Living-in-the-moment mentality and climate crisis concerns

Reposted from CFACT

By Dr Charles Battig |November 20th, 2019|Climate|4 Comments

One seemingly irresistible charm of modern technology is that it makes so many things instantly available. Why irresistible? Because it resonates with the inner infant child who has never fully matured, yearns to “have it now,” and throws a temper tantrum if denied the latest want. Delayed gratification is so irritating. Growling Greta provided a prime example of this on the U.N. world stage in New York City recently. Closely allied is the eye-rolling accompanied by the ultimate demand to “do something” and “do it now, time is running out” on exhibit at the various orchestrated school strike demonstrations and political performances.

With an all-knowing and constant digital companion, “do it now” is just a command away. One need not bother to pick up a book or newspaper and actually read, research, and analyze. Crying out your request is so much easier and less mentally demanding. Click, click and dinner arrives at your doorstep. Over time, this ersatz parent entity becomes one’s constant companion and guardian. From an earlier and more innocent literary age, R. L. Stevenson’s “My Shadow” reflects a poetic analogy to this constant digital companion. A living-in-the-moment mentality of near instant gratification breeds a sense of now, diminishes the sense of past and future, and engenders a sense of an unchanging now as the norm by which our lives are defined. Botox treatments, promises of eternal youth, and deferred signs of aging are current manifestations of a desire to live in an unchanging present. Unwanted change has been targeted for remediation. Perhaps this obsession with an unchanging now is responsible for the current hysteria over climate change, because change is bad, and climate change is very bad.

The original, circa 2007, concern of Al Gore inspired environmental activists was the fear of the onset of run-away global warming linked to man-made carbon dioxide. Although it was, and remains, an unproved hypothesis, it had the allure of simplicity, some theoretical scientific underpinnings, and a causative target amenable to political regulation and commercial exploitation. For those worshiping at the climate crisis temple of Gaia, man-made carbon dioxide fulfills the primal need for someone or something to take the role of the outcast. Carbon dioxide is the chosen scapegoat. As a transference mechanism for relieving oneself of ill-defined feelings of guilt, minimizing the size of one’s carbon footprint ranks close to sorting trash and recycling. A nagging emptiness in one’s sense of meaning in life can be filled by filling the green trash container. Thus, repressed feelings of ill-defined guilt and social anxiety in a large segment of the general public have found relief in demonizing a trace atmospheric gas. Ignored is the fact that this gas is essential both to human and plant existence, as they are eternally intertwined in the dance of life sustained by the carbon dioxide /oxygen photosynthesis cycle.

People are used to having a thermostat in their homes to set a comfortable and unchanging temperature. Why not a imagine a global equivalent of a thermostat reflecting atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, and maintaining that perfect, unchanging climate? The fact that the earth’s climate has always been changing by some measure, and over some time scale since day one, is disregarded. Recasting the natural phenomenon of climate change into something unnatural requiring a solution has been a success story for the eco-activist propagandists. Current thinking is limited to the present, and thus fails in the ability to conceptualize time spans encompassing hundreds, thousands of years or, more. Relevant geological time outstrips the limited timespans of contemporary comprehension. Embracing the carbon dioxide/climate thermostat concept excludes the need to look for further regulators of the climate. Changes in the orbit of the earth, changes in solar energy, and changes in planetary mechanics are needlessly more difficult to factor in than carbon dioxide levels. Considering changes in global cloud cover and atmospheric water vapor as drivers of climate just complicate the more emotionally accessible carbon dioxide thermostat in the sky reflecting mankind’s use of fossil fuel.

Claims of global warming, have morphed into climate weirding, on the way to climate change, and recently to carbon pollution. Any deviation from an un-specified, but idealized climate norm, is labeled as a “climate crisis,” and is automatically linked in the public’s mind to a dangerous carbon dioxide level, itself ill-defined, emanating from fossil fuel usage. Such climate crisis claims rest heavily on faulty computer models unable to accurately account for cloud cover and water vapor mechanics. The Encyclopaedia Britannica entry for Greenhouse Gas written by the much maligned M. Mann states that water vapor is the most potent greenhouse gas. Yet it is carbon dioxide that garners all the political attention.

