Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Stephan Lewandowsky (of retracted Recursive Fury fame ) has just released a paper supporting the “precautionary principle” (h/t JoNova). According to Lewandowsky, the more uncertain you are about risk, the more you should spend to contain the risk.
Lewandowsky of course applies this principle to climate sensitivity – he suggests uncertainty increases the high end risk.
But now that Lewandosky has opened our eyes, let’s try applying his principle to other issues.
Witch burning. Just as there has never been a clear anthropogenic climate signal, so there has never been a clear demonstration of supernatural power. Yet can we be absolutely certain? Lewandowsky teaches us that the less you know about something, the more worried you should be. So for the sake of the children, we had better dust off those old witch finding books.
Flying saucers. There has never been a verified case of human contact with aliens. But there have been plenty of anecdotal accounts of alien encounters, many of which sound rather unpleasant. Lewandowsky teaches us that uncertainty is risk – can we be absolutely certain Earth is not being observed by malevolent alien beings? Better step up efforts to keep us all safe from the unknown.
I’m sure readers can think of other examples – chemtrails, rains of frogs, strange wart like pimples… it’s a long list.
Thank you Lewandowsky, for opening our eyes to what is really important.
spontaneous human combustion
What about the uncertainty around an unprecedented Sharknado attack.
“According to Lewandowsky, the more uncertain you are about risk, the more you should spend to contain the risk.”
The Aztec insurance policy.
To be exact we should be wirried about only the anthropogenic portion of atmospheric CO2 which has failed in a head to head match with climate variability at all levels. If this were a prediction of stock market futures no one would take it seriously excet those who wished to lose their shirts. Apparently Obama wishes to lose a country, let alone his shirt.
I hate typing on a phone screen.
The Precautionary Principle is surely best stated ‘First, Do No Harm’.
On that basis, and with the examples of Ethanol pushing up food prices, windfarms costing millions and killing rare birds and bats, Drax creating more pollution by burning wood pellets imported from the USA to the UK instead of coal, 29,000 excess deaths in the UK winter (compared to summer) etc. etc. it is the Greens (you cannot, in all conscience, call them ‘Environmentalists’) who should be observing that principle a little more carefully.
As usual, Lew has discharged both barrels into his own feet.
“Lewandowsky says we must fear uncertainty, and act on it”
—
As aliens have been mentioned, this chap not one of Darth Sidious’ lesser known Padawans by chance?
Does the converse hold true?
You are CERTAIN about a particular risk that will lead to a real life threatening occurrence, therefore spend less on it than something that you only have suspicion about but very little information?
No I thought not.
But it does explain why we are repeatedly told to worry about our grandchildren by multimillion dollar grant seeking academics like Lewandowsky, while there is a child dying every 5 seconds from hunger and one dollar could save their lives.
If the more uncertain you are about a risk the more you should spend to contain then the opposite must also be true.
Therefore the more certain you are about a risk the less you should spend to contain it. So once we become certain about climate change risks we can stop spending any money on it.
Uh, it sounds like Lewandowsky is applying the “I’m scared of the dark” principle.
He’s uncertain about what is out there in the dark so now we should do whatever is possible to prevent night time.
Oh, and don’t forget those monsters under the bed.
And the alligators in the sewer.
🙂
Impalement by unicorn.
Suffocation in Lew Paper.
What a moron, be very very frightened, man the barricades and hide in the bunker cause we do not know what tomorrow will bring.
The projection by this fellow is most revealing.
He is a genuine government expert.
I have no doubt of this observation.
A classic social parasite.
Too thick to see his own stupidity, he insists upon imposing his help on all others.
It is the likes of Lew and his ilk who will overcome the general publics restraint and resistance to rioting.
Help like this is a precursor to violence.
As I know of no sane method of driving such loons away from your private space, they are relentless is their stupidity.The 5 laws of human stupidity describe the Lew’s as occupying the lower lefthand quadrant, at the extreme corner.
More evidence CAGW is an intelligence test.
One that is revealing our bureaucracies to be in very sorry shape, Filled with fools and bandits..and then there are the Lews.
Beware of werewolves & vampires
Wait, if we must act if we are uncertain, then is the reverse true:
The more certain one is, the less one must act.
So, since Lew is certain we are causing “climate change”, he is implying we should do nothing!
Works for me.
🙂
Borg attack and subsequent assimilation. I’ve seen it on TV and it looks pretty scary. We better get ready, or else it’ll be worse than we think…
/snark
I think Bigfoot snuck into my house and hid my car keys last night.
I want us to fund an anti-BIgfoot home invasion force, STAT!
He must be terrified by Zombies. And cooties. And that thing under his bed. It’s hard not to feel very sorry for him. We take care of our mentally-challenged here in the States.
It is uncertain if Dr. Lewandowsky is suffering from schizophrenia, so treatment must started, asap.
First a round of Haldol and Clozaril. And since there is still uncertainty, electroconvulsive therapy is called for. And for good measure, since lobotomy was the scientific consensus for the treatment of mental disorders, and since uncertainty may still persist, a srgeon should be found who is willing to perform this consensus apporved procedure, stat.
This paper of the Dr. Lewandwosky’s really remarkable. It is an academic version of Captain Queeg’s testimony:
john robertson says:
April 8, 2014 at 7:17 am
Suffocation in Lew Paper.
======
Typo? Loo paper!
Fear the unknown? Yes, let’s prey on society’s most basic fears.
How uncertain are we about whether suppressing CO2 enrichment of the atmosphere will adversely affect crop yields and cause more hunger? Let’s impose a tax on CO2-enrichment suppression.. (Tax time makes me stoop to shooting fish in a barrel.)
I saw this the other day. I thought for sure it was a joke.
When this first came to notice, I assumed it was an elaborate April Fools joke. Turns out it was just fools in April.
Hey that’s the same argument Nick Fury mistakenly had in the latest Captain America movie.
Hail Hydra.
Funny that ..alarmists shout “you can’t speak you are not a climate scientist !”
..and this paper is purely about Lew’s speciality of psychology ? ..or is he excluded lfrom that rule ? (just like geneticist Steve Jones)
1. This information is so important that we are required to pay $39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95 (plus VAT where applicable) for part one and another $39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95 (plus VAT where applicable) for part two to get the inside scoop.
2. In the published promotional materials the word “cost” does not appear … as in the cost to avoid/mitigate the looming disaster is projected to be $XX.XX / €YY.YY / £ ZZ.ZZ (plus VAT where applicable). If the cost of buying insurance is great relative to the risk, insurance is not bought.
3. I await part three where the authors will project the costs of avoidance/mitigation. I’m sure it will cost another $39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95 (plus VAT where applicable).