JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

The Smug do mockery as a substitute for progressive argument

The state of “progressive” national debate has been reduced to backslappin’ self-congratulation about the dumbness of the other side. There is no need to discuss morals or ponder imponderables, it’s enough to crack jokes, point and snigger.

In left-leaning media-land, it’s one long empty selfie. For a change, left-leaning Vox has published a serious article that hits one  mark exactly — even if the writer is unaware how his arguments apply to climate change and other areas. There is admirable self-awareness on the glorified issue of gay rights versus the undeserving interests of the poor.

Emmett Rensin is persuading his fellows to be more respectful of the rubes they disdain, apparently in the fear that Trump is reaching those same rubes and may win come November. He foresees his colleagues saying “What the fuck happened?“. But there is insight as he disassembles the vacuity of at least some channels of political correctness. It’s worth reading, because Rensin is trying to solve a problem conservatives face — how to overcome the empty mockery and get the mockers to engage in honest discussion. Its not enough to have the right arguments if there is no debate.

Rensin hints briefly that “there is money” to reward the mockers (he’s referring to media-land), but doesn’t appear to realize that there is money driving things from the core. When half the population are dependent on Big-Government the darkest shades of mockery come from the parasites caving to base instincts to justify their free lunch.

Emmett Rensin The smug style in American liberalism

The smug style says to itself, Yeah. I really am one of the few thinking people in this country, aren’t I?

Ridicule is the most effective political tactic.

Ridicule is especially effective when it’s personal and about expressing open disdain for stupid, bad people.

You can’t be legitimate if you’re the butt of our jokes.

The working class left the Democrats over the last fifty years and the core of Democrat intellectual “centre of gravity” shifted to universities, media and elite enclaves. Rensin argues that the professionals can’t figure out why they couldn’t convince their old worker buddies to follow them. Rather than self analysis, or coming up with a better argument, they took the easy road, blame those who didn’t “get” their wisdom and called them stupid.

Finding comfort in the notion that their former allies were disdainful, hapless rubes, smug liberals created a culture animated by that contempt. The rubes noticed and replied in kind. The result is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Financial incentive compounded this tendency — there is money, after all, in reassuring the bitter. Over 20 years, an industry arose to cater to the smug style. It began in humor, and culminated for a time in The Daily Show, a program that more than any other thing advanced the idea that liberal orthodoxy was a kind of educated savvy and that its opponents were, before anything else, stupid. The smug liberal found relief in ridiculing them.

Smugness is a perfect circle. Once a person has decided that all their opponents are terminally stupid, all their arguments are “therefore” wrong, no discussion needed:

The smug style created a feedback loop. If the trouble with conservatives was ignorance, then the liberal impulse was to correct it. When such corrections failed, disdain followed after it.

The smug can’t lose. If a conservative was won over, the smug was right. If a conservative was not won over, the conservative was stupid (and the smug was therefore also right about the conservative being stupid). Geddit?

– And if cheap, bullying tactics of mockery “converted” someone, it’s pure genius right?

Rensin talks about “Good Facts” — pointing out that the Smug seem to feel they are not tainted by ideology. Without saying it Rensin is describing people who think they are scientific, logical and armed with “The Science”:

It is the smug style’s first premise: a politics defined by a command of the Correct Facts and signaled by an allegiance to the Correct Culture. A politics that is just the politics of smart people in command of Good Facts. A politics that insists it has no ideology at all, only facts. No moral convictions, only charts, the kind that keep them from “imposing their morals” like the bad guys do.

 He has the insight to recognise the act of “knowing” the Good Facts, is a form of virtue signaling :

What is important, after all, is to signal that you know these things. What is important is to launch links and mockery at those who don’t. The Good Facts are enough: Anybody who fails to capitulate to them is part of the Problem, is terminally uncool.

In the climate debate those who don’t capitulate are not just uncool, they are terminal deniers. Rensin doesn’t make that leap at all. Unaware he’s running in parallel towards it through another debate.

This, I think, is fundamental to understanding the smug style. If good politics and good beliefs are just Good Facts and good tweets — that is, if there is no ideology beyond sensible conclusions drawn from a rational assessment of the world — then there are no moral fights, only lying liars and the stupid rubes who believe them…

The mockers will protest that it’s just for fun, a harmless joke, which it would be, if it were not standing in as a substitute for national debate:

We have long passed the point where blithe ridicule of the American right can be credibly cast as private stress relief and not, for instance, the animating public strategy of an entire wing of the liberal culture apparatus. The Daily Show, as it happens, is not the private entertainment of elites blowing off some steam. It is broadcast on national television.

It’s double or nothing for the Smug style:

It would be unfair to say that the smug style has never learned from these mistakes. But the lesson has been, We underestimated how many people could be fooled.

That is: We underestimated just how dumb these dumb hicks really are.

On politics, Rensin is rightly suggesting the progressives mockery alienates voters:

Abandoned and without any party willing to champion their interests, people cling to candidates who, at the very least, are willing to represent their moral convictions. The smug style resents them for it, and they resent the smug in turn.

There is useful insight in Rensin’s article. He is aware of the psychological studies and surveys that show that Republicans can be smarter, more open minded, and adaptable than the Smug. He’s aware of the contradiction that The Smug paint themselves as more concerned about the poor while they disrespect and mock the poor for being so stupid that they don’t Know What’s Best for The Poor.

This is not a call for civility. Manners are not enough.

Manners may not be enough, but without them there is no national debate at all, just yelling, empty gloating and namecalling. Progressives need to start with manners — honest conversation, accurate English, and acknowledging errors. Some apologies for bad behaviour are long overdue.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.9/10 (83 votes cast)
The Smug do mockery as a substitute for progressive argument, 8.9 out of 10 based on 83 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/h4c8sh7

99 comments to The Smug do mockery as a substitute for progressive argument

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    The American left has been getting steadily worse throughout the Obama administration. Smug is an understatement these days.

