Is there an argument?
I am under the impression that Hugh believes in man made global warming, but I am not sure how to discuss this with him or towards him since I am uncertain as to upon what linchpins swings his belief. If it is CO2 levels primarily that have convinced him, that can be addressed or any other particular conviction of perceived fact.
It is difficult for Hugh, though, not to recognize just how political Science has become (and has always been), and effective at mobilizing the MSM; especially if the thrust is anti-American and millenarian these days.
Thousands of scientists in Europe (especially) insist the US is to blame and ought to follow the Kyoto Protocols (which their countries will never actually enforce on themselves) not to benefit the world, but to try and destroy the US economy which shames them all and would reduce American power in the world.
Nor do I know if Hugh is worried about the world and alarmed that climate is changing, or if he thinks we can or should do anything about it (but the fault may be mine in not paying attention to or missing previous missives from Hugh on the subject).
The promotion of scientific theories, particularly “catastrophic” ones, get a lot of good press, win lots of awards, grants, university chairs, notoriety, and celebrity. Whereas social theories and books about slippery slopes, cultural and moral decline nearly always fail to alarm the general public and politicians.
It is when social problems are recast as scientific ones that they are taken more seriously. The eugenics movement of the 1920’s took situations regarding race, Mongolian idiots, the deformed and such and insisted that these things should be dealt with scientific dispassion. We know the results.
We are now in the second wave of a eugenics movement with the changes wrought by reliable methods of birth control, abortion, genetic screening and engineering, in vitro fertilization, euthanasia of adults and infants.
The global warming project is another example of pseudo intellectuals hoping to acquire power to re-engineer societies according to their tastes and preferences. Cars are bad, especially SUVs. Get rid of them, make everybody walk, bike, or take mass transit. Cow poop and flatulence is bad. Make everyone a vegan. And on and on it goes and grows, the totalitarian impulse of little tin, atheistic gods and their heaven on earth schemes for the sake of our own good.
The global warming movement is simply another tack of an elite and its will to power. There is nothing anyone can do about global warming if it is happening, but a group of men can get a lot of power and money if they successfully manipulate the public and politicians.
Posted on 1:45 PM by Mark Butterworth
Comments
22 Dec 2006
Mary Jackson
Thousands of scientists in Europe (especially) insist the US is to blame and ought to follow the Kyoto Protocols (which their countries will never actually enforce on themselves) not to benefit the world, but to try and destroy the US economy which shames them all and would reduce American power in the world.You are spot on with that. The French, in particular, love to get other countries to sign up to rules that they themselves brazenly flout. And, apart from the in many ways stupidly honest UK, what other Western country, let alone non-Western - and outside the West there is no culture of honesty - will actually adhere to the Kyoto Protocols once they have signed up? It's a conspiracy against the more honest and productive Anglosphere, not just the US.
On the general issue of global warming I am ignorant, though I see that reducing our dependence on fossil fuel is essential. But Kyoto? Belongs in the dustbin of history, like the EU, the UN and all other supranational crap.
22 Dec 2006
Hugh Fitzgerald
You'll get no argument from me.
