Another book that offers some good sense on the hot button topic of “global warming” and a well argued piece in the Daily Mail by it’s author Nigel Lawson.
Who is going to save those poor polar bears from Al Gore's nonsense?
Unbelievers should not be dismissive of the comfort that ‘religion’ can bring. If people feel better when they drive a hybrid car or ride a bicycle to work, and like to parade their virtue in this way, then so be it.
Nonetheless, the new and unattractively intolerant religion of eco-fundamentalism and global warming presents real dangers. The most obvious is that the governments of Europe may get so carried away by their own rhetoric as to impose measures that do serious harm to their economies. That is a particular danger at the present time in the UK.
Another danger is that even if the governments do not go too far and damage their own economies, they may still cause great damage to the developing world by engaging in what might be termed green protectionism. The movement to make us feel guilty about buying overseas produce because of the “food miles” involved is just one example of this.
And France’s President Sarkozy is currently urging the European Union to impose trade barriers against those countries that are not prepared to limit their carbon dioxide emissions.
It should not need pointing out that a lurch into protectionism, and a rolling back of globalisation, would do far more damage to the world economy – and in particular to living standards in the developing countries – than could conceivably result from the projected continuation of global warming.
But even if this danger can be averted, it is clear that the would-be saviours of the planet are, in practice, the enemies of poverty reduction in the developing world.
So the new religion of global warming, however convenient it may be to the politicians, is not as harmless as it may appear. Indeed, the more one examines it, the more it resembles a Da Vinci Code of environmentalism. It is a great story, and a phenomenal bestseller. It contains a grain of truth – and a mountain of nonsense.
And that nonsense could be very damaging indeed.
We appear to have entered a new age of unreason, which threatens to be as economically harmful as it is profoundly disquieting. It is from this, above all, that we really do need to save the planet.
If the book makes the same argument I expect that there may just be a chance that some of those on the brink of taking the plunge into the baptismal pool of the new faith may reconsider taking up the profoundly unreasonable belief that we can change the climate, but sadly I think that many of the Zealots are actually beyond redemption and we may have to respond to their unreasoning belief with more than logic and empirical measurement.
Cheers Comrades
Update
Craigy, in the comments, wants us to believe his link meet my challenge to prove a casual link between global warming and the level of CO2 in the air. I have a screen grab of the paragraph that et out the caveats that make a mockery of his claim that his citation proves that an increase in atmospheric CO2 CAUSES an increase in climatic temperatures.
From Craigy's cited "proof" of the causal link between CO2 increases and the percieved rise in global temperature.
Now apart from this paragraph showing good reasons for being sceptical about the outrageous claims of he waminists, the rest of the document is just a rehash of questionable computer modelling and AGW orthodoxy.
I think that he is going to have to try harder comrades
Filed under: Abortion, Carbon Trading, Global Warming, God bothering, Green Hypocrites, Leftism, Living with Nature, Renewables, World Events | Tagged: Da Vinci Code, Nigel Lawson
Now you quote a Banker Iain.
Right, I am sure that scientists the world over are tearing up their scientific research after hearing that an ex Thatcher Minister and Banker has totally demolished the need for any science. After all his ‘truthieness’ is far more convincing than scientific consensus or peer reviewed research.
What would convince me that you are right Iain, would be if his attractive daughter, Nigella Lawson, was to announce that AGW is definitely a myth, because reducing CO2 emissions will effect the growing of truffles in France. With a low cut top, who could possibly not believe her.
Save the truffles! Stop the global warming hype now!
Of course one of the reasons for this post was to demonstrate that it is not Just Andrew and I who recognise the religious aspects to the warminists argument.
But of course some people are drawn to have ‘faith’ in their ideas.
Some environmentalists do have a ‘faith’ based belief that the pollution in China (and LA for that matter) is bad for your health, based on nothing more than their visual observation.
Non-scientists like myself, have ‘faith’ in the scientific community when they publish research that is peer reviewed and comes to a conclusion that man is effecting the climate. The vast majority of us (you included) could never understand the science enough to have anything other than ‘faith’ in its truthfulness without studying the subject at a University for many years.
So Iain, your opinions are very much a ‘faith’ and you are very much a zealot, as your mind is closed to any other view.
While I have ‘faith’ in those that have studied this matter, my mind is open to being convinced that there is better science available.
I certainly don’t think that you, Bolt or a Banker have the qualifications or have done enough study to be anything other than ideologues.
But I do not dispute the notion that air pollution is bad, the fact that foul city air makes you ill makes that quite clear and no faith is required.
Your standard response Craigy
However when I pose questions about the efficacy of things like Brother Number One’s ETS you avoid the question even when the answer hinges on politics and not science.
No Craigy I am open to the possibility however I have yet to see any conclusive proof of a causal relationship between the increase in CO2 in the air and warming. You would think that with all of those scientists beavering away trying to prove AGW that they would have come up with something on that by now. Please cite any papers that do prove the link and I may reconsider my position.
Why should I believe that when you won’t even consider a political question relating to AGW and ETS?
But we all have functioning brains and knees unsullied by genuflecting to the men in white coats , just because they are wearing their “trust me I’m a scientist” badges.
” the fact that foul city air makes you ill makes that quite clear and no faith is required. ”
Well, it could be sun spots or witchcraft that makes you ill. Without scientific research we wouldn’t know for sure. It might be that breathing foul air is actually good for you, we just need to adapt to it (I’m trying to use your logic here).
“However when I pose questions about the efficacy of things like Brother Number One’s ETS you avoid the question”
I’m sorry Iain but I thought I had answered your question. I’ll try again.
We don’t know the details of the ETS yet. The ETS in Europe hasn’t created the disaster that you claim it would be here. I will wait and see and if it’s as bad as you imagine. If you are correct, I will publicly say so and give you credit for warning us.
“Please cite any papers that do prove the link and I may reconsider my position.”
http://www.gcrio.org/OnLnDoc/pdf/ClimateChangeScience.pdf
I look forward to your change Iain.
“Why should I believe that when you won’t even consider a political question relating to AGW and ETS?”
I thought I answered your question, try me again.
“But we all have functioning brains and knees unsullied by genuflecting to the men in white coats , just because they are wearing their “trust me I’m a scientist” badges.”
Then, I ask you again, who do you trust for your scientific opinions.
Certainly not the PDF that you cite Craigy
How in the name of all that is scientific does that prove a causal relationship between the increase in CO2 and a rise in temperature?, Which was the challenge I put to you btw , Now as i could not quote any of the text here because it was a PDF I have added an update to my post please read that before commenting further.