    I am beginning to believe those who proposed a few years back that liberalism is a mental disorder of some kind.

    The world of the left has gone over a cliff and won’t recognize it until they finally hit bottom — of course, taking the rest of us with them.

    480

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Good Facts

      I’ll beat Linonell to the punch here and point out to Rensin that facts are neither good nor bad. They simply are facts. Fiction, on the other hand can be good bad or anywhere between those extremes as you wish. But fiction is still just fiction, not fact.

      Fiction can be easily established. You just say it and if you say it enough it becomes believed. Facts are more stubborn. They require that you be able to observe something and every time you look, it stays the same, immutable and constant on the basis of actual observation.

      To establish something as fact takes time to see if your supposed fact meets the requirement of staying constant and immutable under observation. Fiction, on the other hand, comes into being simply by some “authority” saying it’s a fact.

      A third category can be considered — opinion. Opinion is correctly stated by saying I think this is true (or false) or words to that effect. Opinion may be worth paying attention to but don’t believe it until it moves into the realm of fact.

      I think we’ve been here numerous times before and have seen that some know the difference between evidence and fiction while some do not.

      360

    • #
      ianl8888

      … of course, taking the rest of us with them

      Sorry, Roy, but I’m not jumping – with anyone :)

      Much more to the point, how much influence (ie. audience size and makeup) does this Emmett Rensin actually have ? Are we dealing with a wannabe, someone who just likes to say “Look at me, look at ME !!” ?

      60

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        But Ian, you have to multiply Rensin’s influence by the influence of all the others who have similar influence supporting the climate change belief. And I’m thinking it’s numerous in the science and pseudoscience worlds all the way to media types, business executives, politicians and countless of the so called millennials and others walking the streets who are part of the problem. And whether some of them actually believe the idea of climate change or not, they act the part. No. The weight of the problem is growing, even as skepticism seems to grow along with it. Rensin is just a symptom, not the cause — just another one saying, “Me too. Me too….” And they aren’t out in the wilderness anymore, they’re on main street now. And they control policy decisions more and more. It will end badly unless stopped.

        You and I may not want to jump, even choose not to jump. But if they keep going we may well be swept over the edge of the cliff unwilling.

        20

      • #
        D. J. Hawkins

        One of us has a reading comprehension issue. Rensin is the one lambasting this (il)Liberal thinking style.

        20

    • #
      Dean Bruckner

      It’s not so much a mental disorder as a moral and spiritual disorder.

      110

    • #
      Santa Baby

      Sounds like the new “holy” Marxist left?

      10

  • #
    pattoh

    Gee, it would be really good if Malcolm & cohorts got this.

    However if history is anything to go by, his mind is in a giant impenetrable bubble ( kinda like Condom Kevvy’s)

    100

  • #
    Stephen Mcdonald

    Malcolm Turnbull can take or leave the facts.

    It depends on how they line up with his obsession with self-interest

    210

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Correct. The joys of being a very wealthy champers socialist is you just dont have to give a damn….about anything….or anyone….

      100

  • #
    Yonniestone

    The smug-ad hominem dialectic used by the pro-CAGW side is what passes for the scientific method in their minds, some are easily led but most know under the stark light of reality this is all they have, without the public phenomena of the illusion of power through MSM and peers they cease to be the popular kids in school.

    182

  • #
    Denis

    Manners may not be enough, but without them there is no national debate at all, just yelling, empty gloating and namecalling. Progressives need to start with manners — honest conversation, accurate English, and acknowledging errors. Some apologies for bad behaviour are long overdue.

    Facts are a funny thing.

    I can fix the Great Barrier Reef and eliminate the need for any public money to be spent on it.

    And this place is listed as one of the top 10 dive sites in the Philippines.

    Puerto Galera (and this is on wikipedia so it must be correct),
    Environment
    In the summer of 1998, extensive coral bleaching occurred around Medio Island and a large section of a shallow coral reef system (referred to as the “Coral Gardens”) died. Since then the coral has regrown with a larger diversity of coral species replacing the prolific table corals. Corals in Puerto Galera were largely unaffected by the 2010 El Niño event.

    In 2006 two super typhoons damaged the shallow reefs around Escarceo Point. Many of the faster-growing coral species were destroyed to a depth of 6 metres (20 ft). This represented about 5% of the coral reef in the area. Extensive signs of new coral recruitment were noted in mid-2008. Acropora species (staghorn and table coral) rapidly recolonized the area so that most of the damaged coral has been replaced with new growth.

    Let’s take some coral from this place and put it off north east Australia.

    120

  • #
    Peter C

    I was a bit confused about Rubes.

    Apparently it is an Americal slang term meaning; hick, redneck, country bumpkin.

    I thought it was short for Reuben.

    60

  • #
    Vlad the Impaler

    Interesting article in the Washington Post today, under Tom Toles by-line:

    Tom Toles
    Editorial cartoonist — Washington, D.C.

    Climate DOESN’T change all the time, but deniers’ excuses do

    The comments from readers are the epitome of smugness. I made the mistake of trying to engage some of them in discussion of the science, but none of them would look at Veizer’s paleotemperature record, or Berner & Kothavala’s GEOCARB III data.

    M4GW’s “I’m A Denier” is apropos … …

    Vlad

    60

    • #
      pat

      Vlad the Impaler -

      reminder:

      4 Apr: WUWT: Mann’s Climate Madhouse Effect
      From Mike Mann’s Facebook page:
      Cover of my new book w/ Tom Toles due out in September, “The ‪#‎MadHouseEffect‬: How Climate Change Denial is Threatening our Planet, Destroying our Politics, and Driving us Crazy”
      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/04/manns-climate-madhouse-effect/

      60

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        An interesting link Pat.

