New Mexico Academic Compares the Climate Crisis to Gun Violence

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Dr. Willie Soon; Professor Mark Boslough, University of New Mexico, has compared people ignoring the climate crisis to a criminal trying to judge whether Dirty Harry’s .44 Magnum is out of bullets.

The Climate Has a Gun

Those who dismiss risk of climate change often appeal to uncertainty, but they have it backward.

In “Climate Change Brings a Flood of Hyperbole” (op-ed, Aug. 11), Steven Koonin put himself in the unenviable position of playing down climate change precisely while we are experiencing unprecedented heat waves, storms, fires, droughts, and floods that exceed model-based expectations.

Mr. Koonin claims that regional projections are “meant to scare people.” But the paper he cites for support addresses the “unfolding of what may become catastrophic changes to Earth’s climate” and argues that “being able to anticipate what would otherwise be surprises in extreme weather and climate variations” requires better models. In other words, our current models cannot rule out a catastrophic future.

Model uncertainty is two-edged. If we’d been lucky, we’d be discovering that we overestimated the danger. But all indicators suggest the opposite. Those who dismiss climate risk often appeal to uncertainty, but they have it backward. Climate uncertainty is like not knowing how many shots Dirty Harry fired from his .44-caliber Magnum. Now that it’s pointed at our head, it’s dawning on us that we’ve probably miscalculated. By the time we’re sure, it’s too late. We’ve got to ask ourselves one question: Do we feel lucky? Well, do we?

Adj. Prof. Mark Boslough
University of New Mexico

Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/climate-change-global-warming-temperature-co2-ipcc-report-11629151874

The problem with this argument is climate action is not zero cost, it is very expensive. Ignoring climate change might kill people. Diverting trillions of dollars towards addressing climate change definitely will kill people.

So what are the relative risks?

So far all climate alarmists can show us as evidence to back their demands for cash is a bunch of in my opinion questionable computer models.

But it is unequivocal that draining trillions of dollars from the productive economy would cause lives to be lost or unnecessarily shortened. Green policies which raise home heating bills are likely already killing people.

Right now we have real problems demanding our attention, like addressing the ongoing low level but potentially catastrophic risk a new and far deadlier Covid strain will emerge, and dealing with the economic dislocation, mental health consequences, and social problems created by Covid lockdowns.

Should we divert money from the Covid effort to fighting climate change? Should we downsize our militaries and abandon our allies, just as an increasingly aggressive and desperate China appears to be rapidly building their military? Should we hamstring our economies with increased tax burdens for ordinary people, or frighten off our job creating entrepreneurs with punitive wealth taxes?

If climate alarmists had tangible evidence, I would support their call. The imminent mass death of billions of people would trump other considerations. But they’ve got nothing tangible, other than a few computer print outs and a big “trust me” plea.

We all deserve better than a pack of in my opinion dubious data abuses and questionable proxy exclusions, from the people who are demanding we make such a sacrifice.

4.7 23 votes
Article Rating
149 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
n.n
August 18, 2021 2:15 am

Weird analogy. The double-edged scalpel aborts more lives than wars and crimes combined. An ethical wicked solution backed by modern religion. Woke and morally broke.

Steve Case
August 18, 2021 2:21 am

“… Ignoring climate change might kill people.…”

Oh good grief, please stop buying into the nonsense.

John Larson
Reply to  Eric Worrall
August 18, 2021 3:32 am

But don’t you mean ignoring climate change alarmism? It’s sounds like you’re agreeing they already came up with “actual evidence” when you speak of ignoring climate change . .

John Larson
Reply to  Eric Worrall
August 18, 2021 6:16 am

To you that’s all, but to me it’s you being “played” by those who want “skeptics” to appear to be recklessly ignoring climate change that we also see occurring. If we all spoke that way, don’t you think that would reinforce that impression?

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Eric Worrall
August 18, 2021 9:06 am

There’s a problem in using their “figure of speech” though – it underscores the false notions attached to the “figure of speech, i.e., that “climate change” is “caused by human fossil fuel use/CO2 emission,” for which there is zero empirical support.

We need to stop allowing their “figures of speech” from being the starting points for discussion. Otherwise, we just reinforce the mass lunacy.

philincalifornia
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
August 18, 2021 12:24 pm

As if that isn’t bad enough, these loonies are allowed to glibly give sermons on the “climate crisis”, which doesn’t even exist.

Izaak Walton
Reply to  Eric Worrall
August 18, 2021 1:37 pm

Eric,
What would you accept as “actual evidence”? Short of a working time machine there is not way anybody can provide “actual evidence” about what might happen in the future. The only option is to use models and then act accordingly.

MarkW
Reply to  Izaak Walton
August 18, 2021 1:48 pm

Why use models that have already failed miserably?
Beyond that we don’t need time machines to tell us what the future holds. We can use science to see what happened in the past.

Over the last 7000 years or so, the Earth has been cooling, with major interruptions about every 1000 years or so. CO2 played no role in either the cooling, nor any of the interruptions in that cooling.

Going back a bit further in time, we see periods where CO2 levels were 10 to 20 times greater than today, and temperatures were the same or even cooler.

Basic science already proves that when it comes to climate, CO2 is a minor player at best.

PS: Before reconstructing the entire world’s economic system and putting millions of lives at risk, I want a little better than “it could happen”.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
DonM
Reply to  Izaak Walton
August 18, 2021 2:45 pm

that would be fantastic.

Recognize the failure to predict, of the best model evidence that there is, and act accordingly.

Or, lie about the models, and act as you want.

What would you accept as actual evidence?
What is the ideal average temperature of the earth?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Izaak Walton
August 18, 2021 6:18 pm

Are you trying to convince people here what qualifies as empirical evidence in a scientific sense? I mean really? Are you that confused?

