Smelly Little Orthodoxies
Smelly Little Orthodoxies
“It is the face of a man who is always fighting against something, but who fights in the open and is not frightened, the face of a man who is generously angry — in other words, of a nineteenth-century liberal, a free intelligence, a type hated with equal hatred by all the smelly little orthodoxies which are now contending for our souls.”
– George Orwell (“Charles Dickens”, 1939)
Downloaded 12/2018 from https://sites.psu.edu/academy/2017/03/24/smelly-little-orthodoxies/
Recently we’ve been told that “Climate science is settled.” I hold 2 degrees in geophysics, so I’m no slouch when it comes to science. Some on the Left would argue that anyone who does not believe in the impending disaster posed by the threat of global warming is a science-denier and ought to be locked up. The “smelly little orthodoxy” is that the science is settled when it comes to human activities as the cause of global warming. Or global climate change (when temperatures go down). Or whatever they decide to call the impending catastrophe to continue the narrative. Richard S. Lindzen writes,
“Global warming is about politics and power rather than science. In science, there is an attempt to clarify; in global warming, language is misused in order to confuse and mislead the public.”
– Richard S. Lindzen, in Abbot, Dr John. Climate Change: The Facts (Kindle Locations 587-588). Stockade Books. Kindle Edition.
This is an important statement from a climate scientist. No one is talking about the real scientific issue: whether feed-back mechanisms dampen or amplify changes in global temperature as a result of increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Political elites want us to believe the “smelly little orthodoxy” that climate science has settled all such issues. They would rather focus the narrative on how much it’s going to cost, what countries can afford to contribute and which ones can’t, and what the punishments should be for skeptics like me who don’t believe that human activities are making a significant contribution to global temperatures.
The narrative should never mention that they stand to gain huge amounts of economic and political power if they can get CO2 emissions regulated and passed into law. Nor do they want to admit that CO2 is not a pollutant. The fact that it is what plants need to live shouldn’t be mentioned.
Mark Steyne once said something like, ‘They want us to believe we can control global temperatures, but that we can’t control our southern border.’
But follow the money. According to https://www.climatedollars.org/full-study/us-govt-funding-of-climate-change/ , from FY 1993 to FY 2014, total US expenditures on climate research amounted to more than $166 billion in 2012 dollars.
And in a 2011 article on forbes.com, “According to the GAO, annual federal climate spending has increased from $4.6 billion in 2003 to $8.8 billion in 2010, amounting to $106.7 billion over that period. The money was spent in four general categories: technology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, science to understand climate changes, international assistance for developing countries, and wildlife adaptation to respond to actual or expected changes.” (Downloaded 12/24/2018, https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2011/08/23/the-alarming-cost-of-climate-change-hysteria/#db466447ebbe)
What incentive is there for climate scientists to tell us that the feedback mechanisms serve as a dampening mechanism to the effects of CO2 on global temperature? Those government-funded research grants would dry up faster than a prune in the Mojave desert. Never mind Milton Friedman’s argument that if you don’t have a welfare state, you can have open borders (we did up until 1914), but if you do have a welfare state, you need to regulate immigration.
And in 2018 we can’t get $5 B for a wall which people actually voted for and which would put human traffickers on our southern border out of business. But up is down and black is white if you need votes in the 21st Century West. The political elites know that intelligent folks are going to vote to balance the budget, control borders, and decrease government overreach. Hence they are working to augment the existing dependency class with potential voters from third-world countries. Does that sound bigoted? Maybe to some, but I’m not: I love people from all countries. And that’s the point. If the US doesn’t stand strong and provide an example of government of the people, for the people, and by the people, and which provides safeguards for economic growth in the private sector and safety for its citizens, the leadership in those countries will never change, their economies will remain stagnant, and people will continue to live in squalor and chaos.
But back to the smelly little orthodoxy that “climate science is settled”, because good science always challenges theories and accepted conclusions.
No one argues that increased concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere can have an effect on global temperatures. What the climate-change alarmists are not talking about is that they are multiplying the feedback mechanism by a factor of 6 to get their numbers. The feedback mechanism refers to the ways the Earth reacts to increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere, such as evaporation from the oceans, increased amounts of water vapor, and increasing clouds. The climate alarmists don’t want to admit that their models turn the dampening effect of feedbacks on temperature changes into an amplification by multiplying the feedback part of the equation by 3 instead of 0.5 (which fits real-world temperature measurements). You can read about it in more detail here: https://mises.org/library/skeptics-case .
But reader beware – an actual challenge to established climate models predicting global catastrophe as a result of global warming must be part of some right-wing conspiracy by climate-deniers. In other words, by haters. Call me a hater if you like, but what I hate is twisting facts for political gain by people addicted to power.
Jesus, talking about the religious leaders of the day, said, “For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’ But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (Matthew 23:4-12, NKJV)
Political leaders of the 21st Century remind me of the religious leaders of the first Century. They want to impose huge tax burdens and regulations to feed their fantasy of controlling the climate while refusing to protect working-class wages and women and children from violent offenders by enforcing existing border laws.
John wrote, “If any man loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” (1 John 2:15b). To love the world in the 21st Century is to love power, and if two plus two needs to be five (or fifty) so be it. When people who are addicted to power feel like they need more of it, they are willing to trade the economic and physical safety of their constituents for political gain.
Jesus also said, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Change the way you think and believe in the good news.” (Paraphrase of Mark 1:15). The kingdoms of this world are inherently corrupt because the human heart is inherently corruptible and, as Lord Acton so aptly put it, “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
My favorite promise in the bible used to be found in Joshua 1:8. But as we find ourselves in an ever-more Orwellian society, it is this:
“For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder.” (Isaiah 9:6a, NKJV).
When the government rests on His shoulder, there will be no more striving for power among corruptible human leaders and we won’t need to argue about how much two plus two is.