Roger Pielke Jr. has a nice, short post in reaction to Paul Krugman’s opinion in the NY Times blaming climate change for the unrest in Egypt…
Go read –> Roger Pielke Jr.
Addendum comments by Dr. Ryan N. Maue
Based upon this quote from Krugman:
But the evidence tells a different, much more ominous story. While several factors have contributed to soaring food prices, what really stands out is the extent to which severe weather events have disrupted agricultural production. And these severe weather events are exactly the kind of thing we’d expect to see as rising concentrations of greenhouse gases change our climate — which means that the current food price surge may be just the beginning.
There is no other way to interpret this than “I told you so” from Krugman directly linking climate change and the disparate weather events of the past year or two to food prices and the crises in the Arab world. To various commenters who are defending Krugman religiously, do you doubt that Krugman is linking the events implicitly or explicitly? Remind you, this is the same Nobel prize winner that less than a few hours after Congresswoman Giffords was shot blamed conservatives for the so-called “Climate of Hate“. How does he have ANY credibility at all — especially with anything related to physical sciences?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hmm.
My wife is rather partial to Tender Stem Broccoli. Fresh – obviously.
It is pretty much available all year around here in the UK if the buyers do their job correctly and the snow does not disrupt deliveries. Since it must be flown in days of volcanic activity can also be disruptive.
Once in a while the Broccoli comes from the UK, according to labelling on the packages. But mostly it seems to originate in Kenya or Egypt. Unusually I found some from Jordan a couple of weeks ago. It’s amazing where fresh produce arrives from these days. I assume the locals don’t like broccoli so they ship the stuff here. Or maybe it’s just a much higher profit margin than grain or cereals in general.
Or perhaps it’s something else to do with the greed of those who would rule over others – a common theme under all regimes in the modern world it seems.
I saw a report this evening that suggested that what the Egyptian people really want is sugar for their tea. And internet access from their phones. Or maybe that was just the prisoners that were released to stir up trouble and add to lawlessness.
Perhaps they should be more worried about having to eat food raw once CAGW related policies result in the twin problems of high cost energy sources that many cannot afford and shortage of availability for those who can afford to cook stuff.
The consequences of those problems on a worldwide basis might just be more locally and personally dramatic than economists are used to considering.
Pure speculation on might part though – as seems to be the case everywhere these days.
[CAGW and Broccoli? Robt]
Higher food prices here to stay: analysts
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110206/bs_afp/worldeconomyfoodinflation;_ylt=AgyJjdnwCxCq5CHjV76Id1ys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTFmb3AxMDhvBHBvcwMxMDAEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlvbl9idXNpbmVzcwRzbGsDaGlnaGVyZm9vZHBy
“And these severe weather events are exactly the kind of thing we’d expect to see as rising concentrations of greenhouse gases change our climate…”
Really Mr. Krugman? You were “expecting” to see these severe weather events, including the record cold and snow? Why didn’t you tell us back when everyone else was predicting that global warming would mean steadily rising temperatures and that children in the UK would rarely see a glimpse of snow? Why didn’t you contradict these people back then with your superior foreknowledge?
What I would really like to know is what type of weather events are exactly the kind of thing we’d expect to see if rising greenhouse gases are NOT changing our climate. Can someone please provide us with a list?
I remember global warming advocates predicting a warmer planet with less ice and snow, but then the opposite began to happen. Now these same people are pointing to cold weather events as examples of things “we’d expect to see” from climate change. If the science is settled then it should be very easy for them to tell us in advance what type of events they would not expect to see due to climate change. I’m tired of them changing their expectations AFTER the fact. Put it on record now.
The very fact that they keep changing the terminology — from global warming to climate change to climate disruption — is strong evidence, in itself, that the science is not settled. They really have no idea what to expect in the future. If they were confident that rising CO2 results in rising temperatures, they would stick with “global warming”. By switching to “climate change” they are acknowledging that they don’t really know if temperatures will go up or down. They’re covering all their bases so, no matter what happens with the climate, they can claim to be right. It’s becoming clear that much of what is being promoted as climate science is simply political activism and environmentalism masquerading as science.
The Egyptian economy is being subjected to stresses that have nothing to do with its agricultural output, this output is at record highs. The problems are mainly external with factors such as the historic low interest rates in the major economies which has led directly to investment institutions piling into commodities such as foodstuffs leading to foodstuff inflation. World food prices are rising not because of declining production, we are seeing stresses within the system caused by protectionism and profiteering and WTO/UN mistakes.
Free trade and open borders for food products and the ending of rich nations subsiding their own agricultural sectors could help and the restricting of investment banking profiteering while encouraging real investment in developing nations agricultural sectors would help. A change of attitude is essential, the third world could become the engine of world economic growth, the world needs food and the third world has land aplenty but little infrastructure and technologies needed to kick start industrial food production. The UN is active in keeping the poorest on the land using subsistence stone age farming techniques when it should be urging the adoption of modern food production methods.
Food dumping of excess 1st world foodstuffs into the 3rd world on the pretext of aid is also preventing the required expansion of modern agribusiness and it is this that is playing a major role in holding back world food production, there are many reasons for the stresses in world food production yet the smallest most insignificant contribution in the form of cyclic weather variability is being exploited to hide the real problems we need to face. Put simply we need more land under the plough and land we have aplenty and with modern irrigation techniques we have all the water we need, we need more modern farming methods and better machines and that we possess in large quantities. So we have the land and we have the gear and we have the money and we have the technologies and we have the shipping fleets to provide the planet with all the food it could ever want, so whats the problem then?
