Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Dr. Willie Soon – University of East Anglia alumni Ben “Beat the cr*p out of him” Santer offering President Trump lessons on fostering international cooperation, shared humanity, mutual understanding and the need to focus on climate action rather than building physical walls.
Ultima Thule, the Cold War and Trump’s Wall
As I learned during my youth in Germany, exploring frontiers beats hiding behind barriers
By Ben Santer on January 11, 2019
…
[snip – a minute of my life I will never get back]
…
Today, we are told, Americans need a wall on our southern border. We are told that we need the wall to keep us safe from rapists and terrorists; from those who are not like us, who speak differently, or do not look like we do.
Back in Cornwall School in 1966, I was “the other.” I was different in my nationality, in my speech and in my religion. For that younger me, safety and security did not come from building metaphorical walls between myself and my peers. Security came from listening, from learning, from seeking understanding of a world that was new to me.
Those lessons seem relevant today.
True security for our country does not come from building a wall on our southern border, or from asking Canada to pay for a wall on our northern border, or from withdrawing into our own little national cocoon. National security in a complex and rapidly changing world is best guaranteed by strong alliances, shared humanity and an accurate understanding of how and why political, economic and environmental changes are occurring. Keeping our country safe from harm requires awareness of the reality and seriousness of human effects on global climate. It requires a willingness to work with the rest of the world in finding innovative clean-energy solutions to the existential threat of human-caused climate change. No physical wall can fully protect us from that threat.
Read more: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/ultima-thule-the-cold-war-and-trumps-wall/
Ben Santer has an interesting background for a climate peacemaker.
Aside from his bizarre physical threat against Pat Michaels, Ben Santer wrote emails describing being audited by Steve McIntyre as the 21st century equivalent of public hanging (Climategate email 3356.txt), and complained about “scientific competitors” using FOIA requests to access datasets before he was finished with them (Climategate email 1231257056.txt).
Santer expressed concern about intentional or unintentional “misuse” of datasets by scientists who disagreed with his position (Climategate email 1229468467.txt). He wrote an apology to colleagues when McIntyre forced him to publish some of his data (Climategate email 1229468467.txt).
Ben Santer put his foot in it when he said in 2011, that periods of 17 years or more are required to identify the human footprint in the climate record. When 17 years came and went without any rise in temperature. Santer in 2015 tried to explain the pause as being due to lots of small volcanoes suppressing the anthropogenic signal.
But I guess anyone can grow and learn.
Quote from Santer.
Keeping our country safe from harm requires awareness of the reality and seriousness of human effects on global climate.
——-
That has to be the most ridiculous example yet, of someone so fixated with climate change it has removed their ability to think logically, or see reality.
True security would include telling people like Santer to sit down and shut up.
Re: Asking Canada to pay for a border wall, actually, using Donald Trump’s logic, we Canadians should be asking the Americans to pay for a border wall to stop the flow of pass-through migrants coming into our country from the US.
Canada and the US have a “Safe Third Country Agreement” to deal with this.
To be fair, we’ll need the wall to keep the liberal refugees out of Canada when Civil War 2 comes. We have more than enough of them already.
To be fair, half of Canadian liberals take refuge in the southern USA each winter, deliberately seeking a warmer climate change.
Did it occur to you, Trebla, that Trump would be more than happy to see the back of US LibTards?
About 2/3rds of America would.
Besides they are just friends Canadians haven’t met yet.
Did it occur to you, Trebla, that Trump would be more than happy to see the back of US LibTards?
Didn’t Canada recently sign on to the UN Migration Pact? If so, then there are many people who would migrate to Canada so they could slip across Canada’s southern border into the land of Oppression and Welfare.
Lol good point
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-justin-trudeau-canada-immigration-ban-muslim-countries-a7552186.html
Canada’s generous offer was accepted en masse, but no apparent rush to move North by US Citizens.
“True security for our country does not come from building a wall on our southern border”
Yes it does, a wall is part of true security, and they work.
Just ask Israel about it’s US taxpayers funded massive wall with gun mounts, which Ben Santer is no doubt aware of.
Just ask the wealthy elite who have walls around their mansions.
And no doubt Ben Santer has locks on his doors, because they work.
The guy is as fake as a 3 dollar bill.
A really simple example of how walls build security is to look at Santer’s home. I bet he is completely surrounded by walls, which he will call “fences”.
Ask the Pope if walls are immoral, if he says yes then ask him why the Vatican has one.
… requires that people grow up and learn to cope with the world as it presents itself. Demanding to be protected from everything is pathological.
commieBob
Pathological, or immature? Children come to expect their parents to protect them. Some never grow out of that mindset and demand that society or social services, such as police, fill the role that their parents formerly provided.
Good on both of you. Pathologically immature makes sense to me.
All 3 of you are right, this is the Daniel Pearl syndrome.
He’s a chief steward of Mother Gaia and a High Priest in the Church of Omnipotent Greenhouse In Carbon.
His religion supercedes critical thinking, only faith in Mann and digital prophecy form his version of reality.
Oh that’s what he meant about his religion being different.
Another quote from: Ben Santer on January 11, 2019
I betcha no amount of money could convince Ben Santer to take a 3-month sabbatical to go “camping” among those hordes of US-bound immigrants amassed on the Mexican side of the Border and spending his awake hours preaching his “Kumbaya” message of ….. “Security comes from listening, from learning, from seeking understanding”.
“YUP”, Ben Santer wouldn’t do it because he knows that his “preaching” wouldn’t convert any of the rapists, terrorists, health-care-seekers, public-parasites, criminals, smugglers, drug dealers, prostitutes, pimps, etc., etc., who are desperate to get across the Border where “the-living-is-easy” for non-US citizens.
