Ed Hudgins

Global Warming And Reckless Precaution

Recommended Posts

Global Warming And Reckless Precaution

By Edward Hudgins

September 20, 2013 -- The soon-to-be released Fifth United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report will admit that computer predictions for global warming and the effects of carbon emissions contained in previous reports were much too high.

But this has not deterred European Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard from sticking to public policies meant to combat this shrinking problem, while she ignores the real and present catastrophic effects of those policies.

She argues that "Let's say that science, some decades from now, said 'we were wrong, it was not about climate' [i.e., global warming is not a problem], would it not in any case have been good to do many of things you have to do in order to combat climate change?" Further, “In a world with nine billion people … at the middle of this century, where literally billions of global citizens will still have to get out of poverty and enter the consuming middle classes, don't you think that anyway it makes a lot of sense to get more energy and resource efficient?"

But Hedergaard’s arguments promoting anti-global warming policies—even if there is no global warming problem—fly in the face of reality. Consider the assumptions of Hedergaard and all others who take the Al Gore party line on this issue:

First, the atmosphere is warming up significantly.

Second, this warming poses serious and highly probable threats to the health and safety of large numbers of people.

Third, the probable benefits of warming—e.g., longer growing seasons—are minimal.

Fourth, human activities are in large part responsible for the warming.

Fifth, there are policies that have a high probability of stopping the warming.

Sixth, the probable benefits of such policies will more than outweigh the probable adverse effects.

All of these assumptions are highly questionable. And with the first assumption thrown further in doubt by the U.N. report, the others are even more problematic.

But what is beyond doubt are here-and-now downsides to “green” and anti-global warming policies. Germany is phasing out nuclear power—even though it contributes far less to alleged global warming than fossil fuels—and substituting “green” energy alternatives.

But an August 2013 article entitled “How Electricity Became a Luxury Good” in Der Spiegel, Germany’s top news magazine, reports that the renewable energy surcharge will increase the electricity bills for Germans by 20 percent, just to start; Germany already has the highest electricity prices in Europe. Germans also must cover the €20 billion costs of generating €3 billion worth of electricity via solar, wind, and biogas plants. (Gee, I thoughts Germans were good at math!)

Further, the flow of “green” electricity can vary erratically depending on weather. Thus, German factories have been asked at times to shut down when the electricity supply didn’t correspond properly with use. Germany is recklessly, bit by bit, destroying its economy and harming its own citizens as precaution against an improbable future harm.

The “green” policies of Commissioner Hedegaard and her allies will impoverish citizens of the industrialized world. And by substituting very expensive, unreliable “green” tech for reliable, cost-effective forms of energy production, they will hinder rather than help the impoverished billions to rise into the middle class.
----
Hudgins is director of advocacy and a senior scholar at The Atlas Society.

For further information:

*Bradley Doucet, “Why Are We So Worried About the Planet?” April 18, 2009.

*Edward Hudgins, “Energy and Environment: The Moral Battle of Our Age.” August 8, 2008.

*Robert Bidinotto, “Death by Environmentalism.” March 2004.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was into topics on global warming after watching An Inconvenient Truth back in 2006 (possibly 2007) and since then I don't really give a crap about it anymore.

Why did a shiny object distract you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global warming is a secular feminized leftist political religion.

It's articles of faith are that global warming is catastrophic,,, that it is human caused... and only government taxation regulation and litigation can save mankind.

It's exactly the same religion today as it was in the 1970's...except then it was called global cooling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global warming is a secular feminized leftist political religion.

It's articles of faith are that global warming is catastrophic,,, that it is human caused... and only government taxation regulation and litigation can save mankind.

It's exactly the same religion today as it was in the 1970's...except then it was called global cooling.

What you say is true half the time. Half the time the climate is cooling. The other half, the climate is warming all thanks to natural processes.

Is Mother Nature too feminine for you?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global warming is a secular feminized leftist political religion.

It's articles of faith are that global warming is catastrophic,,, that it is human caused... and only government taxation regulation and litigation can save mankind.

It's exactly the same religion today as it was in the 1970's...except then it was called global cooling.

"Feminized"? What the fuck does global warming, hoax or not, have anything to do with feminism? The phrase use of the "secular feminized leftist" is a telling technique that I identified several months ago: incoherently throwing a bunch of terms together to create one's own unique label for something which is either a "floating abstraction" or already has a less ridiculously-sounding label.

I direct you to George Orwell's Politics and the English Language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

I think your article is timely and appropriate, given the sudden admission of the IPCC that things aren't as bad as they thought back in 2005 and before. Also, although the topic may be boring to some people, the fact is that global warming is currently taken as gospel in many quarters. It will take a major effort by scientists and commentators to roll back some of the "green" policies that have already been put in place. Thank you for carrying the torch.

Darrell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

I think your article is timely and appropriate, given the sudden admission of the IPCC that things aren't as bad as they thought back in 2005 and before. Also, although the topic may be boring to some people, the fact is that global warming is currently taken as gospel in many quarters. It will take a major effort by scientists and commentators to roll back some of the "green" policies that have already been put in place. Thank you for carrying the torch.

Darrell

They will blame the lack of global warming on the capitalists. If there is a sudden ice age they will also blame that on the capitalists.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Mother Nature too feminine for you?

Oh, not at all, Baal.

The creative is masculine... and receptive creation is feminine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global warming is a secular feminized leftist political religion.

It's articles of faith are that global warming is catastrophic,,, that it is human caused... and only government taxation regulation and litigation can save mankind.

It's exactly the same religion today as it was in the 1970's...except then it was called global cooling.

"Feminized"? What the fuck does global warming, hoax or not, have anything to do with feminism?

It has nothing to do with feminism, because feminism is an ideology for bitter angry females.

Liberalism is a feminine ideology,

just as Conservatism is a masculine ideology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Global warming is a secular feminized leftist political religion.

It's articles of faith are that global warming is catastrophic,,, that it is human caused... and only government taxation regulation and litigation can save mankind.

It's exactly the same religion today as it was in the 1970's...except then it was called global cooling.

"Feminized"? What the fuck does global warming, hoax or not, have anything to do with feminism?
It has nothing to do with feminism, because feminism is an ideology for bitter angry females.

Liberalism is a feminine ideology,

just as Conservatism is a masculine ideology.

But you said "secular feminized leftist political religion". Now you're going to tell me that it doesn't have anything to do with feminism despite the text that I emphasized? And do explain the correlation between feminism and liberalism and between masculinism and conservatism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you said "secular feminized leftist political religion". Now you're going to tell me that it doesn't have anything to do with feminism despite the text that I emphasized?

FEMINIZE
tr.v. fem·i·nized, fem·i·niz·ing, fem·i·niz·es. 1. To give a feminine appearance or character to. 2. To cause (a male) to assume feminine characteristics.

The meaning is quite clear. And there is no reference to the angry leftist female political movement called Feminism.

And do explain the correlation between feminism and liberalism and between masculinism and conservatism.

Liberalism is a feminine archetype: anti gun, pro big government, anti military, anti capitalist, pro socialist. Females naturally tend to be liberals, as are males who failed to grow into decent men.

Conservatism is a masculine archetype: pro gun, anti big government, pro military, pro capitalist, anti socialist. Men naturally tend to be Conservatives, as are females who have matured into decent women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

[...] the sudden admission of the IPCC that things aren't as bad as they thought back in 2005 and before.

The only thing "sudden" about it is that the report is soon to be released. :smile: The admissions have been going on, small move by small move, for years. It's just that the slow backtracking isn't reported except on counter-alarmism sites.

By the time for the next report, maybe the eugenics pattern will have been followed: No one is an alarmist, and no one ever was an alarmist (imitating Michael Crichton).

Ellen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

[...] the sudden admission of the IPCC that things aren't as bad as they thought back in 2005 and before.

The only thing "sudden" about it is that the report is soon to be released. :smile: The admissions have been going on, small move by small move, for years. It's just that the slow backtracking isn't reported except on counter-alarmism sites.

By the time for the next report, maybe the eugenics pattern will have been followed: No one is an alarmist, and no one ever was an alarmist (imitating Michael Crichton).

Ellen

What do you mean here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the time for the next report, maybe the eugenics pattern will have been followed: No one is an alarmist, and no one ever was an alarmist (imitating Michael Crichton).

Ellen

What do you mean here?

Before World War II "everyone" (lots and lots of prominent someones and scientists) was (were) a eugenicist. "After World War II, nobody was a eugenicist, and nobody had ever been a eugenicist."

From an article excerpted from State of Fear - link.

The quoted sentence is about halfway down the page.

Ellen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

[...] the sudden admission of the IPCC that things aren't as bad as they thought back in 2005 and before.

The admissions have been going on, small move by small move, for years. It's just that the slow backtracking isn't reported except on counter-alarmism sites.

One obvious admission is the retreat from "global warming" to "climate change" just in case the liberal lunatics get 70's global cooling flashbacks..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superior book, must read in my opinion.

Margaret Sanger was pure evil with the rest of the Eugenicists right behind her. In operation with John Dewey, the other philosophical criminal of our times they set in motion extremely destructive memes into the culture.

State of Fear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superior book, must read in my opinion.

Margaret Sanger was pure evil with the rest of the Eugenicists right behind her. In operation with John Dewey, the other philosophical criminal of our times they set in motion extremely destructive memes into the culture.

State of Fear

And don't forget that persnickety Old Fart Immanuel Kant who started it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superior book, must read in my opinion.

Margaret Sanger was pure evil with the rest of the Eugenicists right behind her. In operation with John Dewey, the other philosophical criminal of our times they set in motion extremely destructive memes into the culture.

State of Fear

Had I had my way, eugenicists who engaged in compulsory sterilization would be punished. Severely. Though fours walls would be too many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Superior book, must read in my opinion.

Margaret Sanger was pure evil with the rest of the Eugenicists right behind her. In operation with John Dewey, the other philosophical criminal of our times they set in motion extremely destructive memes into the culture.

State of Fear

Had I had my way, eugenicists who engaged in compulsory sterilization would be punished. Severely. Though fours walls would be too many.

Not to mention fetusnuffers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And don't forget that persnickety Old Fart Immanuel Kant who started it all.

David,

Another case where I don't feel sure if I'm understanding your intent.

I think you're gently mocking, yes?

Ellen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...