With apologies to the late great Yogi Berra, who surely would have something to say about this climate inanity, and via Bishop Hill, we have this reminder of the ghost of alarmism past:
Sir John Houghton once famously said:
Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen.
Except actually he didn’t say that. His real words were:
“If we want a good environmental policy in the future we’ll have to have a disaster.”
Now, in an eerie echo of the learned Sir John, we have the words of Robert Stavins, the head of Harvard’s Environmental Economics program:
It’s unlikely that the U.S. is going to take serious action on climate change until there are observable, dramatic events, almost catastrophic in nature, that drive public opinion and drive the political process in that direction
It’s unlikely that the U.S. is going to take serious action on climate change until there are observable, dramatic events, almost catastrophic in nature, that drive public opinion and drive the political process in that direction
lol, what that pinhead doesn’t understand, is that we have experienced “observable, dramatic events,
almostcatastrophic in nature.”What happens is that people of this nation pull together, fix what is necessary and go on. We look back at the events with a sense of pride that it doesn’t stop this nation. It is in our DNA to go through adversity. We don’t succumb to it! Did 9/11 cause us to decide to give into the type fanaticism that caused the death of thousands of our countrymen? No, it strengthened our resolve. We adhere to a bit of Nietzsche. Did we see an uprising of global warming concern from our brothers and sisters in the south in regard to the recent outbreak of tornadoes? No, and we won’t. They’ll set their jaw, clean up the mess, mourn the dead, and move forward. It is what we do, it is how we respond to adversity, it is what we are.
Unfortunately, we also have interspersed throughout our population some who haven’t bothered to take the time to understand the group of people about whom he’s speaking. I’ll leave to everyone else to discern his mental capacity from this.
Even if the dark totalitarian Malthusian fantasies where correct, which they are not.
(Click here to see the latest decadal correlation between CO2 and temps.
) We wouldn’t react in the manner Stavins thinks we might. I’m not sure how we’d react if these totalitarian Malthusian fantasies were accepted as factual, but I’m sure it would be a total mess. Our liberties and enterprise are too precious to let a bit of weather change our ways.
Speaking of remarkable quotations, the UEA’s Prof Mike Hulme said on public radio in Australia the other day that
‘we are “just as uncertain” about climate sensitivity as we were 25 years ago’.
So the science is settled alright; our ignorance is incurable.
http://catallaxyfiles.com/2011/05/03/buying-scientists-at-the-afr/#comment-210830
Please excuse the double comment, but after some errands I came back and reviewed the source of the comment in question. It was originally published in Bloomberg reports at
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-29/disaster-needed-for-u-s-to-act-on-climate-change-stavins-says.html
Stavins is a clear cut, straight thinking, straight talking, rational guy. I don’t see why WUWT persons would challenge this statement. He is currently advising a host of industry that want to be compliant with any climate change law that may come to be. The statement in question merely states the fact that action in Congress on climate change has ground to a halt, and that it will take a monumental reason to restart it. Anthony, where is the disagreement? I think that your staff has picked on the wrong guy as an example.
Policyguy says:
May 3, 2011 at 2:51 pm
> Be careful not to jump to Harvard bias conclusions. I know Stavins. He’s as clear thinking, articulate and as bright as they come. Interpret his words as stated.
Careful – software engineers learn to look for ambiguity in computer languages, and it spills over into human languages. For example,
A lot of us would enjoy watching the political process get driven into a dramatic catastrophe. Well, except when the US Congress does it – they make it so damn expensive….
Smokey says:
May 3, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Our Hoser contingent should be congratulated for helping their country come to its senses. Great job, eh? The West needs a leader like Canada.
Not far off the mark. The Conservatives trashed a 40% reduction climate bill in the Senate. Now they can do it in the House. No more griping about the Oil Sands, I’m betting.
Wasn’t that the plot of “State of Fear?”by Michael Crichton.
“It’s unlikely that the U.S. is going to take serious action on climate change until…” – change the word”until” to “unless “and the statement is accurrate.
LOL. More “climate science??” They will bury themselves.
When winter death rates start to rise because of power cuts people will notice a disaster is occuring. Unfortunately by that stage the ballot box will no longer be an option.
Here is a quote from the late Stephen Schneider:
Historians will pour over similar quotes to try and understand how we reached this level of ‘global warming’ insanity.
Tom T -it was similar, but in “State of Fear” the acts were intended to frighten and kill people through “act of God” incidents (calf antarctic ice, cause tsunamis, cause flash-flooding deaths). Leon got one of the plot details wrong for Rainbow Six, the engineered disease wasn’t intended to be the big killer, the “solution” to it was. You see, they had a vaccine all ready to go that was ready to be shipped out on short notice that had a longer retention time than the original disease and a higher mortality rate. The main theme was a common one though, most people are too dumb to recognize the “dangers”, so their “betters” needed to take action.