Notice here Santer is using the phrase, “human effects on global climate.”
That is a much less arguable position than the “Climate Change” as defined by the IPCC. His description goes beyond the now unsupportable CO2 catastrophism that underlies carbon tax and trading schemes by those looking to cash in on “green” carbon credit trading and tax monies.
And as an aside, I wonder why it is we can’t grow our own Climate Rentseekers here in the US?
Except for Mann, most of the notable rentseekers are from our English speaking friends.
Hayhoe – Canada
Santer – England
Trenberth – Kiwi
Schmidt – England.
And I suspect Mann is an alien too — extraterrestrial that is.
Yup, he’s a slitheen.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=unORPOtavqM
In literal terms what he says is correct.
It’s just that “awareness of the reality and seriousness of human effects on global climate” would lead rationally and sensibly to doing nothing but getting in with our lives.
Yes, because the reality is the “seriousness of human effects on global climate” is nonexistent.
Is this the Ben Santer who rewrote the conclusions of an IPCC committee off his own bat when the others in his group had gone home?
Do we all need to join hands and sing Kumbaya now?
I’m only here for the chocolate and marshmallows. *
*you all can keep the graham crackers*
Settled scence that walls work. Jim Acosta just found out for himself in McAllister Texas.
Shut her down Pelosi until the wall funding is forth coming.
Santer’s 17 year attribution threshold analysis was published in 2011, with a pause then ~10 years old. He obviously believed temperature would eventually rise as modeled. When they didn’t, he waffled rather than accept the conclusion consequences of his own paper. The volcanoes excuse is bogus, as shown in essay Blowing Smoke in eponius ebook of same title.
Trump wants only $5 billion, that’s nowhere near enough. To build this wall he needs $100 billion at least.
Not true. Where the steel slat/bollard designs 20 foot to 30 foot high are currently being installed, the total cost per mile is about $3.2-3.5million. Trump is asking for $5.6 billion. That pays for about (5600/3.4) 1650 miles. He only wants about 1000 more. The surplus pays for land acquisition, monitoring remote cameras, and the like. Plus, he already has $1.6 plus $1.6 billion already appropriated and used per his tweets and statements for renovation, land acquisition, and new wall.
The $25 billion was more a left media talking point than anything remotely realistic.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/test-steel-prototype-border-wall-showed-it-could-be-sawed-n956856
The people working on the border “FOR YEARS” say that is what they want. Even the head of the border patrol under the Obama administration says this is required and effective!
Do you think nbcnews knows more about securing the border, than the people that work there do??? Might as well ask Jim Acosta for advice on what works best to secure an insecure border.
Walls will not stop visa overstays, the main source of illegal immigration.
Any wall can be breached. The question is: how long and how hard? A guy showing up with a diamond saw or a plasma torch is going to be rather conspicuous, and will take long enough that the Border Patrol will get there before he’s through.
David,
With Visa overstays, the US State Department has a record of the overstayer. We have a photo, DOB, name, country of origin, and fingerprints. Plus they’ve been checked against Interpol and US criminal records and warrant searches prior to Visa issue, especially from origin nationality/countries of concern.
Those are not the real security concern that an unknown, undocumented illegal immigrant presents as they cross into the US with no record of who they are.
Joel, with photos, DOBs, names, country of origin, fingerprints, checks against Interpol, checks for US criminal records and warrant searches, visa overstays account for more illegal immigrants than border crossings outside of ports of entry.
…
Walls won’t stop visa overstays.
Oh certainly, just stopping illegal border crossings is not the complete solution. Actual ID, enforcement of Simpson-Mazzoli on employment, and changes to birthright citizenship are needed too, but doing all those things at once is difficult, but doing steps is a more usual tactic.
Unless, of course, you are arguing for “comprehensive immigration reform”, meaning an amnesty now, and no enforcement later.
Joel, walls won’t stop a pregnant lady from visiting here just before her due date, and bestowing citizenship on her newborn, delivered on US soil.
Joel, one of the reasons that people who are illegal immigrants commit less crime than natural born citizens is because with photos, DOBs, names, country of origin, fingerprints, checks against Interpol, checks for US criminal records and warrant searches, they know one single arrest will get them deported.
Halla, if the enforcement of Simpson-Mazzoli on employment was to become common, a lot of farmer’s crops would rot in the field, roofs on people’s homes would not get installed, landscaping would go to hell, and nobody would change the sheets on beds in hotel/motels.
You mean, if employers actually had to negotiate wages in a fair market, prices would go up.
The Democratic Party used much the same argument to defend slavery.
David Dirkse, …….. GETTA CLUE ……… and cease with your partisan Democratic claptrap, …..
If government employees were doing their jobs (instead of partying in Puerto Rico, etc., etc., ….) ….. there wouldn’t be tens-of-thousands of foreigners who have over stayed their visa.
Federal Judges should be issuing “rulings” to force federal Immigration employees to do the job they are being paid to do ……. instead of aiding the Democrat Party in their asinine, idiotic attempt to impeach the POTUS.
Its long past time that those highly politically biased Federal Judges be charged with malfeasance and removed from their judicial positions.
David Dirkse – January 13, 2019 at 5:50 pm
The leftist liberal argument for “open borders” …… doesn’t get much more asinine, foolish and idiotic than what is stated above.
“DUH”, David Dirkse must have been told by his like-minded friend that …. ALL illegal immigrants that sneak across US Borders carry with them their personal resume including their photo, DOB, given name, country of origin, fingerprints, Interpol status, US criminality status and warrant status …… just in case they get arrested for their illegal action.
