Climate Change, and what people really think


Update:- Good physics-based demolition of the CO2 myth over at Counting Cats….h/t the Devil

David Davis

I was intrigued just now by something Bishop Hill has done, in placing different strands of opinion about AGW and climate change generally, on a sort of Johari Window.

Here it is, but do read his piece.

About these ads

3 responses to “Climate Change, and what people really think

  1. It has seemed apparent for some time that one cannot push in one direction without setting up a reaction in the other (unbreakable reality!) and thus the likelihood of human activity having an impact on the planet has been obvious for decades. And, yes, this has been hijacked by the elite as a means to further their control and exploitation of the productive sector while they swan around in their private jets. Did I hear 100s of billions new taxes to pay funds towards developing countries to be initiated at Copenhagen, on the BBC this evening? And no doubt most of those funds will go to agencies or others channelling these funds.
    The most consistent and honest person I have seen in the climate debate bewailing our fate has been James Lovelock of Gaia, who at least seems to accept we may have to accept a 30 to 50 per cent wipe out of the human race. And he is cheerful.

  2. I met one of those wipe-out people, in the Alternative Bookshop, about 28 years ago.

    She was spouting the GreeNazi line, rather earlier than most. We challenged her to the effect that about half the human race would die freezing in the dark and starving if her policies were adopted. Her response was “Well, that wouldn’t be such a bad thing, would it!” I had to be restrained from smashing her face in.

    It’s easy to be “consistent and honest” on the GreeNazi side, while basking in the Gaian glory of Cornwall (one of the most idylically neo-pastoral places on earth – a post-pastoral landscape with unreal-ly perfect beaches, rocks and buckets and spades, toy animals in little fields, and broadband laid on by capitalism.) Moreover, he can be cheerful, fawned over as he is by ageing hippies, and indeed some prettier ones not so ageing.

    Gaianess is pre-barbarian anti-rationalism. Very, very dangerous stuff. Could return us all to the Stone Age if not stamped out. There are, as you often say, John, thuths and lies.

    Gaia is a particularly dangerous lie, smelling of unfathomable wickedness, surviving from times of Darkness.

  3. I do agree with you, that the gaian line seems to come from a primaeval evil line and ancestry. I suppose the amount of respect I had for him, watching him on the tel-y-vision was his consistency, be it evil. He was not like Sr Gore, trailing his little luggage trolley around airports, like a little innocence lost in a fading world, who probably shouted: “now where’s my …… ……. airplane” as soon as the cameras stopped rolling.
    However. My thinking would be the young lady you saw should be free to spout her green nazi line, free of any molestation, as long as she doesn’t try to stop you or me doing the same. And, yes, it must be easy to espouse anything as long as one can live in nice places and circumstances. Like Al Gore.
    Truth to tell, I don’t know too much about the gaian thing except I have a strong awareness, as you say, that it is probably quite close to Lucifer’s heart. However, lies as lies I can deal with, but lies when they dress up as truth and scientific salvation really make me feel ill. Like Polonium 210.