks to his or her patients the way I saw patients dealt with at one of downtown Toronto’s elite hospitals yesterday.

Nick Packwood, “Why socialist medicine will fail in the United States”, Ghost of a Flea, 2009-11-24

Tonight on Iowahawk Geographic

Filed under: Environment, Humour, Science — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 12:19

This is a fascinating show on a topic of great public and scientific interest:

Narrator

This is the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, home of one of the largest nesting populations of climate scientists in Europe.

Gentle ant’s-eye scene of idyllic campus lawn, strewn about with drunken mating undergraduates

Each year it attracts magnificent migratory flocks of graduate students, adjuncts and visiting faculty from across the northern hemisphere.

Shots of jumbo jets landing at Heathrow; herds of climate researchers busily milling at Duty Free shops, retrieving baggage, phoning for prearranged limo service

Within minutes of arriving on campus, the migratory researchers approach the entrance of the Climate Research Unit and perform the secret credential dance, fiercely displaying their prominent curriculum vitae. This signals to the security drone that they can be trusted with the sacred electronic lanyard badge that will grant them entrance to the hive’s inner sanctum.

During the upcoming research season, this hive alone will produce over 6 million metric tons of grant-sustaining climate data guano, but until recently little was known about the elusive genus of homo scientifica living inside. Where do they come from? What strange force draws them here year after year? In order to unravel the mystery, Iowahawk Geographic documentary filmmaker David Burge undertook a painstaking one-week project to finally capture the climate researchers in their native habitat.

November 23, 2009

NFL to finally address concussion problems

Filed under: Football, Health — Tags: — Nicholas @ 13:07

The NFL has been under fire recently for failing to address the serious problems players have had with concussions. A concussion is a potentially serious injury, yet the league has been unwilling to force teams to treat their injured players with due care: a player who has “had his bell rung” is often encouraged to return to play, which drastically increases the chance of further — and more serious — injury. Alan Scharz reports:

[. . .] the league will soon require teams to receive advice from independent neurologists while treating players with brain injuries, several people with knowledge of the plan confirmed Sunday.

For generations, decisions on when players who sustain concussions should return to play have been made by doctors and trainers employed by the team, raising questions of possible conflicts of interest when coaches and owners want players to return more quickly than proper care would suggest.

As scientific studies and anecdotal evidence have found a heightened risk for brain damage, dementia and cognitive decline in retired players, the league has faced barbed criticism from outside experts and, more recently, from Congress over its policies on handling players with concussions.

This is good, not only for current NFL players, but also for college and high school football players, as the professionals set an example to younger players about how to play the game and how to cope with injuries. You can’t just “walk off” a brain injury, and the NFL has to set the precedent of treating concussions as the serious injuries they are. Gregg Easterbrook has been calling for the NFL to show leadership on this issue for quite some time, most recently in his column last week:

The league’s position is that individual clubs set their own medical policies, but that is a transparent cop-out. Most teams will sit a player with a concussion so bad he can’t remember what he had for lunch. But as soon as the player recovers enough to recall the playbook, he may be cleared to resume competition — and may be pressured to do so. Yes, there is an assumption of risk to performing in the NFL, and players know the sport is dangerous. But going on the field with an elbow that hurts is very different from competing with an injured brain. Players recovering from concussions shouldn’t be allowed back on the field until after extended rest. It should not be the player’s decision to make — that is management evading its responsibility, as well as a form of pressure on athletes who are expected to be macho about knowing no fear. The NFL should prohibit concussed players from returning until they have had a mandatory recovery period, or been cleared by neurologists unaffiliated with the league, or both.

This is especially important because NFL behavior sets the tone for college and high school players — and there are 500 of them for each one in the NFL. When high school or college players see NFL athletes rushing back onto the field soon after concussions, or pretending to the trainer to be fine in order to be sent back in, that’s the behavior they emulate. If the NFL instead sent a message that all concussions should be treated seriously and conservatively, college and high school players would imitate that.

In addition to being more careful about treating injured players, the league should also change two pieces of equipment that could help to increase player safety in the area of concussions:

The league should mandate helmets with concussion-reducing designs — the Riddell Speed (successor to the Revo), the Schutt Ion and the Xenith. None are panaceas, but all are likely to lessen concussion incidence or severity. If the NFL set an example by allowing only helmets engineered against concussions, the NCAA and eventually high schools would follow.