The ‘Wall’ is under construction….
https://youtu.be/H-f6KkLJF9c
More ‘Wall’ construction in progress…
https://youtu.be/xgP1wPCtwa4
Trump should propose installing a 1000 mile 30 foot high Solar Panel array (topped with razor wire) along the border. Sell the electricity to Mexico to pay back the investment. The dems should have no problem coming up with the extra billions. Win-win. 😀
@David – “Visa overstays” is a frequent excuse for not securing our borders. Anyone that applied for and received a visa, went through the lawful process to enter the country. If they were smuggling drugs, trafficking women and children, and committing violent crimes, we would be more concerned about them. The problem is not people that come here legally. The problem is people who come here illegally. We don’t know who they are, and what they plan on doing while they are here. Most people that come here on a Visa are students, or have family here. Both of those reasons are legitimate, and have a stabilizing influence on their behavior. If they are a problem, we have information on why they are here, and that makes them easier to find.
Russ, people that come here legally on a visa, then overstay that visa are now here illegally.
They entered the country legally. We have a record of who they are and what they intend to do. If they violate the law we already have a record of who they are and why they are here. Are you that dense that you don’t understand the distinction?
Cartel drug mules don’t get a Visa.
Felons running from charges in Mexico don’t get a Visa.
Violent gang members fleeing other violent gang members don’t get a Visa.
Traffickers and smugglers don’t get a Visa.
We can’t stop them all, but we can make it more difficult for them, and make it less profitable.
Russ R:
…
1) Most drug smuggling is done through ports of entry, via trucks, cars, boats and planes.
2) Ditto for human traffickers.
3) Violent gang members can easily get a visa, especially since the US State Department doesn’t track violent gang members in foreign countries.
4) “If they violate the law we already have a record of who they are” Really?……tell me, how does the FBI know who violated the law in Guatemala?
….
Russ, visa overstays will not be stopped by a wall.
The wall is not designed to stop visa overstays. When visa overstays are a problem, we will address that problem, if it needs addressing. We may just make it easier for people to renew their visa, if they are productive and law abiding.r
1) Most drug smuggling is not caught, so we don’t know where it is done. We know where we find more, and that is where we have walls and enforcement. If we knew where the stuff we didn’t stop was, we could stop more of it. If you remove one option, you have limited the drug smuggling options, which makes it easier to deter.
2) ditto…
3) It is easier to stop those that get a visa, than it is to stop those that don’t.
4) If they violated our laws, and were previously deported. Many crimes are committed by a small minority of repeat offenders. Why do you want to make it easier for them?
We can’t solve every problem. But that does not mean we should not try to improve the situation. We should have done this years ago, but we hoped it would get better. It has NOT.
You want to defend 4000 homicides? How many is too many? You have better ideas than the border patrol, or is your plan to do nothing? How many more mothers have to bury their children, or children grow up without a parent, before we decide to do something about it?
David Dirkse – January 13, 2019 at 6:40 pm
David Dirkse, ….. and just why in hell did you ask the above question, ….. given the FACT that you already told us the answer in your above posting of, ….. to wit:
Fer shame, fer shame, …. deviousness, disingenuous and dishonesty masquerading as feigned ignorance and cluelessness.
Fer shame, fer shame, …. deviousness, disingenuous and dishonesty masquerading as feigned ignorance and cluelessness.
in other words a typical leftist democrat.
Where a wall exists, there are no migrants. link
I would also note that, since I brought my cats to the neighborhood, no dragons have devoured maidens. If you want to keep your daughters safe, you must keep at least one cat.
On the other hand, keeping a cat could actually be quite good for your daughters’ health. link
Jim’s facile logic was met with the facile logic of the social media. The truth is always more complex.
McAllen, not McAllister.
I daresay some time in Big Mac would do him some good.
(Big Mac is a nickname for the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlister)
McAlister is in Oklahoma.😉
Keeping our country safe from harm requires awareness of the reality and seriousness of the global elite’s theft of our wealth.
Well said, but missed in practice while witch-hunting so called “skeptics” and “doubter”
Don’t forget to, as one of the original Progressives said, “but carry a big stick.”
Kirshn,
Good point, he never did not learn a thing about respect for others, honesty, ethics, or the need for a good scientist to be skeptical.
why did he need security?
were there roving bands of post-grads looking to abuse non-protestants with obvious accents?
what type of people actually do people do business with this guy???
Classic Confirmation Bias / Group Think coupled with Cognitive Dissonance.
Nothing more need be said.
what about World Peace?
Got it right here:
That about encapsulates it. When the climatemongers can’t sell the stinking fish they have to throw in something extra to get the pleb’s support. “But wait there’s more.”
First, you need a world piece. *rattle, click*
Ben obviously knows from nothing about the U.S. southern border. Let’s feed just a third of those 24 million illegals into East Anglia. making sure they have the correct proportion of murderers, rapists, drug dealers, etc. Ben the Boob. Big mouth, nothing behind it.
Santer should have been placed behind a wall for his actions regarding the IPCC SPM in 1996.
I noticed our prisons have walls around them to keep the antisocial within.
There’s a door in the wall though where those deemed safe pass in and out pretty regularly.. but the walls do a pretty good job preventing the uncontrolled flow of the antisocial element.
Maybe this bloke might like to contemplate living next to a wall-less prison before he opens his mouth and inserts another foot?
I’m guessing his house has walls, too.
A closed mouth gathers no foot. Good advice, that.