Evidence doesn’t address “what might happen in the future”, so models are of no use. They are only useful when combined with actual, reproducible experiments. Evidence applies to that which we have actually observed in the present or in records of past events … data … measured, anecdotal or proxy.

The output of a computer model is NOT DATA. If what you feed into the model is not raw, unsmoothed, unadjusted undoctored data then your output is meaningless Ka-Ka.

buggs
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 19, 2021 9:48 am

GIGO is the phrase we used to use in the modeling course I took – Garbage In, Garbage Out.

The other great phrase not to be forgotten from that course was:

All models are wrong, some are useful.

It shouldn’t need to be said, but for clarity the corollary is that most are not useful.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  buggs
August 19, 2021 10:09 am

It shouldn’t need to be said, but for clarity the corollary is that most are not useful.

Exactly. and the useful aspects are only useful for the wrong reasons. They’re used yo dissemble and project the wrong information.

huls
Reply to  Izaak Walton
August 19, 2021 10:52 am

Demonstrably wrong models are worse than no action at all.
All models and predictions from the alarmists have failed so far.
Their whole premise, human CO2 emissions cause catastrophic climate change, is false, as the inventors of this nonsense have confessed multiple times.
What is worse? knowingly perpetuating a lie or actually believing it?

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Izaak Walton
August 19, 2021 5:24 pm

“there is not way anybody can provide “actual evidence” about what might happen in the future.”

Izaak, this a perfect Bertrand Russell’s “Teapot” analogy. You’ll be wiser reading his take on it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

Mark Smith
August 18, 2021 3:01 am

I feel totally lucky- if climate change was Dirty Harry he wouldn’t have any bulkets in his gun in the first place. He has been hittibg with the empty gun.

MarkW
Reply to  Mark Smith
August 18, 2021 7:11 am

I would think that the many failed predictions of the climate warming crowd would be proof that there are no bullets in the gun.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 9:11 am

Yeah, it’d be kind of like if he clicked through all six cylinders twice, checked his pockets for spare rounds twice and found them empty, and THEN asked if you “feel lucky.”

DonM
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
August 18, 2021 2:40 pm

… fumbles around looking for more bullets … fumbles and drops the gun in the water … composes himself … holds up his hand as a fake gun … menacingly points his finger (at us) and then says:

“In all the confusion (that I created) you probably lost count of how many bullets are left in the gun, do you feel lucky, punk”.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Mark Smith
August 18, 2021 9:09 am

“Climate change,” as they mean it, would be more like Hal Holbrooks’ “Capt. Briggs” – never even removed the gun from its holster.

Climate change “policies” are more like Dirty Harry with six bullets in the gun pointing it at your head at point blank range.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
August 18, 2021 6:24 pm

“Climate change”, as applied by the media, government and AGW true believer “scientists” isn’t really anything. It’s meaningless as all logical fallacies are. “Climate change” is a perfect example of an appeal to ambiguity … equivocation. We can’t really take it seriously. If they’re referring to AGW … then say so, instead of trying to hide behind a logical fallacy, like “consensus”.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Mark Smith
August 18, 2021 1:39 pm

My imagery is of a character in a comedy film (I forget which film, but Gene Wilder was perhaps the actor?) who is being threatened by a mob. He grabs a milk carton and smashes it against a counter and threatens the mob with it.

fretslider
August 18, 2021 3:02 am

“Those who dismiss risk of climate change often appeal to uncertainty”

No, they point the uncertainty out – it’s definitely there. Like it or not.

“that exceed model-based expectations”

Any expectations based on woefully incomplete models will be, er, wrong; every time. 

One question I’ve got to ask Professor Mark Boslough is ‘are you receiving treatment for your climate PTSD’?

Richard Page
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 6:03 am

It’s a ridiculous thing to say. Clear “reductio ad absurdam” – taking an argument to the silliest extreme because he obviously has no other argument to make. What a complete and total idiot.

Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 8:02 am

He is not receiving treatment, he is receiving salary.

This tells us all we need to know about the University. Unfortunately, about almost any University. Down with Mathematics.

fretslider
Reply to  Curious George
August 18, 2021 8:04 am

Down with Mathematics.

Indeed, it’s racist.

Math professors at top college/universities, including Harvard, Univ. of IL and Brooklyn College, have pontificated that mathematics is rooted in “white supremacist patriarchy” and “white social construct”. A professor at Brooklyn College, Laurie Rubel, said “the idea of math being culturally neutral is a “myth”, because 2+2=4 “reeks of white supremacist patriarchy”. 

https://farleftfacts.org/white-people/math-yes-math-is-racist/

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 9:21 am

Obviously, those “professors” need to get an education.

“It is your ancestors, the Mayans, that introduced the concept of zero, the absence of value.” – Edward James Olmos as Jamie Escalante, Stand and Deliver

Somehow I doubt the Mayans were white supremacists; ditto for the Arabs who introduced Arabic Numerals.

Guess the black female NASA mathematicians who helped the US calculate flight trajectories for space missions were parading around in their KKK Halloween suits in their spare time as well.

There is just no cure for this level of stupid.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
August 18, 2021 9:49 am

“Guess the black female NASA mathematicians who helped the US calculate flight trajectories for space missions were parading around in their KKK Halloween suits in their spare time as well.”

Buzz Aldrin, astronaut, and one of the best orbit mathematicians around, would be in a meeting discussing Apollo orbits, and Buzz always wanted to know what “the girl” thought about the calculations.

That’s high praise for “the girl”.

huls
Reply to  Tom Abbott
August 19, 2021 11:09 am

That’s because “computer” was the designation for the mostly female calculators who did the heavy number crunching in WW II.
Computer IS female largely because it was considered clerical work which equates to women’s work
The word computer is first recognized in 1640.

https://youtu.be/eE69LKO4dCQ

MarkW
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
August 18, 2021 1:52 pm

I’m trying to figure out how the Mayans introduced the concept of zero to the Europeans.
I have no idea whether the Mayans had figured out the concept of zero or not. But for Europe and the rest of the known world at that time, the concept of zero was introduced by the Indians (the ones from Asia).