        It’s obvious that democratic processes are no longer functional.

        Advertising rules all in the race for votes and ultimately and most vitally, access to the National Treasuries of the world.

        Kk

        40

  • #
    Pathway

    Being dismissive of the other side is a technique developed by an American communist named Saul Alinsky who wrote a book called Rules for Radicals. President Obama is a disciple of Alinsky as is Hillary Clinton. Ms. Clinton actually had a meeting with Alinsky when she was a young radical at Wellesley College.

    170

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Roy, you have done a good job summing it up: comments #1 to 1.1.2.

    I left school many years ago and went into heavy industry.

    I was happy and pleased to be in a world driven by and answerable to the facts and common sense but when the world changed changed in the late 60s I decided to move on.

    The best 9 years of my working life.

    There have always been slick operators, perhaps 20%, leading the others but it now seems that 80% is a more appropriate figure for the smug group.

    When that many have got it wrong we are really in a mess.

    KK

    60

    • #
      Analitik

      By “good facts”, I think Rensin is referring to opinions held by the progressives as being articles of truth, not our definition of facts

      100

  • #
    Ruairi

    Smug warmists collectively see,
    All skeptics who fail to agree,
    With their socialist plan,
    For the planet and man,
    As backward politically.

    200

  • #
    Mark D.

    Progressives need to start with manners — honest conversation, accurate English, and acknowledging errors. Some apologies for bad behaviour are long overdue.

    IMHO it is not going to happen with them. The best way to identify one of the Smug is that they cannot bring themselves to admit wrong. Apologies are out of the question. This to me is evidence of a disturbing mental defect.

    There is another (I believe parallel) defect called narcissism.

    Yes I know that the psych industry would not like me using the word “defect”. I don’t care what they think.

    110

    • #
      ianl8888

      There is another (I believe parallel) defect called narcissism

      Not parallel, mark

      One and the same. A shrink (qualified) once told me that to want to be a successful politician, one had first to be a narcissist. Since this a most unpleasnat human trait, it automatically disqualified one from becoming a useful politician. Hence the number of useless politicians.

      130

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Did you know that the majority of narcissists cannot spell narsicsists, erm nasissists, er narcssists.

        Just as well I am not one.

        80

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Narcissists also find it hard to make fun of themselves, or speak of their failures. “I didn’t miss the bus! It came early, before I got to the bus stop!”.

          100

      • #
        Mark D.

        One-and-the-same vs. parallel….

        Under Parliamentary Rules: A friendly amendment perhaps?

        Though it isn’t just politicians that are Smug right?

        No, too many Smug people are not voted in or out of office.

        30

  • #
    OriginalSteve

    “Pride goes before destruction, And a haughty spirit before stumbling.”

    Proverbs 16:18 ( the Bible – another book hated by Leftists…)

    “Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.”

    Proverbs 16:12

    “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.”

    Proverbs 12:15

    “He is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions”

    1 Tim 6:4

    180

  • #
    MudCrab

    professionals can’t figure out why they couldn’t convince their old worker buddies to follow them

    The base foundation of Marx is that ‘workers’ are being oppressed by the ‘owners’. There are also the ‘owner-workers’ but Marx concluded they would soon no longer exist and hence could be completely ignored. So in the Marx-Universe there were only two types of people and their current relationships needed to be changed for the good of all.

    Except what people forget is that Marx was neither a worker or an owner.

    The often ignored fact about being inside ‘Worker’s Paradise’ is that YOU are still JUST a worker.

    Marx and people who follow his views never cast themselves into the worker mold. Instead they are the clever people who will free the workers and then continue to do wonderful clever things while all the grateful little workers look up to them with their grateful little faces.

    Instead most workers don’t actually want to remain workers their entire life. They tend to want to do things with their lives. How they do that is their own choice. They might work the extra shifts so they can have the better holidays with their families with the better fishing boat they have saved for. They might do the night course to get the promotion. They might take the risk and start the small business, but basically they want to live by the ‘hard work = better rewards’ concept and very few of them want to be forced to remain in some common equality being overseen by a smug git in a cardigan.

    Why share the community fishing boot with everyone on the block when you are relax all weekend on the one you brought yourself?

    And yet the Smug Class can’t understand why the ‘workers’ don’t rush to them in worship. Weird, isn’t it? :P

    170

    • #
      Denis

      And not forgetting that Marx lived because other people gave him money to live.

      And he wrote the blooming tract in England.

      120

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      I think Animal Farm had it right…..

      Some animals are more equal than others….

      100

      • #
        Mike

        From Animal Farm, possibly very likely referring to bankers as they are top of the food chain.

        “It is for your sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples,”

        60

  • #
    Bulldust

    Shock and horror at the ABC as they find out increased CO2 has greened the planet to the tune of two Australian land masses:

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-26/global-snapshot-shows-how-humans-are-greening-the-earth/7346382

    Waiting to hear one of the faithful explain why this greening will be bad for us…

    170

    • #
      Mark D.

      Greening (real chlorophyll that is) can’t be bad for us. Humans actually causing it might be bad for several “Green” organizations and Causes.

      Really, the best is how it smacks down Malthus and all that he was worried about.

      130

    • #
      Mark D.

      At the end of the article here it is:

      “These will eventually outweigh by far any benefit from the greening,” he said.

      No evidence mind you, just scare. Sounds oh so familiar……..

      150

      • #
        Bulldust

        I like this quote:

        Dr Canadell said the remote sensing data was run through 10 global environmental change models to identify the cause of the greening.

        So we look for scientific truth in models now? Used to be the CSIRO did real science … those were the days…

        I bet he is very smug, however, and has access to all the “good” facts.