Modern prisons are built around the concept of the inverted fortress. A classic fortress has multiple lines of obstruction for keeping assailants out. An inverted fortress has multiple lines of obstruction to keep prisoners in. From the individual cells to the walls to the fences to the regular guard patrols and so on. A prisoner attempting escape may make it through some of those lines but is highly unlikely to make it through them all.
In a similar vein, when we talk about The Wall, we don’t mean just the physical wall, but also the patrols, surveillance equipment, alarms, and other lines of obstruction that go with it. Trump’s libby-leftie detractors all seem to assume just a wall will be built.
We don’t need no stinkin’ lectures from Santer.
I see he didn’t ask Mexico to stop building a wall on their Southern Border?
So obviously this rant of his was political theater, nothing else…
He is just repeating the Left’s doublespeak. No facts, no common ground as to what are the true issues. Just repeat the same thoughtless ideology/propaganda.
The issue is legal immigration vs a dangerous rush for the border which is dangerous for all concerned. Same problem in Europe. How many Africans drown trying to get to Europe. There are 1.2 billion Africans.
Legal immigration is controlled. There are hundreds of millions of people who would ‘immigrate’ to the US if the border truly was open. Open borders is chaos that leads to shanty towns around major cities.
Illegal immigration does not solve the problems in the countries that people are leaving.
Hundreds of billions of dollars is spent every year on CAGW. The money spent on CAGW has accomplished nothing.
The observations support the assertion that there is no CAGW.
“Those lessons seem relevant today.” It may seem that way, but it only seems that way.
Well, we have Somalia refugees flooding Maine and Massachusetts. We have Latin American, South American and Mexican refugees flooding the north country (many from Canada).
Just think of how much more heat energy will be required to keep them warm vs. not so much from where they came from. The wall will help.
Just saying…
The wall is about drugs, criminals being booted from their home countries, terrorist and more votes for democrats who just love waging war in other countries.
John, you don’t understand.
Ben just pointed out that the folks who make up the caravans and are causing chaos at the border points only want to gain entry in order to help us
I am going to have to listen to Trump’s speech again ’cause I missed the part where he said he wants a wall in order to protect us from climate change.
“As I learned during my youth in Germany, exploring frontiers beats hiding behind barriers…”
I do not know what Santer did in Germany but it appears not to have included any study of history. But as I recall, the “barrier” he is likely referring to was known as the Berlin Wall. It was built by the communist East Germans to keep East Germans in, not other people out. So who was hiding?
And a wall along the Canadian border? That must be the strawiest of straw men every proposed. Canada is a great country. Canadians have good jobs and homes and a good standard of living except for the poor who are always with everybody. Besides, they own a bunch of Florida. So why a wall? Who is proposing such a wall? Only Santer that I can see.
And this is the same guy who recently fudged the RSS satellite temperature graph to increase “warming” by roughly half a degree more since 2000 than it otherwise would. Using the same satellite data as Christy and Spencer at UAH which shows no such increase.
Furthermore this is the same “settled science” guy who somehow does not agreee with the “settled facts” of our southern border as expressed by the experts – that is the Border Patrol.
Enough venting. Santer is worth no more.
DHR,
interesting.
I seem to recall a certain German Quisling called Walter Ulbrich, telling the imprisoned Easter Berliners that his wall was to prevent the poor starving and repressed West Berliners invading their ‘utopia’ in the East.
So nothing new in Mr Santers version of the great lie.
It just goes to prove that communism never dies. It has just changed colour from red to green.
I think it was the great James Delingpole who coined the term ‘Watermelons’ to describe them.
I thought Quisling was Norwegian.
I think that patrick is using Quisling as an descriptive noun , just as I might say ” on holiday last summer a German Casanova seduced my sister ” , even though Casanova was Italian.
Indeed. A quisling (noun) is “a traitor who collaborates with an enemy force occupying their country.” named after Vidkun Abraham Lauritz Jonssøn Quisling who was Norwegian. Calling someone a quisling isn’t claiming they are Norwegian.
similarly the term “Cassanova” (as mikewaite points out) is used to describe a charming, smooth-talking womanizer, was named after the Italian adventurer Giacomo Girolamo Casanova. Referring to someone as a cassanova isn’t a claim to them being Italian.
Many words and phrases can be traced back to historical figures: Benedict Arnold (a traitor, named after the traitor Benedict Arnold), Boycott (organized refusal to do business with a company, named after Charles Boycott), Pompadour (hairstyle named after the Madame de Pompadour, mistress of Louis XV), Wellingtons (the rubber boots, named after the 1st Duke of Wellington), Maverick (an unorthodox or independent-minded person, named after Samuel Maverick)
And a wall along the Canadian border? That must be the strawiest of straw men every proposed.
Indeed, I somehow missed the caravans of illegals trying to cross the US/Canada border (in either direction). Likely because both countries are stable first world countries who citizens don’t have an overwhelming need to flee.
“from those who are not like us, who speak differently, or do not look like we do”
What is it about liberals and their desperate need to believe the worst about anyone who disagrees with them?
No one is saying that. Perhaps Mr. Santer is projecting his racism?
Everyone else is worried about the drain on welfare, jobs for low paid workers (i.e. entry work that school leavers would normally do), vote shifting, slum communities, and criminal gang entry into the area, and illegal entry into the country as opposed to legal entry.
But Santer is worried about how they look and speak. It’s either projection, or he doesn’t know why people don’t want uncontrolled immigration.
Complaining about Climate is just ridiculous.
“What is it about liberals and their desperate need to believe the worst about anyone who disagrees with them?”
