“Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change” Lovelock

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=2156 ^ | William M. Briggs

[mattstat]

James Lovelock knows of what he speaks: personal experience allows him to say that a lot of humans aren’t that bright.

But Lovelock forgets that while there are many—half!—who are below average on the IQ scale, it takes an academic to say something really stupid.

Take the Gaia hypothesis—now elevated to “theory”—Lovelock’s creation. Life forms a complex web of interactions, Lovelock says. Has anyone in all of history ever disagreed with that? It is trivially true, and noticing it is not the least worthy of praise. Yet several grant-awarding agencies still gave Lovelock a hearty pat on the back after he gave that banal observation a cute name.

James Lovelock and his pal Gaia

And a healthy dose of pre-civilized mysticism, without which Gaia theory would never have caught on. The Earth itself is “alive”; it is one self-regulating organism, says our sage. In which, Gaiaists (Gaiaers? Gaiaphytes?) say, humans are a “cancer” that ma Earth would like to rid itself of. Etc., etc.

Since it is Lovelock’s comment about human ignorance that is our subject today, it is well to point out that Lovelock himself lacks the mental capacity to see the inconsistencies in his theory, despite being given plenty of time to notice them, and being given the able assistance of many critics.

Take the statement...

[Travis McGee]

Yes, we need a Global Elite to run the world, because we mere humans are just too stupid.

Let the Algore be King of the World.

[Puppage]

“Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change” Lovelock

Or, to believe in human caused change.

[skully]

Yeah James, I may be stupid, I may be ignorant...but at least I'm not a Liberal

[joethedrummer]

Sorry James... it’s not that we’re too STUPID; Rather, we’re too insignificant.

[Flintlock]

Yep!
We’re so stupid we can’t even control THE SUN!!

What dummies we are!

[fireman15]

This article reminds me of my little nieces. They are currently receiving the finest education that California taxpeyers can provide. They came to our house repaeating all of the green crap they learned in school, which sounds a lot like the kind of green crap that Briggs believes in. As the article states, Mr. Briggs it is not that people are too stupid to prevent “climate change”, some of us are just observant enough to realize that there are some things that mankind does not currently have the ability to control.

[libh8er]

"..we cannot confidently predict what the future holds. ."

If you cannot confidently predict what the future holds, what is your point ?

[mattstat]

The “kind of green crap that Briggs believes in.”?

I think you need to read the article (and associated articles) a little more closely.

[fireman15]

I am sorry I meant James Lovelock believes in. My appologies to Mr. Briggs.

[fireman15]

I appreciated Mr. Brigg’s article very much.

[Oceander]

If (1) human-beings aren't "too bright," and (2) Mr. Lovelock is a human-being (please, let's just assume arguendo for the time being, ok?), then (3) Mr. Lovelock is not "too bright" - that is, Mr. Lovelock is stupid, and therefore (4) has no basis for asserting that his claims to "know" about climate change are more truthful - more accurate - than the competing counter-claims made by any other human-being regarding climate change.

Ergo, on the basis of his own premises, Mr. Lovelock doesn't know what he's talking about and should shut the eff up.