Two things have happened with the climate debate recently that reveals that climate change apologists—better known as Europeans-- owe the rest of us an apology.
OK, make that three things have happened.
Or to put it more correctly: two things have happened and one thing has not.
What hasn’t happened, as most of us know by now, is that temperatures have not risen in the last two decades.
This pause in “global warming” has confounded the models that climate change evangelists cite when they propose to tax the rest of us, ration our energy and herd us into urban areas where we all get to ride bikes, buses and electric train cars “for our own good.”
Montana, for example, is not oceanfront property as of yet, and, the last time I looked, rising oceans have swamped no substantial islands.
This non-event has led to a bit of nervous laughter from the Left.
In a pre-release of the upcoming IPCC climate change report, UN scientists reportedly concede that their models have failed to account for this almost two decade long pause of global warming.
“One of the central issues [dealt with in the new report] is believed to be why the IPCC failed to account for the ‘pause’ in global warming,” writes the UK’s Telegraph, “which they admit that they did not predict in their computer models. Since 1997, world average temperatures have not shown any statistically significant increase.
The summary also shows that scientist have now discovered that between 950 and 1250 AD, before the Industrial Revolution, parts of the world were as warm for decades at a time as they are now.”
Recommended
But still a group of scientists, who have more time on their hands than is wise, and also more money than common sense, happened to put out a new “world” map that will help us with spending more money on things scientists now admit that they don’t know about. This map is based on the climate change model we know to be flawed.
The map purports to show the world areas most susceptible to climate change; areas that will be vulnerable, of course, in some distant future when the flawed climate model suddenly, miraculously, imitates reality, likely by Divine intervention or just plain old coincidence.
“Scientists said that the new world map,” writes IBTimes, “which is created using data from the world’s ecosystems and predictions of how climate change will impact them, is expected to help governments, environmental agencies and donors identify regions that would be best served by investments in programs such as the creation of protected areas, restoration efforts and other conservation activities.”
Yup, um, scientists are always saying stuff like that with other people’s money: proposing tax credits and restoration work and off-limit areas where really, really important stuff is happening in nature.
Or perhaps not.
See, I used to think that the point of science was to actually figure out how the world really works, not how we would like it to work.
But I can see now that it’s more important to have scientific models of how the world should work.
Because just this week, the European Commissioner of Climate Change Action—a sort of European Power Ranger on climate—happened to say: so what if we got the science regarding the earth’s temperature wrong? Can’t we just be grateful to the climate model without being nitpicky on actual temperature or consequences?
"Let's say that science,” said EU weather czar Connie Hedegaard, “some decades from now, said 'we were wrong, it was not about climate', would it not in any case have been good to do many of things you have to do in order to combat climate change?"
What? Like riding bikes more? Drinking one glass of red wine a day? Shipping more Powder River Basin coal to China so that the Chinese can enjoy the benefits of the cheap, domestic U.S. coal reserves while Americans pay more for energy?
In fairness to science, Hedegaard, isn’t really a scientist. She’s more of a literary historian. Her Wikipedia entry describes her as a “public intellectual,” whatever that is.
And her defective thinking exemplifies why I’ve always been troubled by liberals’ obsession with Europe.
Talk about making bad, bad decisions as a continent.
Here’s a region of supposedly educated and superior people-- Europe that is-- who have made very few correct decisions over the last 200 years.
And after hearing from Hedegaard, I don’t think those bad decisions are chance. It’s ingrained poor processing, it’s public intellectualism.
There was that whole Hitler thing; before that the World War I thing; Napoleon, Stalin, monarchies, socialism, communism, green parties, not shaving your underarms. Horsemeat is considered a delicacy in Europe!
And another thing: Europe controlled North America for longer than there has been the United States.
In all that time they couldn’t make it profitable.
Why?
The taxes were too high. Everyone besides Obama and the Europeans know this.
So on behalf of the rest of the country, even the rest of the world, I accept your apology Europe for getting so much of history wrong.
Now let’s talk about that science thing…
Join the conversation as a VIP Member