They call this ‘tolerance’ and ‘inclusion’. Interestingly enough, the intolerance of opposing points of view transcends everything else that the left claims to be tolerant of. I must be hard to recognize hypocrisy when you’re a hypocrite.
Liberals are not like us, speak differently and don’t look like we do.
It’s not about ‘refugees’, it’s about THEM.
The problem is that sophistry is ideal for this issue, and understanding the real issue is difficult. Simple misleading science is more difficult to communicate the real science. Climate Change is based on energy fluxes. It is far easier to describe CO2 increases Temperature increases then to try to explain the real science behind the issue. Here is an example of how to simplify the message using an example that almost anyone would understand, a giant bucket at a water park.
An Einstein Thought Experiment on Climate Change
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2019/01/12/an-einstein-thought-experiment-on-climate-change/
Co2islife
Reading through your link reminds the reader to beware of carefully worded non-sense. Mostly you can look out your window to the world and decide for your self if there’s a catastrophic climate disaster stalking the land.
Reducing reality to climate change.
Seeing the world through the lens of climate change.
Rejecting all other views.
How long before, “two plus two is 4, because climate change”?
Its creeping into math word problems at the elementary level.
Read Orwell’s 1984 and you will find how 2+2 can equal 5 or 3 or even 4. Poor George went to Spain to fight for the Republican Cause. It went well until his fellow travelers had a falling out. The Republican Cause was being run by the Soviet secret police and the organization George was fighting with was denounced as Trotskyite saboteurs. They were hunted down for extermination. George was able to flee for his life. The episode seems to have given him a jaundiced view of life.
2 + 2 can equal 5.
2.4 + 2.4 = 4.8
Now round those numbers to integers, and you get
2 + 2 = 5
Maybe I should have been a Climate Scientologist?
However, that’s not 2 + 2 equaling 5, that’s a rounding error (quantization error) as 2.4 is not really 2 and 4.8 is not really 5 so trying to round in that way is not going to give you the correct result.
Every time they open their mouth a non sequitur pops out.
Humans are destroying the planet, therefore we should not build a wall.
Mr. Santer,
I don’t think you have enough experience with what climate is made of, weather.
On how quickly and unpredictably it can change. Nor how swiftly it can kill.
You have a thing or three against warmth. My opinion is that you’ll definitively change your mind after you experience what winter operations really look and feel like for be it a few days.
Your credo to control climate relies implicitly on controlling weather. Good luck with that Mr. Santer. Only those who never faced the powers of weather can eventually listen to your claims.
Which is why your rhetoric calls for “deniers”, “skeptics” and other very scientific claims.
Face it Mr. Santer, going that low is the ultimate evidence that your business is in a flat-spin.
How many mathematicians rely on ONG’s and government decisions to substantiate their claims?
There was a time when “concerned” scientists attempted to support the politics of a certain “reich” and vice-versa. Which is why we are more than happy to witness your ideological struggles as you grasp for funds by any means.
It’s over Mr. Santer.
More absurdities from the worlds of philosophy and egotism.
Typical, choose a topic the writer, Santer, has zero real world knowledge but lots of opinions, and introduce a false strawman so the writer can misdirect readers.
Trump’s Administration has not made any of these explicit claims:
* “We are told that we need the wall to keep us safe from rapists and terrorists”,
* “from those who are not like us”,
* “who speak differently”,
* “or do not look like we do”.
Every one of Santer’s imagined claims are his claims, not the Trump’s Administration.
Trump’s Administration seeks to stem and control the invasions and smuggling across our Southern Border.
That those invading, are willing to break immigration, treade, human rights law is itself very worrying.
Within those invading crowds are, identified, rapists, murderers, human rights offenders, drug smugglers, etc. is not a fantasy; it is proven fact.
Pure egotism and vastly inflated self importance.
“Security came from listening, from learning, from seeking understanding of a world that was new to me.”
Apparently Santer confuses or conflates emotional security with physical security. Another twist allowing Santer to use his limited experience to address Santer’s own false strawmen, not reality.
Within two years, Trump’s Administration has corrected and is still correcting bad treaties, horrendous trade negotiations, international relations disasters, wars, violent threats, etc. etc.
* Not talked about.
* Not acquiesced to weaker nations or trade associations.
* Not ignored, or as a preceding President achieved so often, not inflamed through ignorance or overt weakness.
Nope! Santer assumes he knows what is best for topics where Santer has zero experience, but lots of opinion.
All based on Santer’s false strawman arguments. e.g. Santer’s framing his strawman as “True security”, a security that appears to be based on Santer’s emotional vision of security.
Nothing to do with the very real problem at America’s Southern Border that causes economic chaos, violence, illegal immigrants stealing false identification. Santer also ignores the human rights violations illegal immigrants endure while trying to stay in this country.
Maybe Trump’s Administration will simply defund those agencies, departments and grants that result in anti-Government screeds while failing to produce real science.
One should try not to fight a war on too many fronts. Santer wants to tie global warming to illegal immigration (and many other unrelated causes). By doing so, he dilutes his message and gives his detractors new avenues for attack.
We need to build physical walls to avoid building legal boundaries. For the construction of legal boundaries, society is not prepared for the moment, so we have to build physical boundaries prematurely. We are forced to build borders in the same way as the fight against climate change, it is not a matter of free choice.
So they want us all to live a third-world existence, except those who actually have a third-world existence. Those unfortunates should move to a first-world country where they will undoubtedly start putting out more CO2.
Because that will save the planet from GlobalCoolingWarmingChange.
When Ben takes the locks off of his doors and allows migrants to move in as they please I might listen to him. Meanwhile back at the Ranchero… https://www.macleans.ca/politics/worldpolitics/how-mexico-is-locking-down-its-other-border-wall/
‘Security came from listening, from learning, from seeking understanding of a world that was new to me.
