Today’s post is at The Stream: “Bishops Demand World-Wide Decarbonization“.
Generally, the less physics a man knows the more he cares about global-warming-of-doom. The reason is simple. In-depth knowledge of the sun-earth energy budget, of radiative transfer, of fluid flow on a rotating sphere, and of the complexities of discretizing and integrating forward the equations of motion fed by sporadic, incomplete measurements bashes fantasies of doom on the head, leaving them quite dead.
On the other hand, ignorance of these matters leaves folks defenseless against hucksters selling sure-fire cures of environmental catastrophe. “Take this small carbon tax, friend, printed on organic recycled paper, and you’ll save the earth!”
That mastery dampens ardor isn’t an invariable rule. Knowledgeable scientists have been known to fret, too. Yet the scientists who believe in doom do so because they have fallen in love with their models. These scientists are like the sculptor Pygmalion, lovingly chipping away at their Theories, wistfully wishing they were Real. Only they aren’t. Global-warming-of-doom Theory and Reality are not friends; they aren’t even on speaking terms.
And for more on the harm ignorant moral signaling causes, this: The Rise of Sentiment and the Fall of Civilization.
You had me at “hello”:
“the less physics a man knows the more he cares about global-warming-of-doom. The reason is simple. In-depth knowledge of the sun-earth energy budget, of radiative transfer, of fluid flow on a rotating sphere, and of the complexities of discretizing and integrating forward the equations of motion fed by sporadic, incomplete measurements bashes fantasies of doom on the head, leaving them quite dead.”
All we need are more windmills that were so successful at reducing carbon in Europe.
A complete “decarbonization” means no fossil fuels. It’s word play designed to take away from the real meaning of what these people want. Of course, “address inequality and bring people out of poverty” is mutually exclusive in this case, but I doubt these people even know what that term means. There is no rational thought in any of this–none.
Until we find another cache of wind turbine and solar panel seeds to plant more farms, we are stuck using massive amounts of fossil fuels to create those energy sources. Unless the Bishops know where the seeds are, they are advocating for the impossible.
I’m hard pressed to believe these people care at all about anything but themselves. They hate their children, they hate anyone who disagrees with them–they are walking bundles of hatred except for themselves. They are going to take all the spoils of war because they are the only ones worthy. Everyone else is surely expendable.
Euthanasia plays right into the hands of the decarbonistas.
Bless me father, for I have sinned…
I drove my car four days last week
I’ve been heating my house this winter
I’ve been breathing out my entire life
aaah, indulgences you say
Pingback: Stream: Bishops Demand World-Wide Decarbonization. | Reaction Times
A complete “decarbonization” means no fossil fuels.
We all know carbon warms. Heck! Every time I have a cookout I warm my food with charcoal which is nothing but very pure carbon. A complete decarbonization means NO fuels. People will no longer be in poverty under this strategy because there won’t be any people. If any DO remain, they’ll all be equally poor so there will no longer be a wealth disparity.
DAV: No, in the way global warmists use the term, the only bad sources of carbon are fossil fuels. Some activists throw in things like cow gas and silly things like that. But the actual theory says only fossil fuels are the problem because these sources were sequestered over millions of years and now we are releasing the carbon dioxide way too quickly. Also, the use of the word “carbon” has been so messed up by the media and the activists it’s obvious they care nothing about accuracy or the theory in general. It’s Carbon Dioxide, methane and a very few other specific compounds. Only the completely scientifically illiterate call for the “decarbonization” of the planet. When you hear that term, think complete moron following his preachers of the upcoming apocalypse blindly. Unless the speaker calls it carbon dioxide, the speacher should be ignored or called out for their ignorance. Pointing and laughing may be appropriate.
“the complexities of discretizing and integrating forward the equations of motion fed by sporadic, incomplete measurements”
Right there, that’s enough to confidently discount the complex general circulation models.
Their lousy predictions confirms it.
In addition to falling in love with their theories, some of the professed belief in GWOD may be a desire to control the lives of others and profit handsomely thereby, and some of it explained by G. K. Chesterton’s ‘When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.’ There may be other causes as well.
There is also a lack of scientific integrity, which demands that doubts be engaged, not suppressed. Predictions of the future are inherently uncertain, to leave that unmentioned is another symptom of the loss of integrity.
De Maistre would be appalled at this ridiculousness, as would 99% of popes in history. Are they blind to the true evils of the Modern World? Has the Catholic priesthood gone mad?