The real disaster could come from an opposite development like this:
Winter Corn and Wheat woes continue
http://www.weatherbell.com/jd/?category_name=blog_home_page
Publius says:
May 3, 2011 at 4:18 pm
“…until there are observable, dramatic events, almost catastrophic in nature, that drive public opinion and drive the political process in that direction…”
Hey. Wasn’t the 9.0 quake and tsunami enough?
No. In part because it did not directly affect the US. I believe Stavin’s quote is accurate for the public, but not so much for the government. It will be up to the public to prevent their government from driving the political process in the direction of tax increases to fight global warming when such processes will have no effect on climate. Stavin has missed the point that the tail is now wagging the dog. Just as the public is waking up to the reality that they have been hood-winked, as public opinion polls are starting to show, governments are trying to implement their false agenda. In Canada we just elected a Federal Government that opposes a carbon tax. Vote the carbon tax off the government agenda and it won’t come back.
Very interesting. That would explain why every extreme weather event, floods, draughts, cold winters, hot summer days, draughts, high winds, and so on are attributed to AGW. It’s climate change not global warming as my significant other tells me.
Do not let logic or observational facts get in the way of spending trillions of dollars to limit a gas that is essential to life on this planet. Greenhouses inject CO2 into their greenhouse to increase yield and reduce growing time.
It is sad as this process moves on, that so many wish for disasters just to satisfy their own egos. Their own confused need to be “right.” As Nathaniel Bronner Jr. wrote: ““Ego has a voracious appetite, the more you feed it, the hungrier it gets.”
It’s unlikely that the U.S. is going to take serious action on climate change until there are observable, dramatic events, almost catastrophic in nature, that drive public opinion and drive the political process in that direction
What do they look like? What would a catastrophic event be? Flooding, blizzard, heat wave, hurricane, tornado, what and how many for how long over what area etc? If no person is harmed is it catastrophic?
What about the ice strom in New England and Quebec several years ago?
Leon Brozyna says:
May 3, 2011 at 2:15 pm [Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six environmental activist terrorist reference]
The Japanese Manga/Anime “Death Note” has the same antagonists. When such story lines make it into so many mainstream entertainment venues, we can be sure the awful reality may not be far behind.
The Monster says:
May 3, 2011 at 1:55 pm
I believe Yogi Berra is alive and doing well for an 85-year-old.
REPLY: Well that’s what I get for not double checking. Thanks for setting me straight – Anthony
Anthony that was a bit of a boo-boo! 😉
I think Yogi, like Kieth Richards, has been dead for a while, just nobody bothered to tell them….
to paraphrase for Yogi…”If I were dead I’m sure I would know about it.”
I have a cunning plan to save energy. As global warming is down to increasing levels of CO2, the air in all saunas should be enriched with CO2. The more CO2 in the atmosphere of the sauna the hotter it will be.
Policyguy says:
May 3, 2011 at 5:49 pm
“The statement in question merely states the fact that action in Congress on climate change has ground to a halt, and that it will take a monumental reason to restart it. Anthony, where is the disagreement? I think that your staff has picked on the wrong guy as an example.”
Very simple. Global Warming is a huge pack of lies leavened with fraud. We do not want our people or our Congress to be once again influenced by a huge pack of lies leavened with fraud. The disagreement is whether folks should be telling huge packs of lies leavened with fraud. We say, no! You say, yes!
Also, Abe Vigoda is not dead yet (may he live many, many more years!):
http://www.abevigoda.com/
Paul
“Never let a good crisis go to waste.”
–Rahm Emmanuel
Policyguy says:
May 3, 2011 at 5:49 pm
Please excuse the double comment, but after some errands I came back and reviewed the source of the comment in question. It was originally published in Bloomberg reports at
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-29/disaster-needed-for-u-s-to-act-on-climate-change-stavins-says.html
Stavins is a clear cut, straight thinking, straight talking, rational guy. I don’t see why WUWT persons would challenge this statement. He is currently advising a host of industry that want to be compliant with any climate change law that may come to be.
Oh – So Stavins is making HIS money by “advising” industries what to do about CAGW. So, if Stavins can’t “create” a CAGW “cause” for Congressional democrats and the UNIPCC to engorge themselves and threaten industries with (unneeded and catastrophic) responses to a (false) CAGW threat, then Stavins doesn’t get paid ……
I thought it was the “evil” oil companies that were profiting by influencing the “science” behind skepticism, and all I find is 90 billion US dollars spent going to people who profit from “prophetting” CAGW …..