Those lessons seem relevant today.’
He embraced assimilation. He recognized the need to become acculturated to his new environment. Which absolutely is not happening in today’s invasion. The Left has zero interest in the assimilation of today’s immigrants, which is why they back illegal immigration rather than legal immigration, with its path to assimilation and citizenship.
The Wall is to protect and to preserve the nation. Goals the Left are against.
“Back in Cornwall School in 1966, I was “the other.” I was different in my nationality, in my speech and in my religion.” I could not find anything about Mr. Santer’s nationality, speech, or religion in the excerpt, or in the Wikipedia. He sure seems to be the other.
Santer is American and lived and worked in GB, CRU and 1987 to 1992 in Germany at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology
And I bet he never entered either GB or Germany illegally.
And I bet, you are right 😀
“exploring frontiers beats hiding behind barriers”
The hypocrisy is breathtaking.
The bigotry or sanctimonious hypocrisy, full of faith, ethics, diversity, political congruence, and wicked solutions, has been progressive or monotonic for nearly a century.
Santer seems to think it is about diversity or color judgment (e.g. racism). However, the wall is not Pro-Choice or selective and opportunistic. It does not excludes Americans of various diversity (e.g. color) classes, nor does it deny legal immigration to various diversity classes from around the world. The goal is emigration reform to mitigate collateral damage forced by catastrophic anthropogenic immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises) at both ends of the bridge and throughout. Allow the Mediterranean to finish boarding the remains of children separated from their parents in the last social justice adventure. Lift the veil of privacy and expose the millions of human lives planned annually for social progress and clinical cannibalism rationalized in liberally oriented cultures with foreign and domestic-induced faith and ethics. Also, don’t conflate logical domains or poison reality with politically congruent emotional appeals. #HateLovesAbortion
After the wall is built, let’s dig a deep hole and throw Santer in it, followed by Mann et Al.
Why is “a willingness to work with the rest of the world” on climate change synonymous with letting thousands of illegal immigrants flood your southern border? This is a wild conflation. The man is utterly deluded.
Immigration reform can be forced by organic climate change. However, millions of refugees annually are the result of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change forced by social justice adventures (e.g. elective regime changes, wars without security) and social dysfunction (e.g. minority regimes, redistributive and retributive change, diversity or color judgments).
[??? .mod]
“Why is “a willingness to work with the rest of the world” on climate change synonymous with letting thousands of illegal immigrants flood your southern border? ”
Because ‘climate change’ is just another way to push Globalism. And always has been.
Canada to pay for a wall on our northern border,
=============
Canada already has a wall. It forces 90% of the Canadian population to live within 150 miles of the US border. The rest of the country is pretty much empty.
And Canadians already pay billion$ every year for their wall. Every time the they heat their homes. Canadians call the wall winter.
National security in a complex and rapidly changing world is best guaranteed
=======
History says otherwise. Both western and eastern teachings are the same on this subject:
If you want peace, prepare for war.
Would an adjustable sea wall across the Bering Strait allow us to adjust Earth’s thermostat?
Eric
You said, “But I guess anyone can grow and learn.”
It has been my experience that most people actually do not grow up. They simply grow old and wrinkled, retaining the personality and immaturity they had in their youth. Santer is an example of that.
Santer’s article is a political opinion essay written by a political activist that has a socialist global government perspective. It’s instructive to see that it is in Scientific America–an ostensibly “science” magazine happy to publish a political commentary.
The essay demonstrates the overt politicization of science, and specifically climate science. And it demonstrates that any “science” published by a political activist such as Santer is likely contaminated with the overt political biases presented clearly in the essay. Anyone that can publish an essay that is so full of poor logic and faulty reasoning isn’t so much a scientist as he is a political activist.
One can not be both a scientist and a activist. The former requires you to be impartial and neutral following where the data leads, the later involves choosing a position and advocating for it by ignoring or disparaging any data that is contrary to that position. The two activities are mutually exclusive any scientist that becomes an activist ceases to be a scientist.
Agreed. The problem is we now have far too many “activists” and far too few “scientists.”
Oh, and the other problem is that the “activists” wear the costume of, and disguise themselves as, “scientists,” and too many can’t see the Trojan Horse they represent.
Well I guess he comes by it naturally.
Mr Santer shows his competence as a statesman to be on par with his abilities as a Climate Scientist.
The man should have shut up and sat down after the CRU emails made him infamous.
However keep up the good work Mr Santer,alienating and offending one citizen at a time..works real well to “persuade” the public of your authority.
Authority being the only evidence I recall Mr Santer ever voluntarily offering.
OMG! This is Ben Santer’s attempt at intellectual intercourse! I’m embarrassed for him. What a disconnected strewing of mental litter. He even got in the victimhood of being a middleclass шнутеьоу in a Cornwall school with an accent! His weaving immigration issues in with climate disaster is могоиic.
Steve McIntyre, who had dealings with many of the main climate actors remarked:
“…In my opinion, most climate scientists on the Team would have been high school teachers in an earlier generation – if they were lucky. Many/most of them have degrees from minor universities. It’s much easier to picture people like Briffa or Jones as high school teachers than as Oxford dons of a generation ago. Or as minor officials in a municipal government……(regarding critics like himself Steve added)
…Allusions to famous past amateurs over-inflates the rather small accomplishments of present critics, including myself. A better perspective is the complete mediocrity of the Team makes their work vulnerable to examination by the merely competent.”
Santer’s sophomoric offering reinforces Steve’s observation.