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 8:13 am

Which department in the university is he with?

Richard Page
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
August 18, 2021 9:24 am

He’s not. He’s an ‘adjunct’ professor – means he gets paid to do a few lectures and stuff but isn’t actually part of the university faculty. Basically he’s freelance but, like most climate enthusiasts, believes that associating his name with a university gives him more credibility.

buggs
Reply to  Richard Page
August 19, 2021 9:55 am

Adjunct is and isn’t meaningless, depending on what the individual does. Richard’s note above is probably a description of the most common situation, although the individual may not even get paid for said lectures.
More often in my experience it means an individual has some level of expertise and is asked to sit on a graduate student’s thesis committee. They attend meetings, review the thesis and attend the thesis defense but do no actual work for the university beyond that solitary project.

So in some cases the association with the university is pretty minimal. There are other situations where an adjunct may regularly lecture and receive financial compensation but is not “on faculty” with the institution.

Ron Long
August 18, 2021 3:08 am

Good catch on more climate nonsense, Eric (h/t Willie Soon). Not only do the doomsters models fail, they never present a cost/benefit analysis, nor do they ever go near the cost of implementation versus mitigation. While floods and droughts march along as always, NASA says the earth has undergone 10% greening, although how much is due to anthropogenic CO2 addition to the atmosphere versus natural additions is not known. Alex, I’ll take greening of the earth for a few trillion bucks.

George Daddis
Reply to  Ron Long
August 18, 2021 6:24 am

while we are experiencing unprecedented heat waves, storms, fires, droughts, and floods..”
I don’t understand how a science based academic can get away with a falsehood like that.

It enables him to then continue with the logical fallacy of a “false premise”.

This type of thing destroys their plea for us to have “belief in science” (when they really mean a belief in scientists.)

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  George Daddis
August 18, 2021 9:26 am

More like they really mean belief in activists pretending to be scientists.

Once they lost their objectivity (which was decades ago), the so-called “scientists” ceased to be worthy of the title. Once you’re pushing a “Cause,” as they are, you are no longer a scientist.

Last edited 1 month ago by AGW is Not Science
Tom Abbott
Reply to  George Daddis
August 18, 2021 9:59 am

“I don’t understand how a science based academic can get away with a falsehood like that.”

Yes, he starts his article out with a lie.

The statistics show there is no unprecedented weather.

The Earth has had heatwaves, and storms and fires, and droughts, and floods since the beginning of time, and for every severe weather event we see today, we can find one in the past that is equal to or more severe than what we see currently.

It’s not that hard to find this information. A science-based writer of climate science should be aware of these statistics.

I’m not sure what the writer of this article is aware of, but he is just pushing climate change propaganda on this occasion.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Ron Long
August 18, 2021 9:24 am

nor do they ever go near the cost of implementation versus mitigation adaptation as needed

Fixed that for you. Mitigation is what they are suggesting, even though they are completely wrong about the causes and the absolute futility of their proposed “fix.”

Jason Pratt
August 18, 2021 3:24 am

Michael Mann was listed as the co-author of the letter in the WSJ.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Jason Pratt
August 18, 2021 9:27 am

Falsehoods explained.

Rudi
August 18, 2021 3:39 am
  1. Mark Boslogh probably use a lot of fossil fuel himself but expect others to change. He probably is not aware of the actual consequences of living without it. That is very common among believers in Catastrophic Climate Change.
  2. Neither the physical properties of the CO2 molecule nor earth climate history points in a direction of CO2 being a strong parameter in the climate above the present concentrations

Mark should educate himself and foremost live according to his own belief system, starting yesterday.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Rudi
August 18, 2021 4:10 am

Or he could just stop exhaling.

griff
August 18, 2021 4:00 am

The UK has, sadly, just had its first mass shooting in 11 years.

The USA had 615 last year, the whole of Europe and Russia two.

and US knife crime figures don’t seem better than UK ones, before you start…

fretslider
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 4:19 am

griff, congratulations on coming up with that.

Your favourite paper, The Groaniad, wants that single attack –  first mass shooting in 11 years – to make a whole group of people into terrorists. Even though they haven’t actually done anything

I’m sure you probably concur with that sentiment, unhinged as it is.

Last edited 1 month ago by fretslider
Alan the Brit
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 4:55 am

Why does the UN of all people, rank the USA at around 24/25th in the World for gun crime, behind countries like India, China, & a dozen South American countries? I somehow don’t think a country like China would allow such data to openly be collected & made public, after all, Communism/Socialism cannot possibly be seen to be a fail!!!

fretslider
Reply to  Alan the Brit
August 18, 2021 5:16 am

Lets send griff to a Brazilian favela….

MarkW
Reply to  Alan the Brit
August 18, 2021 7:16 am

In almost all the countries with higher rates of gun crime, legally owning guns for private citizens is either impossible, or almost so.

niceguy
Reply to  MarkW
August 19, 2021 7:24 am

Owning is firearm is one thing, being able to take it out of your safe is another.

There are legal ownership cases where the gun can only be taken out in specific cases, and is useless.

Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 5:21 am

The griffter is moving from climate to social issues….the USA has a segment of the population that is prone to shooting people ….just like the UK has a segment that is prone to raping…even gang raping…but this site is about climate

Reply to  Anti_griff
August 18, 2021 6:01 am

I must add….guns don’t kill people – people kill people.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Anti_griff
August 18, 2021 7:08 am

My point exactly, I’ve been clay-pigeon shooting for years & have never know of a gun going off all by itself, just because it felt like it!!! Anything can be used as a weapon in some way or other!!! Why not force people & tradesmen & women pay for the privilege of owning a saw, chisel, Stanley knife, etc? Over here in Britishstan, penknives & multi-tools are only allowed to be carried by tradespeople to & from their place of work!!! If they do otherwise, like me, out of over 30 years of work-habit, they are technically breaking the law & thus have become criminals!!! Last time I checked, most gun-crime in the US is carried out by criminal gangs & individuals who have very little regard for right & wrong or the law, & the guns are often illegally held for easy disposal etc, but “blood-sucking lawyers” (attributed to John Hammond in Jurassic Park) aren’t interested in such details & facts, only if they can force another Human being to do what they tell them to do, they get off on it!!! They live in the same world as public-sector bureaucrats, “I create hoops to make people jump through simply because I can!!!” We’re riddled with them over hear!!! When I took my son (then 19) clay-pigeon shooting to boost his confidence after a painful break-up, one of the instructors there was telling us over a mug of coffee, about a man who once drove nearly 70 miles to see a friend, to borrow his 12 bore, (gauge for you Colonists), he then drove all the way home, blew his wife’s head off, then the following morning calmly drove back to return the gun!!! The gun was merely an extension of the hand & arm, nothing more!!!

MarkW
Reply to  Alan the Brit
August 18, 2021 7:18 am

Anyone who expects people who routinely ignore laws, to suddenly start paying attention to gun laws, is either seriously deluded, or a liberal.

philincalifornia
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 7:34 am

“seriously deluded, or a liberal.”

There you go repeating yourself.

They’re so deluded, they don’t even know they’re not liberal.

MAL
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 10:28 am

Let me fix that for you “Anyone who expects people who routinely ignore laws, to suddenly start paying attention to gun laws, is either seriously deluded, or a leftist.” Liberal in the modern world are a
very endangered species. The leftist stomp them down any chance they can.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 12:54 pm

… is either seriously deluded, or a liberal.

You are being redundant!

MarkW
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
August 18, 2021 1:55 pm

Not everyone who is deluded is a liberal, but everyone who is a liberal is deluded.

Richard Page
Reply to  Anti_griff
August 18, 2021 6:07 am

The figures for rapes in the UK are skewed – more women come forward to report rapes in the UK than in the USA, but overall the UK has fewer per capita.

fretslider
Reply to  Richard Page
August 18, 2021 6:37 am

figures for rapes in the UK are skewed

Yes but with islamic grooming and raping the authorities claim girls under 16 – even as young as 10 or 11 – are making a lifestyle choice. How do they count that? They don’t.

Fathers have been arrested while trying to rescue their daughters. The feminists say nothing….

Last edited 1 month ago by fretslider
Alan the Brit
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 7:10 am

Neither do the Authorities concerned, just make lots of the right noises!!!

Richard Page
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 9:37 am

No. The ‘grooming gang’ incidents happens extremely rarely and, in actual fact, are as much a problem with Albanian immigrants as Pakistani Muslims – in all cases the gangs are arrested for the criminal activity. 2 fathers were arrested by Rotherham police while trying to rescue their daughters; what is rarely stated is that the police arrested and charged the gang, made the girls safe but the 2 fathers were drunk, violent and resisted arrest and were later just given a caution.

fretslider
Reply to  Richard Page
August 18, 2021 10:04 am

Rarely? Yet it is happening in every town

Pakistani and Bangladeshis are still at it – with impunity

Last edited 1 month ago by fretslider
Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Richard Page
August 18, 2021 10:03 am

I suppose you’ve interviewed every woman in both countries to come up with this “fact”.

MAL
Reply to  Richard Page
August 18, 2021 10:29 am

If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.

niceguy
Reply to  Richard Page
August 18, 2021 11:50 am

And of course Swedish women began reporting rape just after their country was set on a course of mass immigration by the Left?

MarkW
Reply to  Anti_griff
August 18, 2021 7:17 am

Actually this site is about anything that interests Anthony. Don’t fall into the camp of the whiners who want to restrict what the rest of us talk about.

philincalifornia
Reply to  Anti_griff
August 18, 2021 7:42 am

“The griffter is moving from climate to social issues…”

….. and he’s going to pretend he never had his strident, idiot-brained views on sea ice and polar bears.

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 5:35 am

And so what?
Do you realise how many people are killed by arms sales from pretty much all those countries you mentioned….

Top arms exporters.
UK, France, Russia, USA…and counting!

Alan the Brit
Reply to  pigs_in_space
August 18, 2021 7:15 am

After the tragedy of Dunblane, which turned out to be completely preventable, the Labour/Socialist guvment arbitrarily banned hand-gun ownership, probably quietly hoping for such an excuse to do so, yet gun-crime virtually doubled from around 1300 incidents a year, to around 2600 incidents within a few years, largely through poor immigration control/checks allowing criminal gangs to smuggle weapons into the UK. Socialists don’t seem to understand the concept of criminality & gang warfare in cities & towns!!!

MarkW
Reply to  pigs_in_space
August 18, 2021 7:20 am

Are you claiming that if the top arms exporters stopped exporting guns, there would be a drop in gun violence?
Guns are easy to make. Anyone with a few thousand dollars in shop equipment could start cranking them out if they wanted to.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 7:14 am

I would think that the fact that knife violence figures track gun violence figures would be enough to show that the problem is violent criminals, not guns.

But then when you have a broken ideology to defend, looking at the actual facts is not something one tends to do.

oeman 50
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 8:04 am

You guys have let the griff hijack this thread with an off-topic issue.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  oeman 50
August 18, 2021 1:10 pm

Sorry, it is a hot button for me!

