Ben Santer: We Need Understanding, Not Physical Walls, to Address Climate Change

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.

5 1 vote
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

156 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Russ R.
January 13, 2019 7:39 pm

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/guide-children-arriving-border-laws-policies-and-responses

Prior to 2006, ICE commonly detained parents and children separately. …

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/why-are-families-being-separated-at-the-border-an-explainer/
Is this a new immigration enforcement policy?
Not completely. The George W. Bush administration implemented Operation Streamline in 2005, which also referred many people who violated these provisions for prosecution in federal courts, although the majority of prosecutions were for the felony charge of illegal re-entry and not for first-time offenders. The Obama administration continued and expanded the policy through 2014, but later shifted its enforcement priorities towards targeting specific criminal populations.

The Obama administration also used family separation when they prosecuted immigration offenses as a deterrent against illegal border crossings after 2014 as more children and families fled violence in Central American countries.

hunter
January 13, 2019 7:57 pm

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?

Russ R.
Reply to  hunter
January 13, 2019 8:20 pm

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”?

Reply to  Russ R.
January 14, 2019 11:13 am

just the important stuff….
🙂

Gary Ashe
January 13, 2019 8:17 pm

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.

Louis Hunt
Reply to  Gary Ashe
January 14, 2019 11:34 am

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.

Wiliam Haas
January 13, 2019 9:28 pm

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.

Tim
January 14, 2019 4:25 am

This is what a country that is serious about stopping migration does:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt–Israel_barrier

Reply to  Tim
January 14, 2019 11:16 am

… stopping (illegal) migration ….

John Endicott
January 14, 2019 12:12 pm

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.