A great quote, thanks.
https://climateaudit.org/2013/07/26/guy-callendar-vs-the-gcms/#comment-429654
His lack of common sense is remarkable. The Hockey Team recipe for energy transition will cause social disruption of energy production, and increase the costs of energy to consumers. That is unavoidable if we follow their recommendations.
Many jobs that employ low-skilled, and unskilled labor, have energy requirements to produce the product or service that will eventually make that position profitable. It is obvious that they don’t provide value through R&D, Management, Marketing, Legal, Medical services, or any of the other skilled positions that are available.
He is advocating importing labor, that will not find work here, because those jobs are going to countries where the energy supplies are not being sabotaged by Gang-Green policies.
Many of the positions that could be filled by unskilled labor are now being done in Mexico! That is why the current crop of illegal immigrants are not coming to America looking for work. We already have 20 – 30 million illegal immigrants who do not have legal status to work here. They have found ways to survive, but there is not an unlimited number of positions for people that are undocumented. And much of what we buy that is produced by unskilled labor and low cost energy is produced in other countries.
The economic transitions that are being driven by the policies Ben and his “fellow travelers” advocate, are making it more difficult for unskilled labor to find work in First World countries. And if they can’t find work, they will not find a better life for themselves or their families. They will be another pawn that can be scarified as needed for political gain by unscrupulous politicians.
Another recipe for social and economic chaos by Gang-Green. Why am I not surprised?
Based on popular discontent over Trump’s proposed wall, all American property owners should immediately tear down all fences enclosing their back yards, all fences surrounding their business yards, all fences around home vegetable gardens, and all sound-barrier walls along highways, … in the spirit of openness and receptivity, … in the spirit of anti-racist, anti-xenophobe, anti-everything that might categorize, differentiate, mark, or otherwise distinguish one thing from another.
Categorization, at its very core, is racist and excluding. Let us deny walls of every living cell in the human body too. Let us aspire to build our lived-in structures without walls too — just imagine that they are there, and trust in the good will of all humankind to understand that each person is equal to every other person, BUT we are still individuals, which is totally contradictory, but, hey, to say otherwise would impose a boundary of expectation on the use of language, which would be ANOTHER wall, and we cannot have that.
What have the billions upon billions of dollars spent on climate change bought us? ANSWER: Nothing that I have been able to locate any quantifying information on.
So, it’s okay to spend countless billions to get nothing in return, but it’s not okay to spend billions to get something real.
Spending should have no boundaries, right? … nothing physical to show for it, right? … just lots of good feelings for doing something to entertain fantasy narratives?
Did it occur to you, Trebla, that Trump would be more than happy to see the back of US LibTards?
Ben Santer’s alterations to the text of the IPCC second report in 1995 assures that his name will be more than a footnote when the definitive history of the Great Catastrophic Global Warming racket is finally written.
Ben Santer said: “Today, we are told, Americans need a wall on our southern border. We are told that we need the wall to keep us safe from rapists and terrorists; from those who are not like us, who speak differently, or do not look like we do.”
Ben is conflating two different things, just like he conflates climate change with human-caused climate change. In this case he is correct, sensible Americans want to be kept safe from rapists and terrorists, but he is incorrect about the reason being that illegal aliens are not like us and speak differently and don’t look like us. It’s not a dislike of “others” it’s a dislike of rapists and terrrorists and gangs, and criminal enterprises, and child/women molesters and murderers of any race, color or creed. Ben wants to make out like protecting our border is based on racism. Ben is a faithful lefty spouting (and possibly believing) the party line, but he is not close to the truth.
Ben Santer said: “True security for our country does not come from building a wall on our southern border, or from asking Canada to pay for a wall on our northern border, or from withdrawing into our own little national cocoon.”
Ben thinks protecting our borders from criminals crossing means we want to run and hide our heads in the sand. I bet Ben has a lock on the door of his house. Does that mean Ben is withdrawing from the world and rejecting everything outside the door? It’s a silly proposition.
The US has a right to determine who comes and goes across our borders and our leaders have the obligation to regulate that traffic for the maximum safety of American citizens.
I hear the polls are starting to go against the Democrats on the border wall issue.
Nancy should do a deal or be prepared to get nothing for herself and her party for the next two years, and President Trump will make the border issue and the Democrats inability/unwillingness to protect the nation, the number one issue in the 2020 election. Democrats may not hold the House after that.
The Democrats are not going to prevent the wall from being built. The Democrats might as well get on board and save themselves a lot of wasted effort. But they are “reality challenged” so there’s no telling what they will do.
Anyone can grow and learn except Ben Santer and his ilk who are true believers.
Borders and national identities are hindrances to the sort of world governance that is the goal of the likes of Santer, Edenhofer, and Figueres.
Of course, this pipe-dream ‘Government of World Unity to Save The Planet’ would be led by such luminaries as themselves.
It is not that they are megalomaniacs or anything like that, they just fervently believe that the world ought to be run by a consensus of scientists (such as themselves) and enlightened technocrats.
“We are told that we need the wall to keep us safe from rapists and terrorists; from those who are not like us, who speak differently, or do not look like we do”
No sir. You are told that the usa has immigration laws and that these laws must be enforced. That the USA welcomes legal immigration is seen in the large number of asians who “don’t look like you do” leaving us here in asia and moving to america legally to pursue their dream. Entering america legally isn’t really that hard if you go to the embassy first instead of just walking to the border and trying to force your way in.
The definition of a “Polotician” is One who lies. One who deceives. One who scams. One who twist facts. I could go on.