MAL
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 10:22 am

Until recently the crime rat in London than any America city, now our regressive Dimms have fixed that, you must be happy.

niceguy
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 10:25 am

USA still has no border wall, Europe has a sea, Australia and NZ have an ocean.

establ
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 10:34 am

So how is a mass shooting defined in the United States Ms. Griff?

https://www.politifact.com/article/2017/oct/04/mass-shooting-what-does-it-mean/

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 1:04 pm

If someone were objective, which you have demonstrated numerous times that you are not, they would list such events after being normalized, as “per capita.”

Yes, the US knife homicide rates alone are are larger than the total homicide rates of most European countries, despite almost every kitchen in the world having one or more knives. It is a cultural phenomena. Again, were you objective, you would recognize that. You wield raw numbers like a dull butter knife, instead of like a sharp scalpel. That is one of the reasons you command no respect here.

MarkW
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
August 18, 2021 1:58 pm

Another fact is that when you break down violence by demographic group in both the US and other countries, you find that the same demographic groups have similar crime and violence rates, regardless of which country they live in.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 3:26 pm

I’m quite aware of that. I was trying not to go there because no one wants to talk about it.

MarkW
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
August 18, 2021 7:19 pm

As you are aware, the reason I am so well loved is that I have no aversion to talking about things the more genteel people avoid.

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
Lrp
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 1:27 pm

Is that a climate change indicator?

MarkW
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 1:53 pm

Unless you are going to claim that this mass shooting was the result of global warming, I don’t see how your post is relevant.

Teddy Lee
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 2:11 pm

Griff,could give us a demographic breakdown of the mass shootings in the US?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  griff
August 18, 2021 6:37 pm

You’re spouting utter, ignorant rot. The only reason the US gun violence is so visible is because of a free press. Most countries in the world don’t have that so we don’t get to review the statistics. Hell, In Africa, the Muslim terrorist group Boko Haram has killed tens of thousands of people. In South Africa 1000s are killed by gun, knife and club violence. That’s just two locations in Africa. On any given day in any Islamic country killings run in the thousands.

Do you really think Russia allows the world to look at their dirty laundry as the US does? They have a gang problem that’s 10 times worse than The Mafia. Russian gangs are composed of disaffected Russian special forces and KGB … trained killing machines.

Get a bloody clue!

huls
Reply to  griff
August 19, 2021 11:15 am

I’ll bite: Please look at the ethnic distribution of the shootings. You will see a strong correlation with pigmentation. If we remove all heavy pigmented shootings form the list, all of a sudden we see something remarkable: low pigmentation correlates very strong with low shooting incidents (and other types of violence btw). US numbers are similar to other countries independent of gun laws.

Your move griff.

Michael in Dublin
August 18, 2021 4:01 am

I will go one better than Professor Mark Boslough.
What he is doing is promoting a climate ponzi scheme that makes Bernie Madoff’s scheme look like chump change.

fretslider
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
August 18, 2021 5:19 am

“… chump change”.

Be fair, Madoff was but one man. The climate scam is a global enterprise.

MarkW
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 7:21 am

A global enterprise, with the baking of many governments.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 6:42 pm

The climate scam is a global enterprise …

… with hundreds of thousands of recipients for the 100s of $billions in AGW largess pouring out of the free world countries. It might as well be flushed don the toilet for all the returns received by the citizens who funded it. “Climate change” advocacy is a license to print money.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 18, 2021 11:46 pm

Manmade globul warming was always about wealth-redistribution, Socialism at large, they want to win over as many countries as possible & those countries will back anything where money is concerned!!!

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Alan the Brit
August 19, 2021 12:20 am

Through the judicious use of several “crises”, since the 1950s, the peddlers of international socialism have bilked the public out of billions and come closer to their true goal than any time since socialism was pulled out of someone’s backside. Smoking, AIDS, global cooling, AGW, “climate change” and now SARS CoV-2 combined with the propaganda power of social media and a corrupt MSM. It has already been a massive redistribution of wealth.

Lurker Pete
August 18, 2021 4:16 am

“Model uncertainty is two-edged. If we’d been lucky, we’d be discovering that we overestimated the danger.”

Looks like we’ve been lucky then

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/07/un-climate-panel-confronts-implausibly-hot-forecasts-future-warming

“But all indicators suggest the opposite.”

this would make a good advert….

“shoulda gone to spec-savers”

Scissor
Reply to  Lurker Pete
August 18, 2021 5:31 am

Uncertainty is so overrated. The Biden administration is rolling out booster shots for public use while phase 1/2 clinical trials are still recruiting.

H.R.
Reply to  Scissor
August 18, 2021 6:12 am

I’m in the control group for vaccines and Climate Change Mitigation,

My unvaccinated self provides a valuable data point for evaluating the safety and efficacy of the vaccines.

As for Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, I’ll adapt. I have a tailor who is prepared to hem my trousers up an inch to counter the effects of sea level rise. I have also been acclimating myself to higher temperatures by Snowbirding in Florida.

Control groups are important. I have unselfishly volunteered myself for the role.

Bruce Cobb
August 18, 2021 4:29 am

So here we have a “professor” making a ridiculous argument using both a False Analogy (climate = loaded gun) as well as the Precautionary Principle (better safe than sorry). Pathetic. But then, Climate Believers tend to rely on emotionalism rather than logic, since that is basically all they have.

fretslider
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
August 18, 2021 5:20 am

Think of the children…

H.R.
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 6:18 am

What about toes?

If it saves just one toe. the trillions spent will have been worth it.

fretslider
Reply to  H.R.
August 18, 2021 6:41 am

I dunno

This little piggy went to market, This little piggy stayed home, This little piggy had roast beef, This little piggy had none. This little piggy went … insane all the way home

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  fretslider
August 18, 2021 9:44 am

…freezing to death and starving to death in the dark if these idiots get their way and implement “climate policies.”

