You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Fifth Column
Moving Toward Energy Rationing
2008-05-31
WASHINGTON -- I'm not a global warming believer. I'm not a global warming denier. I'm a global warming agnostic who believes instinctively that it can't be very good to pump lots of CO2 into the atmosphere, but is equally convinced that those who presume to know exactly where that leads are talking through their hats.

Predictions of catastrophe depend on models. Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems -- from ocean currents to cloud formation -- that no one fully understands. Which is why the models are inherently flawed and forever changing. The doomsday scenarios posit a cascade of events, each with a certain probability. The multiple improbability of their simultaneous occurrence renders all such predictions entirely speculative.

Yet on the basis of this speculation, environmental activists, attended by compliant scientists and opportunistic politicians, are advocating radical economic and social regulation. "The largest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity," warns Czech President Vaclav Klaus, "is no longer socialism. It is, instead, the ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous ideology of environmentalism."

If you doubt the arrogance, you haven't seen that Newsweek cover story that declared the global warming debate over. Consider: If Newton's laws of motion could, after 200 years of unfailing experimental and experiential confirmation, be overthrown, it requires religious fervor to believe that global warming -- infinitely more untested, complex and speculative -- is a closed issue.

But declaring it closed has its rewards. It not only dismisses skeptics as the running dogs of reaction, i.e., of Exxon, Cheney and now Klaus. By fiat, it also hugely re-empowers the intellectual left.

For a century, an ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous knowledge class -- social planners, scientists, intellectuals, experts and their left-wing political allies -- arrogated to themselves the right to rule either in the name of the oppressed working class (communism) or, in its more benign form, by virtue of their superior expertise in achieving the highest social progress by means of state planning (socialism).

Two decades ago, however, socialism and communism died rudely, then were buried forever by the empirical demonstration of the superiority of market capitalism everywhere from Thatcher's England to Deng's China, where just the partial abolition of socialism lifted more people out of poverty more rapidly than ever in human history.

Just as the ash heap of history beckoned, the intellectual left was handed the ultimate salvation: environmentalism. Now the experts will regulate your life not in the name of the proletariat or Fabian socialism but -- even better -- in the name of Earth itself.

Environmentalists are Gaia's priests, instructing us in her proper service and casting out those who refuse to genuflect. (See Newsweek above.) And having proclaimed the ultimate commandment -- carbon chastity -- they are preparing the supporting canonical legislation that will tell you how much you can travel, what kind of light you will read by, and at what temperature you may set your bedroom thermostat.

Just Monday, a British parliamentary committee proposed that every citizen be required to carry a carbon card that must be presented, under penalty of law, when buying gasoline, taking an airplane or using electricity. The card contains your yearly carbon ration to be drawn down with every purchase, every trip, every swipe.

There's no greater social power than the power to ration. And, other than rationing food, there is no greater instrument of social control than rationing energy, the currency of just about everything one does and uses in an advanced society.

So what does the global warming agnostic propose as an alternative? First, more research -- untainted and reliable -- to determine (a) whether the carbon footprint of man is or is not lost among the massive natural forces (from sunspot activity to ocean currents) that affect climate, and (b) if the human effect is indeed significant, whether the planetary climate system has the homeostatic mechanisms (like the feedback loops in the human body, for example) with which to compensate.

Second, reduce our carbon footprint in the interim by doing the doable, rather than the economically ruinous and socially destructive. The most obvious step is a major move to nuclear power, which to the atmosphere is the cleanest of the clean.

But your would-be masters have foreseen this contingency. The Church of the Environment promulgates secondary dogmas as well. One of these is a strict nuclear taboo.

Rather convenient, is it not? Take this major coal-substituting fix off the table and we will be rationing all the more. Guess who does the rationing?

Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#13  in the days of wood aircraft, I think fire was a concern (after gravity and termites)
Posted by: Frank G   2008-05-31 19:06  

#12  We are designing wood-fired boilers into our municipal buildings that we design and build. The more independent we become at the local level, the better off everyone is.

Now, we have to start thinking about wood-fired aircraft.......
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2008-05-31 19:01  

#11  since private jets are notorious fuel burners. I would propose a year-long ban on private jet travel - to see the effects on the climate. Think that would pass?
Posted by: Frank G   2008-05-31 18:14  

#10  A carbon card -- what a lovely eco-idiot concept. I suggest they make them optional for a decade so the Al Gores of the world can work out the kinks and show us how it's done. That should stop Gore in his tracks by about January 15th of each year. It should be good for U.N. conference budgets too, except I assume that the Indian and Chinese delegations would be exempt.
Posted by: Darrell   2008-05-31 17:52  

#9   McZoid I was thinking "Slot Cars" but I like the induction idea better, no need to keep the slot clean with induction, no slot.
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2008-05-31 14:04  

#8  I'm not a global warming believer. I'm not a global warming denier. I'm a global warming agnostic who believes instinctively that it can't be very good to pump lots of CO2 into the atmosphere, but is equally convinced that those who presume to know exactly where that leads are talking through their hats.

-explains my position to a t.
Concur OS, I just want the most object & unbiased report possible.
Posted by: Snash Oppressor of the Mohammatans aka Broadhead6   2008-05-31 12:14  

#7  Research -- untainted and reliable -- to determine whether the carbon footprint of man is or is not lost among the massive natural forces (from sunspot activity to ocean currents) that affect climate.

THat's all I want. A fair and open debate. Not the stacked deck the political types want, and the kind the treetards have where they demand silence and assume thier conclusions rather than actually testing them.

And not based off some damnably variable model on a computer that cannot even reproduce the climate of today given the starting point and inputs of the last 400 years.

I know programs and modeling. And it not something to stake such important things upon.

Posted by: OldSpook   2008-05-31 10:21  

#6  Jeebus from Phil_B post from commenter there:

Alex Cull (08:49:29) :
According to the Zen of Global Warming, the ice could simultaneously be there (i.e. we can see it and the ship was stuck in it) and not there, as it could still be melting but in some strange alternative way that cannot be witnessed or measured. Just like polar bears can be simultaneously be increasing in numbers and dwindling away to extinction. Can you hear the sound of one hand clapping?

IÂ’m sure many will also fall back on the long-term warming-trend explanation. One cold day does not a winter make (although a hot day is yet another ominous sign that GW is on us.) As long as the models still predict long-term climate meltdown, anything can happen in the short term - flourishing Arctic ice, polar bears frolicking in the streets, glaciers doing the hokey-cokey - and it wonÂ’t mean a thing. Global Warming will be postponed for a little while longer, they will say, but wait and see. We might not have an ice-free Arctic in 2020, but we assuredly will in 2025. Or in 2030. Or 2050. Or maybe 3050. Depends on how we tweak the models.

Or maybe all that ice is a GW-denial-induced hallucination, and the reality is a steaming expanse of open ocean, littered with floating polar bear corpses and oil-drilling platformsÂ…

Me, facetious?
Posted by: George Smiley   2008-05-31 08:57  

#5  Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems -- from ocean currents to cloud formation -- that no one fully understands.

Can they tell if I will meet a young, slender, beautiful woman and have her steal me away from my current wife? Hey, Newton worked on astrology, too. After they pass this bill maybe they can solve the housing crisis by finding a way to turn lead into gold.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2008-05-31 08:56  

#4  Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems -- from ocean currents to cloud formation -- that no one fully understands.

What I do know is that this having been the coldest Jan-Apr time frame in a long time, that the models are just plain screwed and anyone who uses them for justification are just plain power mongers out to substitute them as our new overlords. It's all mesmerized by 'science' that is nothing more than a Three Card Monty hustle than classical critical scientific analysis.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-05-31 08:36  

#3  I get into the culture of deception that pervades the warming side of the debate at Anthony Watts excellent blog. My comments are toward the end where I beat up on a warming believer.
Posted by: phil_b   2008-05-31 06:39  

#2  What a load of crap. Post Ice-Age Warming is opening up the Arctic Ocean land shelves up to development. Anywhere that is now a desert, was once a jungle, which means milleniums of tranformation of organics into oil. Oil is in the Arctic; that is why the Ruskies are laying claim to the shelf. Prediction: enough new oil sources will be discovered prior to the invention of cost effective hybrid and electrical vehicles, to meet all of our needs. A major leap would be the introduction of linear induction engines. Go-Karts are empowered by an attachment to an overhead power source. What if electrical roadways could be created that allowed low amp powering from an source in the road surface? Sci fi films like "Minority Report" feature exactly that type of transport system; looking ahead 30 years or so, it could be science fact. Pardon my optimism.
Posted by: McZoid   2008-05-31 04:29  

#1  Hey... June 1st is one day away in Chicago burbs and I still need to turn my heat on at night. Explain that enviornuts.
Posted by: 3dc   2008-05-31 03:01  

00:00