As soon as I read the words. “Today we are told”, I’m like, Oh god, here we go. The rest of what is going to come out of this guys mouth will be lies, deception and twisted logic.
When President Trump addressed the nation to explain why he wants a wall, he said there was a “growing humanitarian and security crisis” at the border. In his rebuttal, Schumer countered with: “This president just used the backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis…”
But Trump is not the first President to refer to the situation on the border as a “crisis.” In 2014, President Obama also addressed the nation and warned about an “actual humanitarian crisis on the border.” I can find no evidence that Schumer called Obama a liar or disputed his description of the crisis on the border. Either Pres. Obama was lying then, or Pres. Trump is telling the truth now. What is clear is that Schumer, Pelosi, and Santer judge “truth” not by the facts, but by what political party the information comes from.
Louis, both Trump”s and Obama’s address was mere talk. Pay attention to the actions. Obama didn’t separate children from their parents. Trump did. Actions speak louder than words.
“Are you really that naive or are you just practicing to be a liberal politician ? …D’OH !
Neither President separated children from their parents. The Border Patrol did this under both presidents and has been doing it since the “William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008”. But it became common practice under the Obama Administration, when it became obvious that many of the adults seeking asylum where not the child’s legal guardian.
https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/human-trafficking
The document from the Obama Justice Dept. that “speaks louder than words”.
https://www.ovc.gov/pubs/FederalHumanTraffickingStrategicPlan.pdf
“Neither President separated children from their parents.”
…
FALSE
…
Obama’s policy was catch and release, insuring children and parents remained together.
…
Trump’s policy was zero tolerance, incarcerating whole families. Problem was that a consent decree did not allow them to hold children in detention for long periods. They separated them then deported the parents. In fact there are hundreds of children still separated and are currently wards of the US government.
The photo that circulated on social media that showed children in cages at the border was taken during the Obama Administration. It occurred when we were were flooded with unaccompanied minors from Central America. There were no parents to release them to, so they had to find make-shift shelters for them to stay in, thus the “cages.” Relatives or volunteers could claim the children if they were willing to provide for them. But many children ended up being released to sex traffickers claiming to work for non-profit organizations. No one cared about these abuses when it was Obama doing it, and the news media were silent about it. It only became an issue after Trump became President. We all know why.
As usual, David substitutes ideology for reality.
In truth, Obama separated more children from their parents than Trump did. The difference is the media didn’t put it on the front page.
Multiple commenters have pointed out in detail why the wall needs to be built and you have not been reading their posts, or at least understanding the basic logic behind it. I’m therefore unsure why you are still commenting on the topic.
You appear to be stuck on the narrative. Maybe try letting the facts sink in before commenting further.
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/guide-children-arriving-border-laws-policies-and-responses
So Santer is not only an expert at “modifying” data to meet the conclusion, he is also an expert in national security and immigration policy.
Is there anything a climate scientists doesn’t know the answer to?
1) Where is the missing heat?
2) Why is the “hot spot”, not hot?
3) Why can’t we “fool all the people, all the time”?
just the important stuff….
🙂
The wall should be ”green”
Long stretches of concrete with section of rigid steel fencing.
See you can put solar panels on the concrete parts.
And electrify the steel fence parts with the juice.
Green and mean.
Instead of calling it a wall, they should simply call it a large solar power plant along the border designed to produce green energy and cut emissions. How could Democrats vote against that? Perhaps it should also be named the Ted Kennedy Memorial Wall, as it would finally fulfill Ted’s promise to secure the border in exchange for the amnesty deal he agreed to in the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli Bill:
“This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.” — Ted Kennedy, 1986
Would some Democrats vote to fund the wall if it was covered in solar panels, named after Ted Kennedy, and built to make him an honest man by finally fulfilling his promise? No, they wouldn’t. Today’s Democratic politicians have moved left of even Ted Kennedy and still don’t care one iota about fulfilling campaign promises or keeping agreements with Republicans.
Regarding climate, the understanding the we need is that the climate change that we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. The AGW conjecture is based on only partial science and in terms of science is full of holes. For example, the AGW conjecture depends upon a radiant greenhouse effect caused by trace gases in the Earth’s atmosphere with LWIR absorption bands. No such of a radiant greenhouse effect has been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere, or anywhere else in the solar system for that matter. The radiant greenhouse effect is science fiction so hence the AGW conjecture is science fiction as well. This is all a matter of science. We need to not waste time and money trying to solve problems that we just cannot solve, like climate change. Think of the starving poor on this planet that we could be feeding with all the money that is being wasted on climate change. Even if we could somehow stop the Earth’s climate from changing, extreme weather events and sea level rise would continue because they are part of the current climate so there is nothing to be gained. Our current inter glacial period will end and a new ice age will develop and mankind does not have the power to change it but most likely it will take thousands to tens of thousands of years to develop.
This is what a country that is serious about stopping migration does:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt–Israel_barrier
… stopping (illegal) migration ….
True security for our country does not come from building a wall on our southern border, or from asking Canada to pay for a wall on our northern border, or from withdrawing into our own little national cocoon
Mr. Santer, do you lock your door at night? Do you let anyone who wants to enter your house at any time they want to without your permission or knowledge? Or do you control entry in to your house, only letting those whom you wish to enter and keeping those whom you don’t out? When you take the locks off your doors and leave them wide open so anyone who wants to can cross your threshold and enter your home whenever they want, then I’ll consider your advice for doing the same on our southern border. But not before then.
Links to those Climategate emails…
● https://sealevel.info/FOIA/3356.txt
● https://sealevel.info/FOIA/1229468467.txt
● https://sealevel.info/FOIA/1231257056.txt