Living-in-the-moment mentality cannot distinguish between weather and climate. If the present is prominent, then the past is vague, and the concept of cycles in nature is foreign. Panicked claims of a climate crisis do not easily succumb to clear scientific facts. Presenting such contrary facts has proved terminal to many academic and professional careers in validation of Voltaire’s admonition: “It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.” Emotion rules the herd, and seems hard-wired into the reptilian brain of man.

What to do? Just ask your digital assistant, now.

59 thoughts on “Living-in-the-moment mentality and climate crisis concerns

  1. “What to do? Just ask your digital assistant, now.”

    “Hey Siri, what should I do?”

    Siri: “Ask your Magic 8 Ball”.


    • Thanks for the cartoon – made me spew my beer.

      I don’t live in the US but as far as I can tell the only policy the Democrats have is to get rid of DJT or oppose anything he does or says.

      Not sure they are going to be able to sell that in 2020 after doing nothing for 4 years.

      • Oh, the tyrannical tantruming democrat Congress did do stuff over the last four years.
        • They partied in Puerto Rico
        • They passed an immense spending bill filled with pork for democrats.
        • They spent godawful amounts of money persecuting an excellent President.
        • They aided and abetted corrupt politicians, corrupt government employees and corrupt government agencies and departments.
        • They scorched the Earth and all allies of President Trump.
        etc. etc.

        Which is why even the leftist polls show President Trump with a 48% approval rating.

        Now, the democrats only have massive voter fraud left in their 2020 election plans.

  2. There are a number of cogent behavioral arguments that indicate that “your phone owns you!”

    In a related matter, go into any public space, just stand there, and see how many times someone using a smartphone walks right into you. The trick to getting away with it is to spot your assailant, then turn at a right angle, and wait for the hit. Many of them just mumble something and walk away, but there are others who seem genuinely offended by the fact that you aren’t looking out for them in their moment of careless self-indulgence.

    • Uh well make sure you don’t do it to someone big enough to beat you in a fair fight. Better advice is to stop doing that – if that’s what you are really doing.

      • actually I don’t do it, but it would be easy to do, in the last week alone I’ve avoided 4 people that would have just walked right into me.

        as far as the fights go, someone who is so self-indulgent as to walk into a person is probably going to last about 3 seconds in a real fight, all the really tough people I know have manners

    • Yup. I use my phone like a land line. I haven’t paid for text or talk in 5 years, I just use Wi-Fi. I bought my smartphone second. Don’t even have a sim. Only take if I will need to use it out of the house. There’s plenty of free Wifi too. Seriously sounds like a hassle to people today. I feel more free than those people.

  3. There is a need it seems for many people to see the apocalypse just around the corner unless something is done. In the fifties any “abnormal” weather event was caused by atom bomb testing. Then we had nuclear winter. We just had to repent our sins or we were going to hell in a hand basket.

    Your right about instant gratification, but seem to have a need to feel to criticize others . “We must save the planet from our sinful selves”. Of course by ourselves they mean other than the person speaking. Just as some people feel superior because the belong to the right religion or even the right church, those that don’t have that will take up a cause and denigrate anyone who doesn’t agree. This is just another ism.

    • There’s a bigger issue Bear,
      It’s called ClimatePhobia.

      Greta may be the poster child as she was influenced by nonsense at the age of 8.

      What isn’t known at this point, are Swedan’s educational institutions, Al Gore’s nonsense, the median nonsense the root cause of her Phobia.

      This is very troubling!

    • So we do nothing or something because? If everything is relative, nothing is real and there is no reason to act. If we use projection in both directions, Dunning-Kruger, etc, we arrive at “there is no reality, there is no answer”. Catch-22, we are all toast.

        • The comment was to Bear. Sorry for assuming the internet would post in order.

          Parents allow their children’s brains to be toasted. It is 100% their doing and their choice.

  4. “it had the allure of simplicity…” is correct, however, for me the attraction of the Global Warming Crisis is that the villians are Big Oil Barons and Rich White Guys Driving SUVs, which the unwashed masses have learned to hate. Why do they hate this group and not just aspire to join them (through hard work, of course)? Because the liberals provide the idea that some people are rich because they have stolen from the poor and exploited them. The proof for this is now widely cited as: these people own the factory and you are forced to work in it, for about 1% of the salary of the company President. Doubt me? The current destructive demonstrations in Chile are intended to achieve “economic equality”. This means equal pay irrespective of contribution or achievment. For the record both myself and my wife drive SUVs.