        121

    • #
      handjive

      Wait no longer! Look no further than @theconversation for 97% doomsday news:

      Rising carbon dioxide is greening the Earth – but it’s not all good news

      80

      • #
        Bulldust

        The Conversation has long been a leftie luvvie “correct-thinking” echo chamber. I would post there but they don’t have a firm grasp on logic. I would love to mention that so-called “AGW deniers” have long understood that there are positive impacts from the CO2-induced warming, such as the “newly discovered” (by the gullible warmists) CO2 fertilisation effect. But they would simply pile on with smug name-calling. Logic and critical thinking is lost in that forum unless it matches their narrow world view.

        90

      • #
        Glen Michel

        No,no not the Conversation.What is it with those dills and their silly echo chamber? lightweight guff for gullible inner- city clueless types.You KNOW the type fellow readers!

        40

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      But no mention of rain. Didn’t our Centre have quite good rain (for it) over the summer just past? My plants respond well to water, and I lose some in droughts.
      I think they’ve just got their scince wrong – again.
      Cheers,
      Dave B

      40

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Try Tallbloke’s Talk for the latest on Venus. It (she? surely) doesn’t behave as the Circulation models predict.

        30

  • #
    Reed Coray

    For the most part, I’m against smugness (it can come back to bite you in the butt), but honesty requires that I have to admit I’m not against mockery. For example, on a WUWT guest post (https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/30/precautionary-principle-memo-ready-for-transmission/) I mocked a group of people for writing a paper that argued we should make sure our electromagnetic transmissions don’t lie about (or at least misrepresent) our involvement in global warming because extraterrestrial intelligences might intercept those messages and decide to punish us for our lies.

    In my limited interaction with CAGW advocates I have yet to talk to anyone who can explain why gases that absorb and radiate electromagnetic energy in sub-bands of the IR band will, not may, but will increase Earth surface temperatures. I hear a lot of responses containing words like “greenhouse gases” and “backradiation,” but very little that has been thought through by most responders. For example, below is a representative dialog of such a discussion.

    Me: Why must CO2 in the atmosphere cause an increase in Earth surface Temperature?

    Response: Because CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

    Me: Okay what exactly is a greenhouse gas, and why does a greenhouse gas ensure a surface temperature increase?

    Response: Come on, everyone knows about the greenhouse effect–specifically that a greenhouse is hotter than the surrounding environment so an atmospheric greenhouse gas will induce a greenhouse effect and warm the Earth’s surface.

    Me: You’re arguing in a circle. You start with the claim that greenhouse gases exhibit a greenhouse effect, and use the greenhouse effect to argue for increased temperature. If the definition of a greenhouse gas is any atmospheric gas that causes an increase in Earth surface temperature, then by definition atmospheric greenhouse gases will cause an increase in the Earth surface temperature. I want to understand the physical mechanism by which water vapor/CO2/methane/etc. leads to an increased Earth surface temperature.

    Response: Well, that’s simple. I won’t define a greenhouse gas to be a gas whose presence in the Earth’s atmosphere increases the Earth’s surface temperature. Instead, I’ll define a greenhouse gas to be a gas that absorbs and radiates electromagnetic radiation in sub-bands of the IR band. Will that satisfy you?

    Me: Yes

    Continuation of response: The bulk of the electromagnetic energy coming from the sun is outside the IR band so atmospheric greenhouse gases have very little effect on the rate energy from the sun is reaching the surface of the Earth; but greenhouse gases have an appreciable effect on the radiated energy that leaves the Earth’s surface–i.e., on outgoing radiation. In particular, ignoring reflection, the energy from the sun reaches the surface of the Earth with little attenuation. The Earth’s surface absorbs that energy, warms to a temperature near 280 K, which means Earth outgoing electromagnetic radiation is predominately in the IR band. Greenhouse gases absorb some of the outgoing radiation, and re-radiate the absorbed energy in all directions. Thus, greenhouse gases re-radiate some of the outgoing radiation back towards the surface of the Earth thus increasing the rate energy is incident on the Earth and thereby increasing the Earth surface temperature. It’s a simple as that.

    Me: OK, let’s see if I have this right. If we have an object at a temperature near 280 K with an internal energy source whose energy rate is independent of the presence/absence of a surrounding greenhouse gas atmosphere, then all else being equal the surface temperature of the object will be higher when surrounded by a greenhouse gas than when not surrounded by a greenhouse gas. The reason for the higher temperature being (a) the absorption by the greenhouse gas of radiation outgoing from the object, and (b) the re-emission of some of that absorbed energy back towards the radiating object. Is that correct?

    Response (after some thought): Yeah, that’s the kernel of the argument.

    Me: Okay then, if what you say is true, filling the vacuum space of a vacuum thermos bottle with a greenhouse gas should slow down the cooling rate of a hot substance stored in the thermos bottle. (a) The vacuum space of a vacuum thermos bottle surrounds (not completely) but to a high degree the chamber in which heated substances are stored. (b) In the absence of a greenhouse gas in this space, there is no greenhouse gas to absorb and re-radiate in all directions electromagnetic energy. However, if the vacuum space is filled with a greenhouse gas, absorption of heated chamber outgoing radiation by the greenhouse gas will occur, the greenhouse gas will re-radiate some of the absorbed radiation back towards the heated chamber. Thus the presence of the greenhouse gas has provided a means (probably an additional means) of energy incident on the heated chamber. (c) This additional means of input energy will decrease the cooling rate. Do you agree.

    Response (suspicious that he/she is being led down a path from which he/she can’t return): Yeah, that sounds right.

    Me: OK. At least for storing hot substances, a thermos bottle whose vacuum space is filled with a greenhouse gas should outperform a vacuum thermos bottle. A question and a comment. Question: If true, why is that no one sells a thermos bottle with greenhouse gas insulation? Comment: Simple experiments show that for heated materials, vacuum thermos bottles outperform thermos bottles whose vacuum space is filled with CO2–a greenhouse gas. Aren’t these inconsistent with your argument?

