“Scientists”, “Journalists”, and other Useful Idiots

Someday, when sanity again rules the Earth, some may look back on today as the most ridiculous time in the history of mankind.

Why is that, you ask?  Because lots of otherwise-smart people today waste their time arguing about Artic Sea ice.

“Oh, look!  it’s shrinking!  What are we going to do?”

Here’s what I do:  pour myself a nice cold Manhattan, and flip on the TV.

George Will writes a column Dark Green Doomsayers pointing out that in the 1970s, the crisis-du-jour was global cooling.  Didn’t happen.  Strangely, nobody ever came forward to say, “hey, sorry about that horribly wrong prediction!”.

And then he points out all the hysteria last summer about disappearing sea ice.  And he quotes some findings by the University of Illinois’ Arctic Climate Research Center, noting that starting in September, the “increase in sea ice has been the fastest change, either up or down, since 1979, when satellite record-keeping began”.

Hoo boy, did the fur fly after that inflammatory line!

And he got jumped like a German tourist in Miami.

Including a piece of “journalism” in that wonderful birdcage-liner, the New York Times, which Mr. Will then promptly eviscerated in his followup piece, Climate Science in a Tornado.

Final score: Will 24, Useful Idiots 0.

But take a step back and think about how stupid and ridiculous this whole thing really is.  People are arguing … about the amount of ice … in the Arctic Sea.

‘Cuz that’s, like, super-important to all of us!

I guess when they can’t find proof of man-made CO2 messing up our lives where actual people live, they haul out the polar bear habitat, and beat us over the head with that. And they’re still wrong.

You should read Will’s column, and then read Anthony Watts’ summation of the ensuing Stupidity Fest, George Will’s battle with hotheaded ice alarmists. It’s up to you whether you want to bother reading all the crap-ola linked there, I didn’t. I don’t have room in my life for hysteria and bullsh*t.

I don’t normally throw around words like “idiocy” and “stupidity”, but I’m sorry, I’ve had quite enough of this charade. We are making ourselves stupider by engaging people who lie for money, and I’m done pretending it is all just an amusing, benign little game. Facts are facts, and the facts are on the side of those who don’t believe in man-made global warming.

If you don’t want to believe me, do some research of your own.

And it has real costs: President Obama is on a mission to impose carbon-trading schemes even at the expense of our economy. You’d think now would be a bad time to suggest such a thing.

News flash from the real world:  the sun has entered what should be another historic minimum for sunspots.  Historic, as in “lowest in 300 years”.

Which means less solar radiation — i.e., “heat that keeps us alive” — reaching Earth over the next few decades.

This has been proven in the past to cause cold waves that kill crops and people.  It’s not a half-baked theory based on flawed climate models and politicized money-grubbing, er, I mean “science”.

So if there is any reason to freak out about something we can’t control — and I’m not saying there is — a historic sunspot minimum is much closer to triggering it.

Yet, today we devote enormous amounts of money and intellectual capital to silly arguments about CO2, which occupies just 376 PPM of the atmosphere.  That’s .000376, or .0376%.

When a percentage starts with a decimal point and a zero, it’s probably not too important.  Especially when compared to the undeniable impact, and essential life-giving properties, of the Sun’s heat on our planet.

Truly, the most ridiculous time man has ever lived in.

Advertisements
6 comments
  1. Dan said:

    You should Will’s column, and then read Anthony Watts’ summation of the ensuing Stupidity Fest, George Will’s battle with hotheaded ice alarmists.

    Whoa, nelly. I’d stick to economics if I were you, science definitely isn’t your bag.

  2. Salahudin al-Rawandi said:

    “When a percentage starts with a decimal point and a zero, it’s probably not too important.”

    you’re so smart.

  3. jb said:

    Quite an impressive counter-argument there. I particularly liked the use of facts and logic addressing the meat of my post. Good job!

  4. jb said:

    And you’re not, apparently.

    By definition, a percentage that starts with “.0” is less than 1/1000. Would you call that significant?

    Or didn’t they cover that in remedial math?

  5. No said:

    *News flash from the real world: the sun has entered what should be another historic minimum for sunspots. Historic, as in “lowest in 300 years”.

    Which means less solar radiation — i.e., “heat that keeps us alive” — reaching Earth over the next few decades.*

    Nice timing–President-for-life Obama in his 8th term can then crow about how he turned back the tides way back when.