“The data show that from 2000 to 2021, the number of global weather and climate disasters declined by about 10%, which is very good news and completely contrary to conventional wisdom.”
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Samizdata quote of the dayJanuary 6th, 2022 |
 16 comments to Samizdata quote of the day |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
So, climate change is interfering with and decreasing the desirable and necessary variability of our climate!
Damn that global warming! Is there nothing it cannot destroy?!
Conventional wisdom appears to be plowing right along unperturbed
Conventional wisdom appears to be plowing right along unperturbed
Indeed. That’s what conventional wisdom does, unfortunately.
But… THE SCIENCE!
But if closing the nuclear and coal fired plants reduced climate disasters by 10%, then we’re on the right track! It’s working!
But here is the challenge, I imagine I can find a dozen articles explaining how things are getting worse, and if you read the comments on this article they claim that the data isn’t being used correctly. So well @John B might say “But THE SCIENCE”. The problem is that the world is so full or garbage information it is very hard to tell what to rely on, what is the actual science. As to this study, I don’t know if it is reliable, because I’d have to dig in. Unfortunately “I agree with it” is not a good measure of the reliability of information. In fact, exactly the opposite is true in science: any result that you “want” should be examined with extra scepticism.
And the only way to know is to look very carefully at the data, study the methodology, sample size, collection method, biases, etc. etc. Which is to say “headline science” is completely unreliable. The bookmarks bar is poison for honest debate, because one can easily collect a huge list of articles supporting one’s position (or at least whose headline does) and ignore the ones that don’t. Then, come any discussion on it, blast your interlocutor with a hundred “studies” that “prove” your point — even though you might not even have read beyond the first paragraph of the article.
The internet brings us a lot of information, but unfortunately most of it is garbage, the challenge of the age, for those who honestly want to know the truth that is, is to be able to effectively sort the diamonds out of the crap.
FWIW, one thing you can easily do is study something like the occurrence of hurricanes, since every time there is a bad one it is blamed on global warming. Wikipedia lists all the hurricane seasons going back fifty years or more. It is easy enough to go back and count the number of hurricanes each year and see that the frequency of hurricanes is pretty much the same as it has been for the past fifty years.
I guess the question is — what point does this study serve for me? Is it there to bolster what I already believe, or is it an honest search for the truth? Things that support my position are good for my ego, they are not, as a general rule, good for my truth seeking. Things that challenge my preconceptions are far better for the latter.
I watched television interviews with people who had their homes destroyed in the recent fire in Colorado.
Did the complain about the failure to clear-the-land? No they did not. The mad “leave it to Gaia” government policy had their de facto support.
Did they complain about their houses being built too close together? No they did. The high density land use policy (hello Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030) had their de fact support.
Did they even complain about the combustible materials of which their houses were made? No – those “Green” regulations must continue.
What they did complain about was how Colorado has got hotter and drier over time – which it has not.
They also complained about how wind speeds have increased – which they have not.
They also complained that the Artic is now ice free and this does something bad to weather patterns – the trouble with that is that the Artic is NOT ice free. There is lots of ice there – as people in ships struck in the ice could testify (if they were allowed on to the media).
In short the population have their heads filled with nonsense – they can stand in SNOW by the ruins of their burned out house, and all that comes out of their mouth is leftist talking points. Because that is what they have been TAUGHT – at school, at university, and by the media.
There is a crises – but it is a civilizational crises. And it is no good trying to reason with these people – as they will scream “DENIER!” and go for your throat. And I mean that literally – you will be physically attacked (so avoid them).
They blame C02 for their houses burning down – much as previous generations would have blamed “witchcraft” or “the Jews”.
As Tony Heller (who used to live in the area – before he escaped to Wyoming to get away from the Covid 19th lockdowns) puts it (quoting others).
“You can not reason someone out of a position they were never reasoned into” – they were not reasoned into their beliefs, they were “got at” when they were very young children and by the time they are adults it is almost hopeless.
It is true that humans are beings – we have free will, we are persons. But brainwashing (conditioning) does tend to work (at least for a time) otherwise it would not be done.
Judge Sewall managed to eventually free himself of the brainwashing (the “education”) that led him to participate in the murder of “witches” in Salem. He bitterly regretted what he had done. Indeed Judge Sewall wrote “Selling Joseph” in 1700 – the first anti slavery book to be written in North America, he was in many ways a good man.
