Posted on 03/05/2013 2:25:55 AM PST by neverdem
Environmental activists make money telling us all how terrible things are; climate scientists appreciate the help promoting their data, we do have a bit of a train wreck coming at us emissions-wise, but climate scientists also know there is a risk of backlash if there are too many hyperbolic claims, and that 'green fatigue' will set in if every change in temperature and every storm is attributed to global warming. That's why even the IPCC, no wallflower when it comes to using media talking points, wishes media would not attribute local weather to climate change(PDF).
And then there is the money aspect to just taking a 'sequester' approach to emissions. While activists seem to believe a sequester approach to taxes and spending - egalitarian, across-the-board cuts without regard to merit - is bad, they have an idealized vision of what it will do in the economy regarding emissions. We should just do it, they insist. When activists said America just 'needs' to get down to early 1990s levels of emissions, they painted a perfect scenario where everyone would somehow be employed in either green energy production or white-collar environmental awareness jobs. Yet America is back at early 1990s levels of emissions right now - and the economy we have is what that looks like. Stagnant business climate, high chronic unemployment and food stamp recipients are numerous enough to pick a president, but the stock market is up so the government claims that higher stocks and higher taxes will eventually help poor people who bridge a wider chasm from the rich than ever.
The ironic downside for activists who have gotten the lower emissions they wanted is that in the hierarchy of needs, broad environmental issues are not all that important. When people can't pay...
(Excerpt) Read more at science20.com ...
To the environmentalist “carbon” is just a ruse. The real enemy is people.
This article will only induce the central planners to get us back to the stone age faster.
It's a proven FACT that polar bears were seen digging in the near vicinity of the Tampa sinkhole!
...people who bridge a wider chasm from...
“The real enemy is people.”
Government run amok is the problem. They need tax dollars to stay in control. Taxing carbon would give them plenty. Climate scientists need to eat and they get funding if they play the right music.
For every science degree you hand out...it’s potentially another scientist waiting for something to ask a grant for: the study of butterflys, the study of melted marshmellows, the study of dirt, etc. I hate to say it....but we may at a point where we need to deny kids into college to study science....because they are worthless to us from that day on.
We need the scientists. What we don’t need is colleges stuffed full of taxpayer funded students and professors who don’t have anything better to do than push liberal ideology.
Put guys like Joe Bastardi in the classroom. He’s passionate about the weather and a real stickler for hard data.
The real enemy is LIBERAL vermin (a.k.a. communists, socialists, etc.)
I am no longer worried about global warming, sequester will kill us all.
-——they painted a perfect scenario where everyone would somehow be employed in either green energy production-—
A year or so ago, We were camped in the serenity of Chaco Canyon when two vans pulled in. They contained a horde of students from a Texas community college. They were geography and geology majors. Turns out, they were very nice and did not disturb the reverent serenity that is Chaco.
They came to pay their respects to the old folks. One told me he was a geography major and that would enable him to get a green energy job.
Take the government funding out of academia and you will instantly see the cess pit start to clear up. Pulling in grant money is a huge factor in promotion, thus once a milk cow like global warming is identified there is enormous pressure to treat it as a sacred cow until it is milked out. The hard sciences got sucked into global warming, because it offered any endless supply of suppositions that were as impossible to disprove as they were to prove.
Another large problem is that the period running up to the 1960s genuinely had a lot of original research, because so much was still unknown. As more and more became known, more and more scientists, who are still required to do original research, started to pass off supposition as fact.
My point is that you are carbon. The Carbon Cycle is the life cycle. Attacking carbon is attacking human beings, specifically. It’s evil.
Government is just the tool they use. It can be small. It can be limited. You only need a social contract that is understood and adhered to by the people. Say, something like this: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
No, no, no, no, no! If they went to trade school, then they wouldn’t be able to claim that they deserve more money than everyone else in the field upon graduation. It’s all because they are so smart and everything.... (sarcasm off)
No, no, no, no, no! If they went to trade school, then they wouldn’t be able to claim that they deserve more money than everyone else in the field upon graduation. It’s all because they are so smart and everything.... (sarcasm off)
I think Al Gore selling his network to a bunch of oil sheikhs has more than a bit to do with this.
That reminds me of the dangers stated in Eisenhower's farewell address. The leftists quote his warning about the military-industrial complex, but I find his warnings about federally funded science to be far more appropriate for the modern audience:
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.