Sara
August 18, 2021 4:47 am

When they start sending out begging letters (PUH-LEEEZZZE send us money to stop climate change) and WWW and the other groups have been doing that for years, you know it’s so that they can have the 10-course lobster/shrimp/steak dinner at the MOST expensive restaurant they can find. Has nothing to do with climate change or widely spreading and rapidly mutating diseases.

It’s the refusal by Those People to acknowledge that Those People have absolutely ZERO control over what this planet does that is simply ridiculous. If they said “Save the Planet by Recycling Metal and Paper” , well, okay, that makes sense. I do that anyway. Cat food cans are aluminum and can be recycled. Newspapers can be recycled. Plastic stuff can be recycled. Less junk going into the garbage dumps.

And as cynical as this may sound, Those People are likely responsible for more poisonous junk going into the trash than you and I are. They are all embedded in more electronic junk than Buck Rogers ever dreamed of, never mind the widely distributed bugs that cause these malevolent diseases we all know about.

Save the Whales!! Save the Quails!! Save the Parrots!!! Save some Carrots (for dinner)!!!

The Planet has gotten along quite well without the dinosaurs, without giant dragonflies and monster-sized centipedes, without invasions from Outer Space and robots made out of spare parts. Nasty diseases have swept through human populations for literally thousands of years, and yet – well, we’re still here!!!

It’s like George Carlin said: The Planet is fine. The People are dingbats (except for a few fine souls we know about).

And so far, my gas bill is the same with my new, efficient gas furnace as it was with the old furnace, which finally died ahead of the winter’s cold breath. And the fridge will last another 5 to 8 years, and I will continue to use my gas-fired stove whether idiots like that political animal in NM like it or not.

Last edited 1 month ago by Sara
Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Sara
August 18, 2021 5:15 am

Recycling aluminum probably does make sense as it is a fairly valuable resource, but other things, not so much, due to the costs of handling, transporting, and re-processing. Even paper, which we like to think of as emminently recyclable winds up costing more, as well as having less useability than new paper. Plastic used to make some sense to recycle because of the Chinese demand for it, but no more. Glass, not really. It primarily gets crushed and mixed with asphalt. Sad, I know. Even burning trash at high temperatures and using the resulting energy for electricity doesn’t appear to be economically viable.

H.R.
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
August 18, 2021 6:24 am

Plus, should we ever run short of materials, dumps can be mined if and when we need the short resource. It’s more convenient when all that waste is in one known spot, waiting to be reclaimed.

Sara
Reply to  H.R.
August 18, 2021 8:51 am

Some of those giant waste dumps are so high that they generate methane from decaying contents. That can be mined and cleaned up, instead of just burning it off. That’s a practical use for dumps.

MarkW
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
August 18, 2021 7:23 am

People were recycling iron, long before it became fashionable.

H.R.
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 7:49 am

Ha! Yes. My mom washed and saved all those styrofoam meat trays. She didn’t reuse them for food. she used them for packing material long before anyone came up with the idea of styrofoam peanuts.

It was a bit of a pain big to clear out her house after she died. But she saved everything to reuse long before anyone talked about recycling. It’s a raised-in-the-Great-Depression thing is what it is.

MarkW
Reply to  H.R.
August 18, 2021 2:02 pm

I was thinking more on the line of auto wrecking yards. But what you mention is also true. My grandad was the same way. Tubes from old radios and TVs. Electric motors, gears, you name it, he probably had at least one somewhere in the garage or basement.
If your vacuum cleaner burned out a motor, he had a replacement. And if it didn’t quite fit, between the band saw and the welder, he’d make it fit. And it would work too.

Sara
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 8:54 am

I think it was Apple that started recycling the boards for phones a while back. They had recovered a real ton of gold that way. Don’t remember the year, sorry about that.

Sara
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
August 18, 2021 8:57 am

Paper can be used as an insulating material if necessary. Also, newspapers are great for soaking up spills and blocking leaky windows. It’s messy, yes, but does the job.

D Boss
August 18, 2021 5:38 am

This is a really stupid analogy. The idiot professor didn’t even do his Dirty Harry homework! Watch the whole clip below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38mE6ba3qj8

He did indeed fire 6 shots in the melee, and after the punk surrenders he implores Harry that “I gots to know” and he dry fires the empty gun at the perp’s head – “click” (no bullets)!

So the professor’s analogy suggests Climate Change Cult is like having Dirty Harry threatening us with his 44 magnum – except Harry was BLUFFING – he knew exactly how many had already been fired – hence why he dry fired at the punk.

Stupid analogy – or a Freudian slip – saying in effect the Climate Cult is bluffing as did Dirty Harry – with no bullets in the gun!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  D Boss
August 18, 2021 10:12 am

I think you have the Dirty Harry movies confused. The one where Dirty Harry asked the punk if he felt lucky was where the perp was kneeling down on a dock at the end of the chase, and Harry asked him if he felt lucky “punk”, and the punk felt lucky and raised up to shoot Harry, and Harry blew him into the water with his last shot.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  D Boss
August 18, 2021 10:16 am

Well, he’s not always bluffing. See the end of the original Dirty Harry movie. Doesn’t end well for the perp who THINKS he’s bluffing.

As I noted above, a better analogy for the “climate crisis” is for Dirty Harry to dry fire his empty gun 12 times, check his empty pockets twice for bullets, and THEN point his gun at the perp and ask if he “feels lucky.”

John Bell
August 18, 2021 5:57 am

Bay Area college professor suspected of setting 7 fires in California

Fred Middleton
Reply to  John Bell
August 18, 2021 8:20 am

Crazy Has been

philincalifornia
Reply to  Fred Middleton
August 18, 2021 12:50 pm

Has been who never was.

Gary Maynard. Since the libtard media haven’t said what motivated him, I think there’s a 100% chance that he was trying to prove carbon dioxide causes fires by being an arsonist. Give him a break through, his degree was in sociology.