    • Ron: “some people are rich because they have stolen from the poor”. 

      This is the standard Marxist way of viewing the world, a kind of “zero-sum game”. It’s very juvenile, like in a kindergarten class where there are 5 toys and 10 kids. If one kid has 3 toys it means he stole from the others. 

      Some of my friends raised in the former Soviet Union have trouble breaking away for this mode of thought. In Soviet Union if someone amassed big wealth he probably did steal it from the others!
      What my Russian friends fail to see is that by hard work, and a system that allows one to keep what he earns, NEW wealth is created. The free market system is not a “zero-sum game”.  A prime example of new wealth created in our society by innovation is fracking, which has made us all wealthier. 

      The Marxist demonization of wealth is not just childish, it encourages class envy and spreads hatred throughout society.

  5. Here in the US, the term “snowflakes” came in use, after the visceral reaction of the rabidly anti-Trump crowd to Trump’s election happened, including sobbing, followed by cries of “not fair”, and that he didn’t “really” win, because the popular vote went for Hillary, but he won a clear majority of the electoral vote. They had a meltdown, which is what the climate True Believers do whenever their ideology is questioned or threatened in any way. The True Believers aren’t operating from a rational standpoint, based on facts, but rather on pure emotion.

  6. Water pours “magically” from a pipe in the wall. Electricity streams from holes in the wall. All their favorite “infotainment” is floating through the ether top their magical little handheld devices.

    Too many raised believing in “magic” rather than mathematics.

      • I enjoyed reading about his visit to four ex;-)
        now theres a chap whos past present n future present some conundrums;-)
        never mind the Luggage;-)

        and just read his last wee free men book
        sadly missed

      • “commieBob November 21, 2019 at 7:36 am

        “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke I guess that makes me a wizard or maybe a wizard”

        is right,

        “Rocketscientist November 21, 2019 at 7:10 am

        Water pours “magically” from a pipe in the wall. Electricity streams from holes in the wall. All their favorite “infotainment” is floating through the ether top their magical little handheld devices.

        Too many raised believing in “magic” rather than mathematics.”

        Newton believed in sorcery: that was his driving force –

    • The schools should do field trips to Power Plants and Waste Treatment Plants more, and less often to art galleries and climate protests. It may help with the “magical” thinking they all seem to have.

    • “Rocketscientist November 21, 2019 at 7:10 am

      Water pours “magically” from a pipe in the wall. Electricity streams from holes in the wall. All their favorite “infotainment” is floating through the ether top their magical little handheld devices.

      Too many raised believing in “magic” rather than mathematics.”


      The story goes:

      An English Prince asked his aids “couldn’t we get fresh water right from the walls of our Chambers.

      And don’t have to carry our chamber pots all through the building ( that stinks!)”

      So the Prince’s Councillors secretly approached the prince’s mom and pa, Mr. and Mrs. King and Queen, to warn them “your son is mental ill. He wants to get fresh water right from the walls of the Chambers + end carrying chamber pots all through the building.

      Only a crazy mind could imagine drilling through stone walls. Next he tells there’s pipes needed through walls for water and sewage!”

  7. Is AGW really an “unproved hypothesis?”

    Can any hypothesis be proved? In fact, that is a problem with climate science, in that research is trying to prove the hypothesis, when research should be aimed at its testing, refinement or rejection.

    • You may be right, but as the hot-spot never never got hot and all the models failed reality, apart from the Russian model, then it is not totally wrong to argue that AGW is an unproven hypothesis.

    • You can never prove a hypothesis, but you can disprove it.
      AGW has been found shaky enough to necessitate a rebranding as Climate Change.

      • AGW is a disproven hypothesis. Climate Change is a term warmists have misappropriated. It does not mean what warmists imply (it is natural not catastrophic). Every sane person in this world knows the climate has changed constantly since the world first formed. I would appreciate any thoughts on a good word or term to use where most people say the BELIEVE in global warming. I use the term UNDERSTAND, as in I understand that global warming is natural. Any suggestions?