But he could not bring back to life the people he had killed.
If men think that the “Climate Change Emergency” burned their houses down – and stand in the snow looking for “DENIERS!” to kill, it is best to avoid them.
They may eventually free their minds of the conditioning (“education”) – but they will not help you if they kill you, no matter how much they bitterly regret it later.
The man stands weeping into the ashes of the people he had burned – “No! What have I done. Forgive me!” he says in words choked by tears – but his tears can not turn the ash back into human beings, and the ashes can not forgive him.
There are many sound arguments against climate change alarmism but one of the best is to analyse the long list of predictions that were based on the notion that CO2 is the main driver of global temperatures. If there is a single one of these that turned out to be correct I am not aware of it.
As confirmed by the millions taken in with Covid scaremongering: “Mass Formation Psychosis” is the term used by Prof Mattias Desmet. Robert Malone MD repeated it in his podcast with Joe Rogan a few days ago, and now Google are desperately trying to down-rank it, which proves they were right!
Thanks Paul for prompting me to recall to link to the core dialog in Isaac Asimov’s The Martian Way. It is ironic that Asimov himself was cited as a typical example of the litany by Bjorn Lomborg in the opening pages of The Sceptical Environmentalist.
When you consider that Asimov’s initial motivation was The McCarthy Era and that he chose to write an allegory in which Martian settlers obtain from the outer solar system replacement water for that which they are alleged to be wasting with reckless disregard for Earth’s environment, it is strongly arguable that he wrote a formally much better allegory than Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. On the one hand, like communists, but unlike witches, politicians corrupted by greed really do exist; on the other, the threat that is posed by communism was markedly reduced in the USA (relative to Europe) lacking, as it does, the evils of established church, residual feudal privilege and industrialisation without the safety valve of an open frontier, in the same way that negative environmental externalities need to be recalibrated relative to the new frontier of expansion into space.
Stonyground they CHANGE their predictions.
For example, for years (indeed decades) they have said that C02 emissions meant LESS snow (the “end of snow”) now they (for example the official “Climate Scientist” for the State of New Jersey – but there are a Legion of them) are saying that the recent heavy snow falls are caused by C02 emissions “Climate Change”.
C02 causes it not to snow and C02 causes it to snow – and the media (and education system) applauds BOTH statements.
Heads their theory is proved – tails their theory is also proved. Any evidence, or the opposite of that evidence, proves their theory – Karl Popper would weep (but modern academics hate him).
“But it makes no sense” – it NEVER makes sense. Blaming “the Jews” or “the capitalists” (factory and mine owners) for everything does not make sense either – but vast numbers of people (including vast numbers of ACADEMICS) supported these movements.
Persecuting “Deniers” is just as much fun as persecuting Jews – as the Guardian puts it, do not think HATE.
It is not snowing – HATE the “Deniers”, it is snowing – HATE the “Deniers”.
Hate! Hate! Hate!
And the education system (schools and universities), mainstream media, and government bureaucracy, will rush to push the HATE.
@Dave Ward (and all)
Just in case it is “misinformationated” by Google, here’s a link to Robert Malone’s Substack page
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/mass-formation-psychosis
Also, his discussion with Neil Oliver
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MpUc7XxcZmfv/
And his own website
https://www.rwmalonemd.com/
Oh, by the way, this might be what got him banned by Twitter (because “content”)
He mentioned this study:
https://rumble.com/vqx3kb-the-pfizer-inoculations-do-more-harm-than-good.html
Sorry, my typo, the previous post refers to Robert Malone MD
Just in case it gets “misinformationated” by Google, here’s a link to another platform
https://rumble.com/vrxr3n-tpc-653-dr.-mattias-desmet-dr.-robert-malone-dr.-peter-mccullough-mass-form.html
He’s also publishing on Substack now
https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/
Here’s a chat of his with Neil Oliver
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MpUc7XxcZmfv/
Mass Formation Psychosis. Sounds like the mentality of forms of crowd behaviour, BTW. Political and religious figures have been doing this a long, long time.
And the horrors in Mao’s China fit with this term, which I am shamelessly stealing.
Which is precisely what Prof Desmet talks about – Hitler’s rise to power being another classic example.