I am hopeful but not optimistic. There are people who lived their whole adult lives from when this nonsense started in the 60s to today and have seen every single prediction fail to material and yet are more fervent believers than they were in the past.
“They “affect the planet.” But they don’t have anything to do with climate. The emphasized sentence is exactly how the cause lost the sensible middle. “Science,” which anyone who disagrees must be a “denier” of, now tells us that planetary temperature reduction requires “decisive action on equality, justice and poverty alleviation””
I have been saying the same thing for 25 years. No one is “for” pollution, even if you recognize it is impossible to have a civilization without having any, and changing from being anti-pollution into primitive nature worship chased away most sane people, which the AGW zealots probably see as a good thing.
Well not in Australia is it over.
The State of Queensland, where I live, announced a few days ago that they will begin shutting down our coal fired power stations in 2031 and finish by 2037.
I have written to the guy who announced this, who happens to be my state representative and state treasurer, asking how the people of Queensland will benefit from this. We’ll see if I get a reply.
To complete the absurdity, Queensland currently burns something like 15 to 20 million tonnes of coal a year. We export 220 million.
I met with the guy 2 1/2 years ago. He said “but isn’t most of that metallurgical coal for making steel?” I told him about the Bessemer process and that only a vanishing small amount of the carbon doesn’t go up the flue as CO2. “Oh”.
Just read the article. John Cochrane was at one time a customer of mine. He flies sailplanes or used to.
Personally, I think Climategate was the turning point. The basic arguments still present today of both climate change and climate skeptic sides were in place, and that scandal revealed basic flaws of climate research frequently rebutted, but never addressed – such as researchers hiding research disputes in order to present the right message to the public (say one thing in private and a different one in public) or the “hiding the decline” problem.
Now, you might be thinking “Boy that was a long time ago!” Well, it takes a while to defeat such a beast.
Once a Paradigm gets established it usually takes a generation for the tenured professors to die off one by one. They are so invested in reputation and financially in the dogma that they will not change. My first exposure to History of Science university courses back in the late 70’s emphasized that…
“Personally, I think Climategate was the turning point.”
Never underestimate the power of cognitive dissonance to simply ignore facts that you don’t like. Consider the example of the Epstein files currently on the public discourse. If there was all this damaging information on Donald Trump being with underage girls in the files it would have been leaked by the Biden administration last summer/fall to ensure the Kamala Harris wins the election, court order or not. They would have just leaked it and claimed they didn’t know who did it. Worst case scenario some lower level employee would have ended up being fired at the Justice department or FBI and if charged with contempt of court pardoned by President Harris. If they had it they would have used it if not the Biden administration then hell Obama could have used it back in 2016 to help Hillary Clinton win.
If there was all this damaging information on Donald Trump being with underage girls in the files it would have been leaked by the Biden administration last summer/fall to ensure the Kamala Harris wins the election, court order or not. They would have just leaked it and claimed they didn’t know who did it. Worst case scenario some lower level employee would have ended up being fired at the Justice department or FBI and if charged with contempt of court pardoned by President Harris. If they had it they would have used it if not the Biden administration then hell Obama could have used it back in 2016 to help Hillary Clinton win.
The only person really interested in doing so would be Trump. And he’d be shooting himself in the foot, if the news were accurate. My view is that one of the above administrations would just release the information if they had it. Would be no need for a leak when it’s true.
“My view is that one of the above administrations would just release the information if they had it. Would be no need for a leak when it’s true”
The official hold up is that some of the information is protected by court order things like protected grand jury testimony. The most likely explanation my guess would be is that it’s not particularly damaging to one side (Trump) or the other side (Bill Clinton) of the political aisle. But it may be damaging to billionaire donor(s) classes (think folks like Bill Gates associated with Epstein) who support both sides of the aisle and it’s because of pressure from them that the information isn’t being released; in addition to the court order issues of course.
I saw a funny but true meme on the Powerlineblog Week in Pictures:
“I tried to follow the science, but it was simply not there. I then followed the money, that’s where I found the science.”
“Pulitzer Prize winning journalist David Cay Johnston tells Times Radio’s Fergus Macphee why the Epstein story isn’t going away now Donald Trump is in the UK and what the second state visit means for the President.”
This is an example of the cognitive dissonance; if there was all of this damaging material (on Trump) in the Epstein files that “would end his presidency; he will be impeached removed” it would have been ferreted out and leaked by the Biden/Harris administration who had four years to do so.