The problem is vested interests and selfish 1st world protectionism combined with a wholly flawed ideological approach by the political classes today and they are using CAGW to hide their own sins and stupid errors and flawed beliefs. I see today a Luddite ignorance being played out, I see a flawed political ideology gaining supremacy in the emerging world government and a selfish supremacist narrative intent on crushing the 3rd world aspirations in order for the few to keep their place a the top. We have all we need to feed the world many times over, what we lack are the leaders to make this happen. We are being fed a diet of fear and suspicion uncertainty, we are being manipulated and lied to and it is blinding us to the truly wonderful future that awaits us.
thegoodlocust says:
February 7, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Well, if you look at Pielke’s graph then food prices have been going down for 100 years. Can we blame that on climate change too since CO2 increases crop yields?
____________________
Actually, if one is to apply simplistic logic in the same manner as Krugman, that would be the more plausible statement: CO2 increaces plant growth and hence crops. Food prices have been falling as CO2 has been increacing in the atmosphere.
Of course, this would be a horrible oversimplification of the chaotic climate system, but I would give it the same value (at least) as Krugman’s ramblings.
Maybe someone should write a new article: “Riots in Egypt despite ever falling food prices and increaced levels of plant food(CO2).”
don’t for get this classic Eric Steig moment below..
I had asked at RealClimate why not have a blogroll link in other opinions, To Climate Audit, Peilke Jnr and Lucia’s Blackboard, as an example of goodwill
[Response: Being listed on our blogroll does not constitute endorsement. In general, the sites we do list — whether they are run by scientists or not — tend to get the science right much of the time, and hence are consistent with our mission. Being not-listed could mean that
a) we haven’t heard of the site,
b) that it is uninteresting or unimportant, or
c) that we consider it dishonest or disingenuous with respect to the science.
Pielke Jr, Blackboard, and ClimateAudit all fall squarely into the latter category.–eric]
http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/extreme-climate/
That comment comment of mine at RC prompted Eric Steig to calling Climate Audi, Lucia and Peilke dishonest. My following 2 comments defending myself from Ray Ladbury, never appeared at RealClimate
on the same article, eric steig made the following comment…
eric [Response: There is, however, no evidence that ‘skeptics’ are being shut out of journals. There is indeed much evidence to the contrary. This is a canard.”
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/06/what-do-climate-scientists-think/comment-page-2/#comment-178911
It is becoming painfully obvious that nobel prizes are awarded on the basis of sucking up to politicians and buearocrats rather any ability or achievement. Democracy is dieing in the west, it can hardly be a coincidence that the entire beaurocratic machinery and political class believe in this stuff.
Extreme weather? Only to the gullible!
Let’s call it what it is: Gullible Warming
REPLY: For somebody always harping on details, the fact that you complain about “fine print” while at the same time lecturing us on details not included with articles suggests that your opinion is not balanced. Your multitude comments, over 18 hours days, dominate most every thread these days, and it makes me wonder if somebody isn’t paying you to disrupt this blog. So here’s the question: who are you and what’s your purpose here? Given the volume of commentary you have here, it’s a fair question. Note that your welcome is getting worn out here, some insight would be helpful. – Anthony
I am a retired Physicist/Engineer.
I hardly dominate any threads. If you count my posts they are a miniscule percentage of the number of posts or words. I only post on a minority of pages where I feel I can make a positive contribution. If you feel that I dominate anything, perhaps it is the quality of what I write that makes you feel that way.
REPLY: 398 comments on WUWT so far, 719 comments in rebuttal to yours. But, you make a good point, a lot of your commentary is pretty bad. – Anthony
Mike says:
February 7, 2011 at 2:39 pm says:
“(*) Cassandra above gives just this sort of critique. Even though I do not agree with her, she does give a valid argument.”
Many thanks for the kind words Mike, I am glad that someone read the post and understood the argument as I intended it. Where do you disagree and why? It would help me to progress my own position if I were to be presented with the substantive weaknesses in my post.
Yours
Cassie K.
“eadler says:
February 7, 2011 at 5:30 pm
”
Okay, I gave it a shot and quoted Krugman multiple times to make my point. It is clear that you either didn’t read my post or had your mind made up before you read it.
Basically, you think it is my “invention” that Krugman is blaming global warming for the Egyptian crisis/food prices. And yet, even if we ignore the many quotes I gave you, it is clear from the hundreds of comments on his article at the NYT’s website that was the impression given to all the commenters on both sides of the aisle.
I will give you credit in that you realize how stupid it makes Krugman look and so you are trying to nip it in the bud, but everyone else regardless of political affiliation understood what he meant. Everyone else must be completely mistaken when they read it.
Hopefully I remember your username so I don’t waste any more time on you in the future.
Always have a problem with the food price, food shortage AGW alarmists.
Throughout the EU we pay billions of tax payers Euro’s to farmers, land owners, golf courses, etc. to grow absolutely nothing at all.
I wonder whether this is linked to food prices?
Paul Krugman is a climate expert. Really?
One definition of an expert: “Someone who is more than 50 miles from home”.
If Krugman commutes more than 50 miles between home and the NYT this would meet the criteria.
Continually peering at the world through warming-colored glasses has a tendency to make everything appear warming-colored. There’s a 60’s theme in there somewhere….
The title of this posting is foolish. After all, don’t you have to have something before you can lose it?