    Response: I question both of your statements–i.e., (a) I don’t believe you when you say that no one sells a CO2 insulated thermos bottle, and [smugly] (b) show me the peer-reviewed paper that supports your claim.

    Me: With regard to CO2 insulated thermos bottles–I’ve searched the internet and have yet to find such a thermos bottle for sale. You can find CO2 thermos bottles on the internet, but they don’t use CO2 as an insulating substance. With regard to a peer reviewed paper, I can’t cite such a paper, probably because anyone with a modicum of knowledge (smugness on my part) of physics knows that because a gas supports heat transfer via radiation, conduction and convection, whereas a vacuum only supports heat transfer via radiation, a vacuum is likely to be a better insulator than a gas. In addition, Peter C, a frequent commenter on Joanne Nova’s blog, ran some rudimentary experiments that showed that for the storage of heated material, vacuum insulation outperforms CO2 insulation.

    Response (with smugness): Yeah, so you say.

    Me: OK. Suppose (a) I could find a peer reviewed paper that supported my claim, and/or (b) experiments by qualified personnel demonstrated that vacuum thermos bottles outperform CO2 filled thermos bottles. Would either of those have any affect on your belief that greenhouse gases surrounding a heated object must induce object warming? I’m not asking whether under some circumstances greenhouse gases might induce warming. I’m asking whether or not greenhouse gases always induce warming. The reason I phrase the issue as above is that your explanation for why greenhouse gases warm objects applies to the thermos bottle example, and yet isn’t supported by experiment.

    Response: It might. But I still believe that any and all atmospheric greenhouse gases result in a warmer Earth surface.

    Me: OK. You believe what you believe, and you may be right; but I’d drop your smug attitude. By itself the basis of your belief (absorption/back-radiation of energy) for why atmospheric greenhouse gases must warm the Earth’s surface doesn’t hold water. When and if you can provide an argument for Earth surface warming from any and all atmospheric greenhouse gases for which no counter examples can be found, then I’ll believe you. However, before you go looking for such an argument, keep in mind that some greenhouse gases (in particular water vapor) are substances that in the Earth’s atmosphere undergo a change in phase state (liquid to vapor to liquid) in temperature ranges near 280 K; and substances that cycle through phase state changes are often used in air conditioners to lower temperature. At a quick look, it seems to me that (a) evaporation of water from the Earth’s surface, (b) convection of that evaporated water to high altitudes, and (c) condensation of the vapor back to water at high altitudes corresponds to the components of many air conditioners that cool a surface in contact with the change of phase from liquid to vapor. It’s true that those air conditioners don’t use water at the refrigerant, but the operation principles are similar. So be ready to discuss the difference between atmospheric greenhouse gases that pass through phase changes and atmospheric greenhouse gases that don’t.

    81

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      (a) evaporation of water from the Earth’s surface, (b) convection of that evaporated water to high altitudes, and (c) condensation of the vapor back to water at high altitudes corresponds to the components of many air conditioners that cool a surface in contact with the change of phase from liquid to vapor.

      :-)

      And what would determine the rate of vertical heat transport (i.e. cooling) in that process?

      00

      • #
        Reed Coray

        In a comment [http://joannenova.com.au/2015/03/weekend-unthreaded-69/] on this blog dated 3 April 2015 I reported the following back-of-the-envelope calculations for the rate energy leaves the Earth’s surface during evaporation and the rate energy is returned to the Earth’s surface by the conversion of “raindrop” kinetic energy to heat when the water returns to the Earth’s surface. I hope this answers your question.

        http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/512638.html reports that the average rate of sea level drop from evaporation is 1.2 meters per year. When coupled with (a) the area of the Earth’s surface covered sea by water (approximately 3.67 x 10^14 square meters), (b) the density of sea water (approximately 1,030 kilograms per cubic meter), and (c) water’s heat of vaporization (approximately 2.23 x 10^6 Joules per kilogram), the energy rate required to sustain this level of evaporation is approximately 3.21 x 10^16 Watts, which is (a) a significant fraction (0.184) of the total rate (1.743 x 10^17 Watts) solar energy is incident at the top of the Earth’s atmosphere, and (b) using an average Earth albedo of 0.3, an even larger fraction (0.263) of the rate solar energy is absorbed by the Earth/Earth-Atmosphere system. Furthermore, using an average raindrop speed of 10 meters per second (http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2007/EvanKaplan.shtml), very little (approximately 7.19×10^11 Watts) of this energy returns to the Earth’s surface as internal thermal energy via the conversion of raindrop kinetic energy to thermal energy as raindrops strike the Earth’s surface. Thus, the rate of energy loss from the Earth’s surface via evaporation alone, which is a non-radiative energy transfer process, is significant.

        10

        • #
          Andrew McRae

          That answer didn’t go as far as I’d hoped. Okay, so the cooling rate of this atmospheric refrigerator (air conditioner) is determined mainly by the rate of evaporation. But do you know what increases the rate of evaporation?

          00

          • #
            Reed Coray

            No, I don’t know what increases the rate of evaporation. But if the answer to your question is: “Rising temperatures will increase evaporation” as I expect you were hoping, then so what? Evaporation will exist for a decreasing, constant, and increasing Earth surface temperature.

