Posted by Jeff Id on April 21, 2014
Time, time, we can’t get more time. The climate grinds though on with or without our opinions. Rather thoughtless of it to ignore what we think, at least in my opinion, but I suppose that is the point, or perhaps that it should be the point. Still, people feel the need to insert their opinions in the face of climate, even when it is in conflict with climate itself. It is as though the self-absorbed belief in the reality of their opinions trumps the reality of climate. Climate change is real… it has always been real. The earth warms, cools and was even a ball of lava at one time. If we look far enough into the future, we can even see a time when the Earth becomes a superheated ball of solar plasma.
Still, our vaunted science has made the decision for us that today’s global temperature is perfect for us. Those who made this decision are climate scientists. Global citizens who hold themselves out to be experts in many fields, climate science, economics, government policy, energy generation, food production, ocean chemistry, computer programming, statistics, are among the most common. These powerful individuals have established certain facts of science, which are indisputable, and utilized them to both predict disaster and recommend a future path to salvation for the entire human race.
As both Goliaths and Galileo’s of science, they see themselves as the brightest points of light, the Gaian Illuminati, those who fight against corrupted human forces for the greater environmental good. Humanity slowly is bending to their will, following the growing outcry step by step. The soft words of hope against the harsh reality of basic science hypnotizing them into belief that we must change as a species, and we must do it now. But there is a disease in the movement, a not-so-subtle disease which is corrupting the message to the people, and the science. The disease is the same disease the Gaian Illuminati seek to eradicate, yet have contracted themselves.
Money and power
And governments are more than happy to provide them both.
It has become a symbiotic relationship, like plants which require animals to create CO2 and animals which require plants to split the CO2 and release the O2, climate scientists cannot survive without government, and government needs climate science to promote its own growth. It started in a not so subtle way, with research, then committees, then whole governmental divisions who’s whole purpose is to study climate. First those groups made recommendations for more study, and the formation of additional subgroups. Eventually, minor rule making was added to address the groups findings. This pressed into whole rule-making bodies who’s sole existence was to make recommendations for regulations on industry with the premise that it would somehow help climate change. Simultaneously, these groups continued to make more recommendations for expanded research and funding. Today, the rule making has expanded until centralized global governmental control of energy production is in sight, and we would have to willfully ignore the history to believe that stopping with energy production is a reasonable conclusion.
The corruption of the system has progressed beyond the merely palpable. It has bent to the point where conflicting opinions are actively suppressed and misrepresentation of observed data has literally become commonplace amongst the most famous but only where it promotes the cause. The computer climate models which started with the best intentions, have fallen wildly short of expectations, or rather observed warming has fallen well short of the models, yet our vaunted, world-powerful climate scientists have become unwilling to admit even that painfully obvious discrepancy.
Then there are those who have the gall to write against this powerful climate industry. Because that is what climate science is. A smog-belching, economy-sucking, rule-making, profit-taking industry.The sheer size of the thing should be enough to give pause, yet growth is the continued agenda, and nothing, including reality, will get in the way of this steamroller’s industrial goals. Imagine the money to fly these people in, to pay the hotels, food, hall rental, the fuel, annual salaries, education, phone bills. Worse, these people make no product. No net output of value comes from this group of near-universally overpriced individuals. No output which can be trusted, believed or even parsed by a normal human is generated from the science or government organizations you see in that picture. That statement is generally true, no matter which argument they are making. It is too corrupted with nonsense and unrelated agendas, and it is therefore very, very expensive, not because of the plane tickets, but because of the rules they demand from their subjects. Rules as a genuflection to their beliefs, not their science, but a mash of pro-governmental and anti-industrial climate goals.
Because at the root, taxation is their food, nutrients, power, and hope for the future of their industry. The best colleges, the most influence, the best jobs. They need your fear to get your taxes, and whether the root-level minions know it, or admit to it, the leaders are certainly very clear on this.
Belief is the core of the cause. Belief that any observed change of the Earth is not only caused by human activity, but is absolutely a bad thing. Many of us wonder about the magnitude of change caused by CO2 emission, and many wonder whether the changes will create floods or hurricanes, but there is little help for understanding these or other potential consequences from the field of climate science. Though there is plenty of scientific ‘opinion’ in the literature, the fluff and exaggeration is literally impossible to parse.
I sometimes wonder just how do they know our current global temperature is perfect? I have seen no study which reasonably demonstrates that our current climate is truly ideal. It seems extraordinarily unlikely to me that we were born into a perfect climate which could never change for the better in either direction. Still, from ice ages we know with certainty, that colder is very, VERY bad for people in general. If 6 degrees colder is so bad, how can it be so certain that only two degrees warmer is going to result in destruction. As a general concept, it seems extremely unlikely that we have achieved the perfect balance of temperature, and an extraordinary claim such as that, should require extraordinary proof. Yet we have none but opinion of experts to guide us in this matter. Not science, just opinion. And that opinion flies in the face of common sense observation of colder vs warmer climates right here on our planet.
The change is too fast they say – belief not science.
The change is crossing thresholds they claim – belief not science.
We must use green energy – belief not science
We must avoid fossil fuels – belief not science
Climate models match observation – belief not science
I will stop there because the examples are truly endless and the evidence that belief trumps all in the climate industry stares us in the face. From anti-nuclear rhetoric to authoritarian government promotion, all the symptoms of the disease of tobacco industry style industrial corruption are exhibited. Politics and nonsense have trumped common sense and reality. Science has taken a necessary back seat to results, and those who wish to be most successful in the field provide the most sensationalist claims.
All for the cause.
It was a proud day when I told mom that a group of psychologists on another continent had intentionally misrepresented my opinions in order to discredit me. It is just another very clear symptom of a greater disease that such activities are considered reasonable and allowed through a review process.
Where will it end
In short, I don’t know, but I do have a tiny piece of understanding which I learned from industry that I like to tell people in paraphrase. Businesses in general are very tough things to break. They can be bent, twisted and redirected, but will fight very hard when survival is the requirement. Climategate, as big and obvious as it was, barely touched the climate industry. Not because it wasn’t horribly embarrassing, and not because it didn’t expose corruption, but rather because it did not affect funding of the scientists involved. Even the specific individuals involved, continued on their previous paths as though nothing had happened. The media capitulated to pressure from the climate industry and failed to report the real issues. But most importantly, the willing governments continued and even expanded the money flow.
Yet observations continue to defy prediction and lag ever farther behind models, some in the field are making corrections for the problem while simultaneously denying the problem even exists. The very existence of the problem represents a condition that is impossible to rectify in the context of science yet again makes perfect sense in politics.
Perhaps it is for wiser minds than myself to visualize the future of this industry, but in general it looks pretty bleak and unstoppable to me.
Addendum – because it happened
I made the mistake of turning on Bill Maher (for the first time in my life) while writing this and just learned from a man on the panel that we need 6 garbage cans in our houses to save the planet. He literally said 6 and the audience loudly applauded. None of them apparently know about the industrial sorting of garbage in developed countries with only one garbage can…
But they do know what they believe.