I am hopeful but not optimistic. There are people who lived their whole adult lives from when this nonsense started in the 60s to today and have seen every single prediction fail to material and yet are more fervent believers than they were in the past.
“They “affect the planet.” But they don’t have anything to do with climate. The emphasized sentence is exactly how the cause lost the sensible middle. “Science,” which anyone who disagrees must be a “denier” of, now tells us that planetary temperature reduction requires “decisive action on equality, justice and poverty alleviation””
I have been saying the same thing for 25 years. No one is “for” pollution, even if you recognize it is impossible to have a civilization without having any, and changing from being anti-pollution into primitive nature worship chased away most sane people, which the AGW zealots probably see as a good thing.
Well not in Australia is it over.
The State of Queensland, where I live, announced a few days ago that they will begin shutting down our coal fired power stations in 2031 and finish by 2037.
I have written to the guy who announced this, who happens to be my state representative and state treasurer, asking how the people of Queensland will benefit from this. We’ll see if I get a reply.
To complete the absurdity, Queensland currently burns something like 15 to 20 million tonnes of coal a year. We export 220 million.
I met with the guy 2 1/2 years ago. He said “but isn’t most of that metallurgical coal for making steel?” I told him about the Bessemer process and that only a vanishing small amount of the carbon doesn’t go up the flue as CO2. “Oh”.
Just read the article. John Cochrane was at one time a customer of mine. He flies sailplanes or used to.
Personally, I think Climategate was the turning point. The basic arguments still present today of both climate change and climate skeptic sides were in place, and that scandal revealed basic flaws of climate research frequently rebutted, but never addressed – such as researchers hiding research disputes in order to present the right message to the public (say one thing in private and a different one in public) or the “hiding the decline” problem.
Now, you might be thinking “Boy that was a long time ago!” Well, it takes a while to defeat such a beast.
Once a Paradigm gets established it usually takes a generation for the tenured professors to die off one by one. They are so invested in reputation and financially in the dogma that they will not change. My first exposure to History of Science university courses back in the late 70’s emphasized that…
“Personally, I think Climategate was the turning point.”
Never underestimate the power of cognitive dissonance to simply ignore facts that you don’t like. Consider the example of the Epstein files currently on the public discourse. If there was all this damaging information on Donald Trump being with underage girls in the files it would have been leaked by the Biden administration last summer/fall to ensure the Kamala Harris wins the election, court order or not. They would have just leaked it and claimed they didn’t know who did it. Worst case scenario some lower level employee would have ended up being fired at the Justice department or FBI and if charged with contempt of court pardoned by President Harris. If they had it they would have used it if not the Biden administration then hell Obama could have used it back in 2016 to help Hillary Clinton win.
If there was all this damaging information on Donald Trump being with underage girls in the files it would have been leaked by the Biden administration last summer/fall to ensure the Kamala Harris wins the election, court order or not. They would have just leaked it and claimed they didn’t know who did it. Worst case scenario some lower level employee would have ended up being fired at the Justice department or FBI and if charged with contempt of court pardoned by President Harris. If they had it they would have used it if not the Biden administration then hell Obama could have used it back in 2016 to help Hillary Clinton win.
The only person really interested in doing so would be Trump. And he’d be shooting himself in the foot, if the news were accurate. My view is that one of the above administrations would just release the information if they had it. Would be no need for a leak when it’s true.
“My view is that one of the above administrations would just release the information if they had it. Would be no need for a leak when it’s true”
The official hold up is that some of the information is protected by court order things like protected grand jury testimony. The most likely explanation my guess would be is that it’s not particularly damaging to one side (Trump) or the other side (Bill Clinton) of the political aisle. But it may be damaging to billionaire donor(s) classes (think folks like Bill Gates associated with Epstein) who support both sides of the aisle and it’s because of pressure from them that the information isn’t being released; in addition to the court order issues of course.
I saw a funny but true meme on the Powerlineblog Week in Pictures:
“I tried to follow the science, but it was simply not there. I then followed the money, that’s where I found the science.”
Trump’s Epstein links ‘will be the end of his presidency’ | David Cay Johnston
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N68spqk0l2w&t=421s
“Pulitzer Prize winning journalist David Cay Johnston tells Times Radio’s Fergus Macphee why the Epstein story isn’t going away now Donald Trump is in the UK and what the second state visit means for the President.”
This is an example of the cognitive dissonance; if there was all of this damaging material (on Trump) in the Epstein files that “would end his presidency; he will be impeached removed” it would have been ferreted out and leaked by the Biden/Harris administration who had four years to do so.