The struggles for believers of the theory-with-no-observations are getting worse. Once upon a time they used to just ignore skeptics. Now they’re coming to terms with their fall from hallowed “untouchable” status.
The Climate Spectator posted an article Wish I wasn’t a warmenist last week discussing the new urban terminology:
Here’s how the online Urban Dictionary defines a warmenist: “Gullible, scientificially (sic) illiterate, unthinking acolyte and zombie-fired propagandist of the Religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming.”
One in the eye, one supposes, for all those academies of science which have declared they accept the science of global warming and man’s role in it. But the definition goes on: “One who takes direct orders from High Priest King of Idiocy, Albert J. Gore. One who puts the “mental” in environmentalism. Historical inheritors of those who believed that King Canute could hold back the tides and that the wolf would eat the moon unless their first-born daughter’s virginity was sacrificed to the local shaman.”
They are even thinking of tossing out Tim Flannery (as gently as possible): “Given the level of national debate, maybe Tim Flannery wasn’t the ideal choice to champion the need to do something about climate change.” As usual when they dissect it, it’s not about verifiable predictions, or rigorous reasoning — it’s just a “communication” problem:
Flannery finds it harder. He is passionate about the subject, writes brilliantly, and is an effective communicator, but only to those who are prepared to listen. The polls tell us that the scare campaign, particularly around energy costs, means many consumers have chosen to switch off their minds, but not their appliances. Flannery does not think or communicate in sound bites. When asked recently how a carbon price would help reduce global temperatures, he answered truthfully: It wouldn’t for a thousand years or more. He should have told them an equal truth, taking action now is designed to try and stop temperatures rising too far, to stop the planet from frying. But perhaps he was burned by prior predictions. In the end his words were distorted to suggest that cutting emissions would have no impact at all.
It’s a sign of the times
Another sign of the times is that big number of the week in Australia — “60%”? As in, sixty percent of Australians don’t want the carbon tax, and importantly, most of those are strongly against it. Only 12% are strongly in favour, and yet fully 39% are strongly against. (The Newspoll results).
The backlash we said would come is on the way, and this is only the start. Why? Because apparently most people still don’t know that there’s no evidence to back the catastrophic claims, or that researchers have lost the data, left thermometers next to airconditioners, and hid declines, or based famous graphs on just one tree in far North Russia. Wait til they find out…
Right now, only 14% think climate change is solely thanks to coal burning power stations and the like. That’s great but 58% think it’s partly due to man-made activity. (It’s an ambiguous question: humans may well have affected regional climates through deforestation and land use changes, but we all know that the people who write “Do You *Believe* in Climate Change” are not seeking out that kind of finer detail…)
So much to do
As long as people think “carbon is pollution”; as long as money is being poured into inefficient solar panels instead of solar research (or medical research), then conquering the worst of the misinformation campaign is still ahead.
As long as Newspoll still thinks it can ask whether you believe in “climate change” and get a meaningful answer there is much to accomplish.
As long as people like Clive Hamilton use the carbon excuse to call for a radical militancy:
we need a new environmental radicalism….
A wave of environmental radicalism, of uncivil disobedience,
Sometimes coaxing the public to your point of view reaches an immovable barrier. Sometimes people must be jolted out of their complacency by militancy, even if that means a period of rancour, turmoil and danger…
Luckily it seems the zeitgeist is spreading. The Canadians moved further away from climate legislation this week, and George Monbiot is still soul searching.