            The intent of my original comment wasn’t to prove that greenhouse gases won’t increase Earth surface temperature–at my knowledge level, they very well might; but to show that by itself the argument (backradiation) used (sometimes smugly) by many people to “prove” greenhouse gas Earth surface warming doesn’t hold water. Examples of decreased temperatures in the presence of “backradiation” can be shown to exist–see for example my comment [http://joannenova.com.au/2015/03/weekend-unleaded-2/#comments] where I show that with a sufficient amount of thermal conduction between a concentric backradiating spherical annulus and an active (internal energy source) sphere, the temperature of the sphere in the presence of the backradiating object will be lower than in the absence of the backradiating object. Now atmospheric gases provide very little thermal conduction away from the Earth’s surface. However, via evaporation the greenhouse gas water vapor plays a major role in transferring massive amounts of heat from the Earth’s surface to high atmosphere altitudes.

            Bottom line, I’m still waiting for an argument that takes everything into account and concludes that all greenhouse gases, not just CO2, in the Earth’s atmosphere will increase the Earth surface temperature. Since taking “everything into account” makes the problem almost untenable, I’m pretty sure it’s beyond anyone’s capability to give an iron clad proof; and way beyond my ability to understand that proof. What I take exception to is the proof of greenhouse gas global warming via the argument that greenhouse gases “backradiate” to the Earth’s surface energy that left the Earth’s surface via radiation.

            00

  • #
    handjive

    Climate Comedy. There is nothing funny about Doomsday.

    “Humor is a tool underutilized in the area of [Global Warming]; yet comedy has power to effectively connect people, information, ideas, and new
    ways of thinking/acting.

    Inside the Greenhouse held a competition to harness the powers of climate comedy through compelling, resonant and meaningful videos.”

    Here are this year’s winners:
    . . .
    The first place video, the weather person is evidence of getting your medication mixed up. Whacko!
    The second place video is moral climate lecturing smugness gone wild from someone who obviously can’t live without fossil fuels.
    The third is the best humour, but not for the reasons the Doomsday Warmunists perceive, as it confirms that we ‘climate consensus rebels’ are indeed, winning.

    Own Goal? Now that’s funny.

    110

    • #

      It would seem that there were only those three entries in the competition.

      I actually didn’t laugh. Not even a smile.

      And people think this is funny?

      Tony.

      60

  • #
    ianl8888

    As an aside, but also a combination of sorts of several posts, Marx called the “rubes” the “lumpenproletariat”

    Obviously rube is shorter and snappier, but Marx’s term has a certain depth of sneering in it.

    80

  • #
    ROM

    The “Smug” were the British upper classes of the 19th century and early 20th century who ruled the world’s greatest Empire and one fifth of the world’s peoples, the only Empire on which the Sun never set.
    It lasted a 150 years at the most until other competing nations and forces created the conditions for its downfall and the British upper classes were left with a little more than the contempt of the masses they had smugly regarded as inferior in every aspect.

    The Marxists and Trotskyites that made up the communists of the second decade of the 20th century were totally convinced in their ideological driven smugness that they were the future of mankind and nothing could deflect their success in becoming the controllers and saviours of mankind.
    They then discovered that few of that mankind were prepared to give up their own independence to fit with the communists smug assessment of their own correctness. So they had to use force and terror to ensure that the ruled were kept in an ideologically correct state.

    The Nazis under Hitler were totally convinced and were exceedingly smug about the total superiority of the Aryan race and the inferiority of despicable Untermenschen’ until those same Untermenschen overran them and destroyed them.

    The Japanese Imperial empire was renown for its exceedingly smug self created sense of a complete racial superiority over all other races.
    It smugly regarded american and its allies armies as just soft living, easily over come, racially inferior specimens to those soldiers and sailors of the Imperial Japanese army and Navy forces.
    And in its smugness and sense of ultimate superiority it even proposed to the Nazis that the world be divided down along the 70th east longitude into their respective control of the world’s nations and peoples.

    The Americans following the end of WW2 were extraordinarily generous with their implementation of the Marshal Plan to rebuild Europe including their former enemies after the devastation of WW2.
    The Americans in those post war years accounted for close to 60% of the Global GDP.

    But then a smugness started to creep in.
    The world’s only Super Power came to believe that could make or break other nations.
    They were unchallengeable and the world’s policeman to whom all should show deep respect and formulate their positions to fit with the American doctrine.
    The Russians didn’t agree.
    The Chinese communists didn’t agree. 
    The North Vietnamese took the Americans and its allies on. The American smugness was gone, dissipated in the realities of a hostile competing world.

    The Chinese dragon is beginning to suffer from an advanced form of smugness.
    They are now treating other nations as inferiors, a long past historical characteristic of Chinese Emperors at the Centre of the Celestial Sphere for centuries past.

    The monks, bishops, abbots, popes and and priests of the Middle Ages were all powerful and completely smug in their righteousness as the interpreters and Keepers of God’s Word and how it should be enforced on the lower class artisans and peasantry.
    Then came Gutenberg’s printing press with its moveable type and reading material for the masses.
    And thus was borne the Reformation that swept away all the nauseating holy smugness of those old religious orders and institutions.

    The leftist and theoretical propounding academics of today in so many of what was once respected centres of learning have taken up the smugness of those abbots and monks of the Middle ages where they left off as being the only ones who are all-knowledgeable and therefore the only ones who are correct and cannot and should not ever be challenged by those of an inferior intelligence and intellect.

    Their growing reward is a steadily increasing level of public contempt for what is now being passed off and inflicted onto the public as some sort or form of science and knowledge by those same smug over paid, underperforming, ivory tower dwelling academics.

    The greens, greenpeace, the WWF and so many more of the green sleaze are completely convinced and completely smug about their absolute correctness in their beliefs in the sanctity of the “environment” and their holy role in seeing to the protection of their only correct version of the “environment”.
    Their credibility and the publics belief and its trust of the green sleaze is now being eroded at an increasing pace.

    The CAGW / climate change believers are so smug about their absolute correctness on the devastation of the world due to the still undefined and unidentifiable human caused climate change that they do not need any explanations or science to give credence to their beliefs and to the maintaining of their smugness.
    It is so obvious to them in their smugness that they are the only ones who are correct in their beliefs and all others are destroyers of the planet.

    The renewable energy advocates are so smug in their absolute correctness that renewable energy can power this energy dependent civilisation that they don’t need any numbers or data to justify their beliefs about decarbonising the planet and relying only on renewable energy to provide mankind with energy at the level those same smug believers is their right to enjoy.

    Smugness, extreme smugness has its rewards.
    And those rewards are invariably made up of blood sweat and tears , many tears indeed for those whose smugness is such that they were never able to see beyond their own tiny sphere of self importance to the great world of innumerable futures and innumerable scenarios beyond that may will likely never ever include themselves or any part of their smug self estimation of their own importance in that future.

    240

    • #
      Analitik

      The Chinese dragon oscillates between total smugness and abject submission. The history of China is highly cyclical.

      Smugness is a luxury that only sets in once the humility and self sacrifice of the working population builds up enough wealth for the elite to revel in. The devolution of the banking/finance sector is yet another example we could add to your list.

      70

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      A few others come to mind:

      The Romans ( still snigger at the throne room scene in “Life of Brian” ) who figured they had it all nailed…untilt hey didn’t..overrun by barbarians and their own waistlines…

      The big film studios…until Napster/Pirate Bay happened, which then took it to the oligarchies….

      The taxi monopolies …er….companies…until Uber showed up….

      The Internet, according to The Daily Bell, is the new information Reformation – I agree. The Elite had a stranglehold over information via the “news” and then they didnt…which is why they tried so hard to censor the internet ( we remember Comrade Conroy for an honourable mention….) and then “NBN” Turncoat ( the NBN is just an attempt at stangle hold on information flow ), but still VPNs exist and if the Elites cut off the net, people will riot, I have no doubt about that….

      40

    • #
      sophocles

      The worst part of all SMUGS is their Inquisitors,

      20

  • #
    Jarryd

    Of course it goes both ways. We like to make comments about the “stupid” warmists too…

    50

    • #
      ROM

      Yes Jarryd. A green thumb for that comment and a point I also considered making but my post was already too long.

      And as the whole of this cult of climate change / environmental worshipping collapses in the face of harsh reality which it will do and is showing strong indications that such a collapse is underway, then we too as skeptics should be very wary of how we both look at events and at ourselves and our outlook on events both past, present and future.

      If we don’t take considerable care then we skeptics will merely repeat the current smugness of the green sleaze ideologists in believing we have been right all along and that they will always be wrong.
      And then make the mistake of believing we have a superior understanding of the climate and the environment and thus whatever we say from then on will be correct and indisputable.
      Without care, Smugness with a capital “S” will prevail as it so often does when one is proven correct and the other proven wrong.

      90

  • #
    pat

    NYT’s Coral Davenport’s insertion of the Koch Brothers in the following “alarming” piece i posted in an earlier thread was par for the course for the MSM. it is as if any mention of CAGW scepticism must include a Koch Bros para or two:

    24 April: NYT: Coral Davenport: Carbon Pricing Becomes a Cause for the World Bank and I.M.F.
    In the United States, voters — especially in the depleted middle class — are leery of the economic pain, and political groups funded by the billionaire brothers Charles G. and David H. Koch stand in the way…

    Nov 2015: The New American: Bob Adelmann: Democrat Strategy to Take Back the Senate: Attack the Koch Brothers
    Upon learning that the Koch brothers, Charles (shown) and David, and their network of conservative donors, were planning on spending upwards of $750 million over the next two election cycles, Harry Reid, the Senate minority leader and harsh critic of the Kochs, enlisted the help of two hard-left political strategists to respond. David Brock, the founder of Media Matters in 2004 and the super-PAC American Bridge in 2010, joined with Geoff Garin, president of ***Hart Research Associates, to build a plan for Democrats to take back the Senate in 2016…
    First, the focus groups. Six of them were held around the country in August, where “swing” voters were exposed to anti-Koch rhetoric for an hour and then asked if any of them had made up their minds about whom them would support next November. The rhetoric included “evidence” that the brothers want to cut Pell grants and reduce environmental regulations. The implication was that the brothers were anti-student and pro-pollution, implying that the Kochs wanted more freedom to pollute the air and water in order to help their bottom line.
    By the time the brainwashing sessions were complete, so was the transformation of these swing voters into rabid anti-Koch activists. Some of them, following the sessions, called the brothers “whores,” “bullies,” and “Nazis.” Said one: “They’re rich white guys who want rich white guys to succeed.” Said another: “Anyone who spends that much money to get somebody elected wants something back what that person is elected.”…
    http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/21995-democrat-strategy-to-take-back-the-senate-attack-the-koch-brothers

    ***note Hart Research Associates…more to come.

    20

  • #
    pat

    ***note Reuters doesn’t link to the unnamed poll:

    25 Apr: Reuters: Valerie Volcovici: Billionaire green donor launches U.S. millennial voter drive
    Billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer’s super PAC launched a $25 million youth voter drive on Monday in seven political battleground states to help elect candidates that champion climate change policies in November’s general election.
    Steyer’s NextGen Climate super PAC, a political group that raises funds to boost candidates with strong environmental platforms, said the campaign aims to boost turnout of millennials, who have become one of the largest potential voter groups.
    In the lead-up to the November general election, NextGen will deploy hundreds of organizers across over 200 colleges to register young voters and facilitate on-campus voting.
    “We are determined that they will be a difference maker,” Steyer told reporters on a conference call…
    Steyer has been the second largest individual political donor in 2016, having spent $13 million so far this year, according to OpenSecrets.org…
    ***NextGen cited a June 2015 poll that found that ***73 percent of young voters want the United States to get 50 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2030…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-climatechange-idUSKCN0XM1XX