I’m sure it works though. How many climate crackpots could get right this multiple choice question:

Wildfires that are caused by arsonists are:

a) Wildfires that are caused by arsonists, or:

b) Wildfires that are caused by carbon dioxide increases in the atmosphere.

How many people did this guy murder?

MarkW
Reply to  philincalifornia
August 18, 2021 2:05 pm

Even if he didn’t kill anyone, he should still be charged with assault with a deadly weapon and reckless endangerment.

philincalifornia
Reply to  MarkW
August 18, 2021 6:15 pm

Well, he is such a crackpot that they’re denying him bail.

James Snook
August 18, 2021 6:03 am

Meanwhile, in Afganistán the Chinese are moving in (‘The Times’ today):

As of last year, Chinese businesses had contracts for projects worth $110 million in Afghanistan, but several large projects were suspended due to political instability, Yu Minghui, director of the China Arab Economic and trade Promotion Committee, told the Global Times.
Another big Chinese project, also stalled, is a $400-million, 25-year contract with PetroChina to develop oilfields in Faryab and Sari Pul provinces in Afghanistan.
A group of Chinese companies are yet to finalise a $400-million deal for a coal-fired, 300-megawatt power plant, which could greatly ease the country’s electricity shortage, the Global Times reported.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  James Snook
August 18, 2021 7:24 am

It is not unusual that commercial offers will be made for $0 capital cost in exchange for resource extraction. The stated project value is notional for future payback in tonnes of something-or-other needed by the Chinese economy.

James Snook
Reply to  DMacKenzie
August 18, 2021 8:56 am

agreed, but I posted the extract because it underlines the costly futility of the West’s ‘net zero’ shenanigans.

DMacKenzie
Reply to  DMacKenzie
August 18, 2021 1:06 pm

Search for ”Taliban sitting on $1 trillion worth of minerals” to get a sense of Chinese longterm planning….the money we send them to buy cheap goods, goes to own the future mineral production somewhere in the world.

Sara
Reply to  James Snook
August 18, 2021 9:06 am

I’ve said this elsewhere: China’s REAL interest in Afghanistan is the rare earths in the mountains of that miserable country. The USGS did a survey a while back – don’t remember exactly when – on the mineral wealth there, and that pathetic country that still lives in the past is awash in those rare earths. When China gets what it wants — and there was a photo last week of the current head of the Taliban with a Chinese ambassador after they “did a deal” – they won’t give a crap about Afghanistan itself.

Just so you all know, China’s missile resources include long-range missiles that have a range of up to 18,000 miles – among other types of boom-boom stuff. And China is building missile bases in the desert well to the west of Beijing, the assumption from DOD being that they are for nuclear missiles.

Meantime, the US is attempting to evacuate our people from the AO. Worse than the last days in Saigon.

Last edited 1 month ago by Sara
Shoki Kaneda
August 18, 2021 6:04 am

More faculty lounge BS from educated idiots.

Scissor
Reply to  Shoki Kaneda
August 18, 2021 6:47 am

I expect that CNN will describe the beheadings as mostly peaceful.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
August 18, 2021 10:20 am

“Westerners” were corrected some time ago about this – they are not “towels,” they are a “little sheet.”

They should therefore be referred to by the correct term, “Little Sheet Heads.”

MarkW
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
August 18, 2021 2:09 pm

Thanks to the UN, we know that the Taliban is going to observe the rights of women and girls. The UN just issued a strongly worded press release.
That will learn em.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/critics-un-ambassador-press-statement-taliban

Last edited 1 month ago by MarkW
Alan the Brit
Reply to  MarkW
August 19, 2021 12:03 am

Yes, but if they transgress, we know that the UN will wag a very stern finger in their general direction, then give the democratic west a stern talking to for letting it happen in the first place!!! When will the West learn, this free-enterprise capitalist democracy crap is an awful philosophy, dreadful, terrible, wicked, you should all give your money & technology away to poor countries, (easily manipulated by us)!!! Rant over!!!

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Shoki Kaneda
August 18, 2021 10:18 am

Need a quote around “educated.” Or a better, more applicable term…indoctrinated, brainwashed, you get the idea…

niceguy
August 18, 2021 8:09 am

Portrayal of guns in movies is a testament to the uselessness of physic education.

I get it: movies don’t have to be realistic. Sometimes the plot needs an unrealistic element. We tolerate it.

But why does the bad guy jumps in the air and travels at least one meter after the good guy fired at him, while standing on his feet with no pod or back support? What’s the point? How does it help the story unfolding? Why can’t the bad guy fall in place?

Olen
August 18, 2021 8:13 am

Is Harry’s gun loaded or not! There is a 50 percent chance of being right and only Harry knows for sure. According to the analogy the damage from climate change has a 50 percent chance of happening one way or the other. Hardly worth the investment demanded and the aggravation.

niceguy
Reply to  Olen
August 18, 2021 10:23 am

There is no way to repeat the experiment and no probability here.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  Olen
August 18, 2021 10:23 am

Given the (lack of) “quality” of the “scientific basis” (using the term loosely here) for the CAGW bullshit, the more correct Dirty Harry analogy is dry fire the weapon 12 times, search pockets twice for spare rounds and come up empty, THEN point gun at perp and ask if he “feels lucky.”

August 18, 2021 9:06 am

IYI Boslough writes:
“Climate uncertainty is like not knowing how many shots Dirty Harry fired from his .44-caliber Magnum. Now that it’s pointed at our head, it’s dawning on us that we’ve probably miscalculated. By the time we’re sure, it’s too late. We’ve got to ask ourselves one question: Do we feel lucky? Well, do we?”

His “we’ve probably miscalculated” can go either way to the issue. The real point is that Boslough is arguing from precaution about things unknowable.

This is the over-wrought Precautionary Principle lie by Professor Boslough. He’s probably continuing to use it on his new students, fresh minds still unable to adequately understand, parse through and critically evaluate the propaganda he spews at them.