The league should mandate double-sided mouthguards — which are much more affordable for high schools than advanced helmets. Boxing has long required double-sided mouthguards, exactly because they reduce concussions.

November 21, 2009

Ah, those deniers are causing a ruckus again

Filed under: Environment, Media, Science — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 11:08

Don’t they realize that the science is settled, all the wiser heads are in agreement, and you can’t disturb their complacency with facts?

Elizabeth sent me a link to this round-up of MSM reporting by James Delingpole, telling me that I was behind the coverage:

Meanwhile, the Climategate scandal (and I do apologise for calling it that, but that’s how the internet works: you need obvious, instantly memorable, event-specific search terms) continues to set the Blogosphere ablaze.

For links to all the latest updates on this, I recommend Marc Morano’s invaluable Climate Depot site.

And if you want to read those potentially incriminating emails in full, go to An Elegant Chaos org where they have all been posted in searchable form.

Like the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal, this is the gift that goes on giving. It won’t, unfortunately, derail Copenhagen (too many vested interests involved) or cause any of our many political parties to start talking sense on “Climate change”. But what it does demonstrate is the growing level of public scepticism towards Al Gore’s Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. That’s why, for example, this story is the single most read item on today’s Telegraph website.

What it also demonstrates — as my dear chum Dan Hannan so frequently and rightly argues — is the growing power of the Blogosphere and the decreasing relevance of the Mainstream Media (MSM).

If it turns out that these documents and email messages are genuine, it will set back the Climate Change/Global Warming lobby quite a long ways . . . unfortunately, it will also taint a lot of other scientists who have not been involved in the mass PR campaign to push the CC agenda.

There’s also the chance that this is a sting operation designed to publicly discredit the skeptics — who have been so cunningly designated “deniers” by certain MSM outfits — by putting an irresistible temptation out there, with just enough “real” data to appear to discredit CC, and then to reveal that the most explosive and incriminating stuff is actually faked.

November 20, 2009

Thinking about the Singularity

Filed under: Science, Technology — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 09:17

For some of you, this will be old hat (ancient history, even). For lots of people, however, the notion of a technological Singularity will be new — and disturbing in a way that hokey woo-woo New Age 2012 Mayan calendars ending is not. Glenn Reynolds writes about it in the December issue of Popular Mechanics:

For some time now, futurists have been talking about a concept called the Singularity, a technological jump so big that society will be transformed. If they’re right, the Industrial Revolution — or even the development of agriculture or harnessing of fire — might seem like minor historical hiccups by comparison. The possibility is now seeming realistic enough that scientists and engineers are grappling with the implications — for good and ill.

When I spoke to technology pioneer and futurist Ray Kurzweil (who popularized the idea in his book The Singularity Is Near), he put it this way: “Within a quarter-century, nonbiological intelligence will match the range and subtlety of human intelligence. It will then soar past it.”

Even before we reach that point, Kurzweil and his peers foresee breathtaking advances. Scientists in Israel have developed tiny robots to crawl through blood vessels attacking cancers, and labs in the United States are working on similar technology. These robots will grow smaller and more capable. One day, intelligent nanorobots may be integrated into our bodies to clear arteries and rebuild failing organs, communicating with each other and the outside world via a “cloud” network. Tiny bots might attach themselves to neurons in the brain and add their processing power — and that of other computers in the cloud — to ours, giving us mental resources that would dwarf anything available now. By stimulating the optic, auditory or tactile nerves, such nanobots might be able to simulate vision, hearing or touch, providing “augmented reality” overlays identifying street names, helping with face recognition or telling us how to repair things we’ve never seen before.

Of course, there are some very scary scenarios as well: you think it’s bad when your email address or bank information gets hacked? How much worse will it be when you’re wearing your immersive technology 24/7? And how much worse again when you’re not wearing it at all, but have it embedded in your body? Being “hacked” then becomes life endangering, not just inconvenient. Charles Stross has written a few books exploring different possible futures (particularly Glasshouse and Halting State, both excellent and highly recommended novels, BTW), and it’s just possible that he’s being too optimistic.

Destructive technologies generally seem to come along sooner than constructive ones — we got war rockets before missile interceptors, and biological warfare before antibiotics. This suggests that there will be a window of vulnerability between the time when we develop technologies that can do dangerous things, and the time when we can protect against those dangers. The slower we move, the longer that window may remain open, leaving more time for the evil, the unscrupulous or the careless to wreak havoc. My conclusion? Faster, please.

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress