Another bad day for Al Gore and the Church of AGW
First the famous "Hockey Stick" and now this. Another splashy claim from Al Gore's so-called documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" runs up against some inconvenient research.
Remember the melting icecap of Kilimanjaro being laid at the feet of man-caused global warming?
Um......not so much.
Newspapers and news sites in the Netherlands today extensively broke the news of the findings of a research team led by Professor Jaap Sinninghe Damste -- a leading molecular paleontologist at Utrecht University and winner of the prestigious Spinoza Prize -- about the melting icecap of the Kilimanjaro, the African mountain that became a symbol of anthropogenic global warming.Professor Sinninghe Damste's research, as discussed on the site of the Dutch Organization of Scientific Research (DOSR) -- a governmental body -- shows that the icecap of Kilimanjaro was not the result of cold air but of large amounts of precipitation which fell at the beginning of the Holocene period, about 11,000 years ago.
But the science is settled, according to....well...anyone who profits from the science being settled.
It needs to be pointed out that there is a Hell of a lot more money to be made by those pushing the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming than by those who are arguing against it.
That is why you hardly ever hear about nuclear power as an answer to a cleaner environment or as a way to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It is because building nucelar power plants to replace coal fired plants don't involve massive transfers of wealth from one set of folks to another.
All directed by one-worlder types in Washington, Turtle Bay, and Brussels. You know, the guys who are paying for all of the research that shows that there (Is. No. Doubt. The. Science. Is. Settled. So. Shut. Up.) man-driven climate change.
And who are telling us that the only way to avoid a planet-wide catastrophe is to let them cut up and re-distribute the wealth of developed countries.
Which, you should notice by now, is the solution for every "problem", be it social, technical, environmental or natural.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Another bad day for Al Gore and the Church of AGW.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.jessicaswell.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2815
4 Comments
Hello MMI think I got your point that there is more to innovation than doscivery and invention, but my feeling is that the name of the Ministry is not necessarily connected to the policies implemented by the Ministry. A rose by any other name, and all that. I'd like to see more focus on the policies such as those outlined in the Minister's publication Igniting the Future , which is available off the MoRST website.If I had been suggesting that science knows better than business what business needs, that would indeed have been churlish. But to get the right answer, one needs to ask the right question. Business uninformed by the latest science may not ask the right question, and dialogue between business and researchers can help there.There is another aspect to the government's involvement in supporting research the issue of where the benefits fall. Research into a better strain of rye grass or a mauve kiwifruit tends to produce results that can be used by the whole industry. It isn't worthwhile for any one farmer to pay for the research, but if the government funds it, the benefit from that funding is widely spread. The position is different if company xyz wants funding to research a better widget. Company xyz will not want a swathe of other firms getting into its market. So where is the public benefit from the government funding the research? There is some, but not a lot. Why don't more companies pay for their own research to develop better products which will be relatively immune to the value of the NZ dollar and bring better profits? Maybe if we can bridge the schism you refer to we will be on track to make a difference. And there are social attitudes that need changing, to better celebrate hard work and enterprise, and look for ways to do things ourselves instead of wanting aunty Helen to do it for us (or uncle John for that matter).
bKYXNH wjmetvqczxnv
JTNzLl jfbsthywgyqt
You're quite right--it's nothing but a method of taking from one person and giving to another. Makes them feel big. Makes their genitals grow, in my brother's inelegant phrase, although he was even ruder than I am.
If you do what the science and research say, then where's the latitude to express your individuality? It takes a certain humility to bow to facts, a humility which these people don't have.
Tell me. Is there any difference in the mindset of these people and of any other totalitarian, such as Mao or Stalin? And before I am accused of being absurd, let's remember that these are the children of the people who howled about DDT, and banning DDT murdered more people through malaria than Stalin and Mao combined.
Screw the science. There's no glory in bowing to facts.