Dr. Michael Crichton took apart the precautionary principle in his fiction, thriller novel State of Fear. He wrote:

— “The “precautionary principle,” properly applied, forbids the precautionary principle. It is self-contradictory. The precautionary principle therefore cannot be spoken of in terms that are too harsh.”

Intellectual yet Idiots (IYI) like Professor Boslough are why the homeless populations are exploding across US West Coast cities. Liberal policies on trying to reduce homelessness with claimed intent to do one thing, end up causing the exact opposite to actually occur.

The same is going to happen with Climate Change policy if we allow these Libtard IYI’s to carry through with it. The very thing they claim to want to avoid, their policies will produce via energy poverty and the resulting destruction of environment in the coming decades as people become desperate for food and fuels to sustain them and their families.

The world is now filled with these libtard IYI’s and their pursuit of policies that end up doing the exact opposite of what they claimed they wanted.

MAL
August 18, 2021 10:16 am

The professor is another educated idiot spouting off, as Tucker Carlson pointed the other night we are not being ruled by a meritocracy but and idiototocracy. Somehow promoting people because the sex, sexual orientation and skin color is not working out. It about time we get back to Martin Luther King dream Of “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by their character.” Character is lacking in America today and so is merit, until those two thing are brought into the forefront of who we elect and lead, we will pay dearly.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  MAL
August 19, 2021 12:19 am

“The professor is another educated idiot”,  “The professor is another poorly educated idiot “.
There, all fixed!!!

I become ever more convinced daily that the propaganda of university education being the be all & end all of education & learning, has gripped the world!!! Still recall having dinner with a Cambridge Professor after an evening professional lecture, & realised that he was very clever, knew lots of theory on structural engineering, but hadn’t a clue about practical structural engineering. I wouldn’t step inside any structure he had designed!!! Would he have lasted outside of the academic world? Probably not IMHO!!!

markl
August 18, 2021 10:19 am

Buy this magazine or we will shoot the dog.

Editor
August 18, 2021 10:50 am

For the scoop on the self-aggrandizing adjunct professor Mark Boslough, see my earlier coverage in his endless campaign against good science at The Mark Boslough Affair.

ResourceGuy
August 18, 2021 11:18 am

Chinese science and hard work by students wins again. NM science is more like Afghan exit process. The hollowing out of US science leaves screaming academics in its decayed place.

Clyde Spencer
August 18, 2021 12:49 pm

The late Chauncey Starr made the reasoned claim that people tolerate risk in proportion to their subjective, perceived benefit. Thus, the often maligned nuclear power industry is not seen by the general public as providing sufficient benefit to justify the inflated risk-perception created by the MSM.

In a similar manner, the climate alarmists, and their know-nothing, professional wordsmith apologists, work to convince the public that there is no benefit from fossil fuels, and attempt to convince the public that the existential risks are far greater than can be justified.

Therefore, we have a situation where the MSM is attempting to stampede the public in a direction to renounce fossil fuels, and to work against their own best self-interest. We are being encouraged to drink the Kool-Aid as a way to salvation. Even the adjunct professor from NM should know how that turns out.

The electorate needs just the facts, and nothing but the facts (Thank you, ma’am!) to decide if there is sufficient reason to roil our economy, and cover vast swaths of the land with wind turbines and photovoltaic arrays. The MSM has become (perhaps well-meaning, but misguided) an efficient propaganda machine. However, there is an old adage: “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”

Robert Hanson
Reply to  Clyde Spencer
August 18, 2021 2:21 pm

Not buying the good intentions theory. It’s all about money and power, along with a bit of wanting applause from the other virtue signalers.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  Robert Hanson
August 18, 2021 3:30 pm

Certainly there is an aspect of corruption. However, I’m sure that there are at least some who believe that they are doing the right thing for the right reasons.

Teddy Lee
August 18, 2021 2:02 pm

I am puzzled by the use of the four lettered word “prof”.

Gary K Hoffman
August 18, 2021 2:22 pm

This exact letter appeared in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal over the name of its purported author, Michael Mann. So who really wrote it?

ScienceABC123
August 18, 2021 2:37 pm

Just because some creative individual can make a comparison between two things (say for instance: grape juice and diamonds, as both require pressure to make) doesn’t mean the comparison is meaningful.

Jim Thomson
August 18, 2021 4:47 pm

In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.

Rory Forbes
August 18, 2021 6:08 pm

Adj. Prof. Mark Boslough is clearly a drooling ignoramus or just a common or garden variety liar … prevaricator … given to mythomania or pseudologia fantastica. Mind you, he could simply be subject to runaway delusions. Either way he should not be on the public payroll anywhere he could do real harm to impressionable, young minds. If he actually believes any of that crap, he needs institutionalization … and soon.

Retired_Engineer_Jim
August 18, 2021 11:06 pm

Pretty strange looking 44 Magnum.

chris
August 19, 2021 1:14 pm

well, it does kill more people per year, but that’s a silly – and disqualifying – comparison.

I am suspicious of all advocacy based on comparing risk categories. In the first place, people are demonstrably terrible when it comes to risk assessment. This makes claims comparing disparate risks suspect as manipulation. and what a dumb comparison! what, Drive less and fewer will be gunned down?! Idiotic.

We are given the impression by Mainstream Media that most gun violence (aka killings) are black-on-black, and no one in the US cares about “those people”. Make it about something (a) that I care about, and (b) that is an actual trade-off.

#idiots

Bill Everett
Reply to  chris
August 20, 2021 8:41 am

So the answer to all of this fear of deadly climate change is a focus on a human contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere that constitutes only two thousanths of one percent of the atmosphere while seemingly ignoring the key role that air pressure plays in the formation of weather and climate?

%d bloggers like this: