This quote from a WSJ article titled Springtime for Warmists (a hat tip to the satirical play Springtime for Hitler in Mel Brooks’ 1968 film The Producers ) is one of those “God help us” moments where we realize higher education has become an abject failure when it comes to teaching reality based science.
Yes, it has come to this. Americans are being urged to submit to “dictatorial” government because democracy is incapable of controlling the weather. “In college classes, climate change is taught as a textbook example of where democracy fails,” Graves asserts in the very first sentence of her column.
Oy!
Springtime for Warmists
Last month Rush Limbaugh remarked that the reason for “the re-establishment of climate change and global warming as a new primary impetus of the White House” is that “it offers the president opportunities to be dictatorial.”
A defender of the president might counter that “dictatorial” is overwrought. After all, whether or not his proposed regulations are wise, they are based on an act of Congress and an interpretation of that law that has passed muster with the Supreme Court. They won’t take effect until members of the public have had the opportunity to make their views known to the Environmental Protection Agency. And Obama will remain in office for only another 2½ years or so, after which his (democratically elected) successors will have the authority to revise the regulations. Congress also retains the authority to change the law.
But National Journal’s Lucia Graves takes a different approach. Instead of denying that Obama’s actions are dictatorial, she disputes Limbaugh’s implicit premise that there’s anything wrong with that. Lest you think we exaggerate, her piece is titled “Obama’s Thankfully ‘Dictatorial’ Approach to Climate Change.”
Yes, it has come to this. Americans are being urged to submit to “dictatorial” government because democracy is incapable of controlling the weather. “In college classes, climate change is taught as a textbook example of where democracy fails,” Graves asserts in the very first sentence of her column.
Well, that settles it. America might have been a noble experiment, but science has proven it a failure. “Science is science,” Obama tells the New York Times’s Thomas Friedman. “And there is no doubt that if we burned all the fossil fuel that’s in the ground right now that the planet’s going to get too hot and the consequences could be dire.” Friedman asked: “Do you ever want to just go off on the climate deniers in Congress? ‘Yeah, absolutely,’ the president said with a laugh.”
Hardy har har.
There are, to say the least, some problems here. Most important, appeals to scientific authority ought to fall on deaf ears unless the science is conducted honestly, which entails acknowledgment of uncertainty and respect for alternative hypotheses. In this regard, the demonization of “skeptics” should raise an alarm for anyone who takes science seriously. Skepticism is the essence of the scientific method.
Read it all here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Curious George says:
June 11, 2014 at 9:04 am
A failure of higher education? Definitely not .. these people are inspired by a highly educated Dr. Goebbels.
I did not know that Joseph Goebbels was a Dr. I guess the highly educated have done a good job in keeping that a secret. If I had a doctorate I would be a little less proud or fat headed. The title of climate Nazi makes even more sense when you learn about Dr. Goebbels.
It appears to me that the leaders of the climate change alarm have studied him and Hitler very well.
Norm Macdonald said that the more he learns about Hitler the less he likes him.
From Bob Tisdale on June 11, 2014 at 10:16 am:
Use a .22 to keep it fair. 12 gauge with #2 is too easy, like hunting fish in a barrel with an M80.
One of Taranto’s standard “headlines” is “We Blame Global Warming”.
Taranto is probably the best single daily commentary on the internet, truly “Best of The Web Today”.
Even for foreigners as me.
I read him every single day, it is my main gateway for info about American politics.
Obviously, it’s ok for the elites to be dictatorial…they know what’s best for us. That’s why, for example, my best friend now has to pay several hundred dollars more per month for an insurance policy that’s “better” for his family than his old policy.
Regarding venison for breakfast, Ms. Gray, though I salute your (apparent) hunting prowess, I still have to say…bacon is better! Save the backstrap for the grill.
rip
” Congress also retains the authority to change the law.”
An interesting idea, but not true. Not as long as Harry Reid controls the Senate. This is the singular reason that Obama can do so much with his “EOs.” He is bullet proof, or perhaps I should use the phrase “impeach-proof” instead. His abuse of the regulatory powers of the EPA is just another example of impeachable offense, but his back is guarded by the Nevada guard dog.
And should by some chance the Senate goes over to the opposition, just remember it takes a 2/3rds majority to override a veto. Congress has less chance of changing what is happening with the EPA than the ice at the bottom of the glacier sitting on top of that 1000 degree lava has of not melting.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says June 11, 2014 at 9:05 am
We shall gather from the carbon rich to give to the carbon poor. Al Gore will see how well his fleet of personal vehicles will run when all the tanks are siphoned dry and refilled with the equivalent in carbon credits.
Very well said.
We already know how that will play out. Since fuel is becoming far too expensive for most or the poor, they do without unless its subsidized. The rich elites do not mind as long as they have theirs. Obamacare and rationing is another good example. The more important self appointed people will have access, the peons can go eat grass.
BarryW says: “Where in the H is the Supreme Court?” – umm…in BO’s pocket?
“Think of how incredibly ignorant and out of control this makes him. He is so deluded by his circle of advisers that he actually thinks that controllilng CO2 is giong to improve the weather.”
There is a real chance that he doesn’t believe that at all, but that he DOES believe that the public is gullible enough and stupid enough to fall for this bs, allowing him to grab dictatorial powers quite easily. If this is the case, then he consciously surrounds himself with the kind of hucksters necessary to sell the con to the sheep about to be fleeced.
It is one or the other, though. I don’t see any third alternative.
All of these Republican cries about Obama’s autocratic powers were mysteriously silent when they were enacted by his Republican predecessor. But then autocracy isn’t autocracy if its enacted by the guy you support, are they?
This probably cannot be rubbed in enough.
If you have to/wish to, destroy civil society to “save” it.
You are most likely the problem.
Some interesting quotes from the Nazi propaganda minister Dr Goebbels.
“What did Dr. Goebbels do?
He said: “Propaganda? Certainly! Good propaganda for a good cause!” We make propaganda not in the pay of men in the background, but rather we make propaganda for our own honest convictions. We advertise for our own ideal, and therefore we fight using all good means to make good propaganda to win the soul of our people.” sounds like Stephen H Schneider. He was a PHD wasn’t he?
Also. “There are two ways to make a revolution,” the newly-named Reich Minister said. “One can fire at the opponent with machine guns until he recognizes the superiority of those who have the machine guns. That is the simplest way. One can also transform a nation through a revolution of the spirit, not destroying the opponent, but winning him over. We National Socialists have gone the second way, and will continue on it. Our first task in this ministry will be to win the whole people for the new state. We want to replace liberal thinking with a sense of community that includes the whole people.”
John A said on June 11, 2014 at 12:02 pm:
Gee, autocratic actions taken after a massive terrorist attack when facing an unknown enemy with future attacks likely imminent, and the subsequent actions in a time of war,
Or picking and choosing which of the laws you swore to uphold you will actually enforce, deciding to enact laws as you wish rather than as specified in the laws, and even blowing off laws to (accidentally?) reinvigorate, with repatriated leaders, the sworn enemies of the country you swore to defend who have repeatedly killed the American citizens you swore to protect, to avoid notifying Congress you wanted to do so to rescue a single individual whom even Congressmen could quickly discover was in no way worth the price thus would have nixed the deal, while citing “expediency”, which is code for “I can do things a lot faster and better without all these obsolete archaic Constitutional restrictions”.
Wow, I can really see the equivalence there.
Perhaps, one day, they’ll learn their lesson. There was a recent article by?/about? Gnome Chomsky (Yes, I know I spelled that wrong – it’s a hat tip to a character in Left4Dead 2) bemoaning the loss of liberties under Obama. On the one hand, the spend their lives espousing and ideology that will result in exactly that – dictatorship and a loss of liberties. On the other, they look about in alarm when what they’ve espoused actually comes to pass. Ya just gotta look at them in disgust and shake your head, wondering how such a willfully hypocritical creature could have been created.
Oh, and btw – the first link on this site to the “Global warming will prevent contact with aliens” was mine on the Mann/Green Lizards thread. Just so ya know.
“In college classes, climate change is taught as a textbook example of where democracy fails”
This implies that “climate change”, that is AGW, is real and must be stopped by all means.
Tyranny, then, is the way forward.
And people pay for this brainwash?
Gary says:
June 11, 2014 at 10:37 am
Pamela Gray says:”…Next thought: Fly or worm? Decisions, decisions.”
Fly. A #10 Adams or Deer Hair Caddis”
#10? What’r you fishing for, whales?
🙂
Hunter what is your solution ?
“Fascism is what happens when corporations control the government” Mussoini
Is it tyranny to ask polluters to pay for the damage they cause? Coal’s damage is estimated at $300-$500 billion per year. At least part of this should be charged to the polluters and rebated to households.
jfreed27:
At June 11, 2014 at 8:37 pm you say
Really? It has been “estimated” to be that much? How and by whom?
And where is this massive damage? Which “households” suffered it so need to be compensated?
When the “damage” cannot be seen are you really sure it is damage?
The use of coal provides “households” with food, fuel and transport. These are great benefits. At least part of these benefits should be rebated to those who provide the coal.