    • Scissor wrote:

      “In fact, that is a problem with climate science, in that research is trying to prove the hypothesis,…”

      Actually I disagree. The problem with ‘Climate Science’ is most ‘research’ starts with the assumption that The Science Is Settled and then go on to ‘prove’ that Global Warming will cause polar bears to take up basket weaving – or some other bollocks – because the reeds needed to make baskets can now grow 2000 m closer to the artic circle.

      THIS is where the grant money goes. Throw the suffix “… and the effects of climate change” on the end of any proposal and it is basically rubber stamp approval time.

      More useful research would be “… and the effects of a solar minimum” but good luck getting Greta to approval that.

  8. “Claims of global warming, have morphed into climate weirding, on the way to climate change, and recently to carbon pollution.”

    Not entirely correct. The CC in IPCC stands for Climate Change, and they’ve been around since 1988. Global Warming was just more direct, and easier for simpletons to understand.

    • Perhaps the problem with the term “global warming” was that it was just too pleasant; attractive even if you’re in a cool climate. Who hasn’t heard “global warming bring it on” when it’s cold.
      To make propaganda effective it needs to generate the “correct” emotion, that’s how it works. Climate emergency or crises or catastrophe; much more effective and generates the added element of a feeling of urgency to go with fear and hatred for humanity.

  9. Over time, this ersatz parent entity becomes one’s constant companion and guardian.

    Seems funny at first to see most everyone with their cell/smart phone held in front, against their head or up in the air, but there’s something disturbing about it. What would happen if those phones stopped working, weren’t available or were taken away?

      • I’m not. I refuse to use a “smart phone”. One of my phones resembles a true “smartphone”, the other two are smart flip phones (that’s what the seller says). I refuse to participate in electronic Soma.

        Yes, I am typing on a computer and if you heard the things I call this…

        • I don’t either, Sheri. Mostly because the screen is too small. I have two PCs on my desk with 25″ monitors. I prefer to relax while I’m reading.

        • ditto anything net wise is turned off on the phone
          and its used as a phone and nothing else
          pc time is after dark when chores etc are done
          all games and antisocial media are removed from any pc I own
          Abine Blur etc are useful programs btw

        • I also find using a phone for anything other than talking an unpleasant chore — actually a step backwards from easy-to-use keyboards and big, easy-to-see flatscreens.

        • Not I, either. Flip phone used as a phone and occasional texts, and my laptop or desktop PC for Internet and wordprocessing, budget, business, etc.

    • The Internet has a lot of advantages and is a lot more informative, compared to when I in the 1970’s used to dial up to various computers, where we had discussions about books and other subjects. I think the issue has become the “helping hand” from the search engines, to select what they think is the right subject for you. When at the same time the Internet is pulling you away from discussions around the dinner table or the local pup, and you no longer get confronted with diverse viewpoints. Finally you end up thinking that only a few backwards people “believe” in CAGW.

      I was once told that most people in the USSR had little knowledge of what was going on in the world, besides what was written in Pravda, the contemporary search engine. It were radio armatures, who relayed uncensored information from the outside, to many people in the union.

  10. Donald Trump won 30 out of 50 states, and 2,623 counties to Clinton’s 20 states or 489 counties. Trump won 220 counties that had voted for Obama in 2012.

    He outsmarted the “smartest woman in the world” while cruising to an ELECTORAL COLLEGE LANDSLIDE. Clinton won California by 4.2 million votes and New York by 1.6 million, meaning that across 48 of the 50 states, Trump was the victor by about 3 million votes in the popular vote. Even including New York and excluding the totally lost far left loony California, he was the popular vote winner by more than a million votes counting 49 of the 50 states.

    After his victory, PRESIDENT Trump addressed the issue by tweeting, “Campaigning to win the Electoral College is much more difficult and SOPHISTICATED than the popular vote. Hillary focused on the wrong states!”

  11. “Such climate crisis claims rest heavily on faulty computer models unable to accurately account for cloud cover and water vapor mechanics……”

    Once they get this right and understand that the global electric circuit controls temperature via electrical resistance . The sun charges up the ionosphere and creates high pressure, and Earths hot interior tries to radiate to space and creates low pressure systems. Clouds are a visible sign of resistance working between Earth and atmosphere. The oceans are not Earth, it is a fluid, a thick dense slow moving conducting atmosphere.

Comments are closed.