Richard
jfreed27 says:
June 11, 2014 at 8:37 pm
Total world economy = 11,490.451 billions.
World economy depending on coal energy = 8,000 billions
“damage” from coal = 300 billion (according to the prejudiced enviro source above)
Ratio of benefits of coal to “costs” of coal = 8,000 billions/300 billions = 26.6 to 1
The actual “damage” from coal is about 5 billions. Most of it preventable if you have moral leaders overseas.
Not bad. Now, let’s allow the developing world to PROTECT lives and ENRICH people with cheaper energy and really go save lives, clean up water, build roads and sewage systems and shelter and power plants and homes and hospitals and food storage facilities ….
But the enviro’s demand the right to kill people.
jfreed27 says:
June 11, 2014 at 8:37 pm
“Is it tyranny to ask polluters to pay for the damage they cause? Coal’s damage is estimated at $300-$500 billion per year. At least part of this should be charged to the polluters and rebated to households.”
And where would those “polluters” get that money from, genius? Think for a moment. I’ll help you. Prices would rise. Those $300-$500 billion would be paid by the “rebated” households. So you end up with exactly the same situation as before – well not exactly. As the government would run the redistribution scheme, it would at best be 50% efficient – because governments just can’t resist money when it comes their way. So you end up with a fatter government that doesn’t do anything more than it did before; would that make you feel happy? If yes, you work for a government already or you’re stupid.
Now, I fully support the right of statists to demand an even fatter lazier government; which you just did, but I disagree. Government employees should be fired and be forced to work.
@Dirk H
There are 2 truths there that basically render jfreed’s argument stupid. One is the word redistribution. That means it is not a revenue neutral scheme – its purpose is to transfer wealth from the producers to the non-producers.
The second is the efficiency. 50% is probably optimistic, but ANY program run by the government will not be revenue neutral for that single reason alone. Even the most efficient organization will require its vigorish to run the program.
DirkH: the Small Business Administration estimates costs of current carbon regulations to the U.S. economy as more than $1.75 trillion per year — about 12%-14% of GDP, and half of the $3.5 trillion Washington is currently spending.
Some people are really in favor of Lysenkoism and a fascist totalitarian government. I don’t know if IPCC founder Maurice Strong is really Adolph Eichmann, but he sure looks like photos of Eichmann in Argentina, and Bush Sr.’s father, Prescott, was a UBS director when UBS was prosecuted for money-laundering for Hitler. Obama is/was a Black Muslim, and they fought on the front with Hitler’s troops.
I just tried to post WUWT’s sea ice graphs (with links & ref.’s) on this Allvoices.com article, and it was deleted as spam:
NASA scientist says Arctic sea ice could disappear in this century; should we care?
North Pole : AK : USA | Jun 11, 2014 at 12:07 PM PDT BY Dava Castillo
Climate wouldn’t be in the news if the NWO globalists who control the media believed in truth..
Sometimes, a picture is worth a thousand words.
To save wearing out my fingers, here it is . . . . . .
http://cartoonmick.wordpress.com/editorial-political/#jp-carousel-205
Cheers
Mick
cassidy421 says:
June 12, 2014 at 8:04 pm
“Some people are really in favor of Lysenkoism and a fascist totalitarian government. I don’t know if IPCC founder Maurice Strong is really Adolph Eichmann, but he sure looks like photos of Eichmann in Argentina,”
I looked. Nah, Strong’s uglier.
” and Bush Sr.’s father, Prescott, was a UBS director when UBS was prosecuted for money-laundering for Hitler. ”
Somebody said, that wasn’t so much out of sympathy for the Nazis but part of the usual build up of an enemy so that more money can be earned in the war. Bush bashing is common in this regard; so I’d like to offer you a Henry Ford as a political counterbalance who financed Hitler’s campaign. What’s goof for Ford should be good for Bush, no? The usual oligarch games.
“Obama is/was a Black Muslim, and they fought on the front with Hitler’s troops.”
Nah, Hitler’s Muslim allies were Bosniaks, Muslims from Bosnia, fighting in the Handschar SS division, organized by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem who resided as Hitler’s guest in Berlin, paid 12 million Reichsmark a year. Hitler never got Arabs or Black muslims into his axis, because of the conflict between colonial power Italy and North Africa. He regretted having Italy as an ally because of this – he thought in hindsight that an alliance with Islam at large would have been more effective.
Reblogged this on The GOLDEN RULE and commented:
At least Tony Abbott has some commonsense about the validity of the “climate change” scam.
“Last month Rush Limbaugh remarked that the reason for “the re-establishment of climate change and global warming as a new primary impetus of the White House” is that “it offers the president opportunities to be dictatorial.”