    PDF: 4 pages: NextGen: Hart Research: Research Findings from Battleground-State Millennials on Climate
    From June 17 to 23, 2015, Hart Research conducted a telephone survey of 2,002 likely voters (including 376 Millennials) in eight key swing states for the 2016 presidential election…
    The Benefits of Clean Energy
    The overwhelming majority ***(73%) is favorable to setting a goal to power America with at least 50% clean energy by the year 2030 (including 52% who are very favorable). Furthermore, they see direct economic benefits to setting this goal. Sixty eight percent (68%) of Millennials believe that setting this clean energy goal would have a positive effect on America’s economy overall (only 10% think it would have a negative effect) and 68% say the same about jobs…
    And in our survey, 70% of Millennials say they would have major concerns (45% very major concerns) about a Republican candidate who disagrees with NASA, the US Military, and 97% of climate scientists that human activity is responsible for climate change, including 69% of independents and half (50%) of self-identified Republicans.
    The Koch brothers, specifically, are viewed by Millennials in a very unfavorable light, ***especially when attached to a short identifier explaining who they are. At the outset, Millennials view the Koch brothers negatively by 19 points (8% positive, 27% negative), and a 55% majority know who they are.
    ***And after reading a description of a hypothetical candidate who is backed by the Koch brothers, the big oil billionaires who have a long record of environmental violations, who, along with their network of wealthy conservatives, have pledged to spend almost a billion dollars on the presidential election, 72% of Millennials (including 74% of independents) say they would have major concerns about supporting that candidate, with 47% saying they would have very major concerns…READ ALL
    https://nextgenclimate.global.ssl.fastly.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/ME11528c-NextGen-Press-08Sept153.pdf

    Hart Research Associates: Our Clients
    NONPROFIT/PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS – ADVOCACY
    INCLUDES: CLIMATE ACTION CAMPAIGN, NRDC, OXFAM, SIERRA CLUB, UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATION, WORLD WILDLIFE FUND…
    POLITICAL – ADVOCACY GROUPS
    •California Latino Leadership Caucus PAC
    •Democratic Attorneys General Association
    •Democratic Governors Association
    •Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
    •Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
    •EMILY’s List
    •House Majority PAC
    •Indiana House Democratic Caucus
    •Kentucky House Democratic Caucus
    •NextGen Climate Action
    •Ohio Democratic Party
    •Priorities USA
    •Senate Majority PAC
    •Virginia Senate Democratic Caucus

    10

  • #
    pat

    oh, it’s Steyer’s own goal! how cool Hart Research found millennials are in agreement!

    7 Apr: Bloomberg: Steyer’s NextGen Plans 2016 Senate Endorsement: Politico
    Two other criteria the group will use: supporting President Obama’s climate rules for power plants and backing Steyer’s goal of generating 50% of country’s power from clean energy by 2030
    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/trackers/2016-04-07/steyer-s-nextgen-plans-2016-senate-endorsement-politico

    btw why wouldn’t China be eager to sign up to the Paris Agreement, given the following announcement recently:

    20 Apr: The New American: Alex Newman: Chinese Mega-bank Partners With World Bank for New World Order
    The many establishment analysts who portrayed the Communist Chinese dictatorship’s new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) as a supposed “rival” to the Western globalist-led international economic order must be awfully embarrassed right now. And those who believed them, hoping the brutal Beijing regime’s bank was going to stand up to the World Bank-International Monetary Fund axis in particular, must be sorely disappointed. It turns out the scandal-plagued World Bank and the Communist Party of China-controlled AIIB are going to be proud partners in globalism. Together, the organizations will seek to promote the dangerous agenda known as “sustainable development” while undermining national sovereignty across Asia by bankrolling regional integration…
    In a barely noticed press release sent out last week, the Chinese autocrats’ international “development” organ, formally born just months ago, celebrated its first official joint financing agreement with the globalist World Bank…
    “I am delighted that today we are raising our partnership to a new level,” World Bank Group President Jim Yong gushed in a statement posted on the Washington, D.C.-based organization’s website. “Signing this agreement enables our institutions to finance development projects together, and that is an important first step toward working with a new partner to address the world’s huge infrastructure needs. As the world’s multilateral development banks collaborate ever more closely, leveraging each other’s financing and expertise, the people who will benefit the most will be the world’s poor.”
    The Communist Party of China operative leading the AIIB, Jin Liqun, who served as the brutal communist dictatorship’s “vice minister of finance” before joining the Rothschild-led “Inclusive Capitalism” bandwagon, also celebrated the deal. “I am very pleased today to sign this co-financing agreement together with World Bank Group President Kim,” Jin said in a statement…
    With the announcement, the two globalist financing giants confirmed what The New American has been reporting for over a year. “Despite establishment efforts to paint the AIIB as a potential ‘rival’ to existing globalist institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, the Beijing-led bank will fit nicely with what the Communist Chinese regime and Western globalists all regularly refer to as the emerging ‘New World Order,’” this magazine reported in April of last year, citing official statements and mountains of evidence that the regime in Beijing is fully on-board with the globalist agenda…
    The Reuters news agency, a key globalist mouthpiece promoting the establishment’s narrative, summed up how the public is supposed to understand what happened and what is happening. “The new bank, which signals China’s growing economic clout, will provide an alternative to the World Bank and other Western-dominated multilateral investment banks,” the news agency claimed, without a hint of irony, in a report about its new collaboration agreement with the World Bank. “Despite opposition from Washington, U.S. allies including Australia, Britain, German, Italy, the Philippines and South Korea have agreed to join the AIIB.” At least that is what you are supposed to believe…
    http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/asia/item/23012-chinese-mega-bank-partners-with-world-bank-for-new-world-order

    10

  • #
    Eddie

    These Congressional hearings are another timeless illustration of the point of your piece.
    Watch the oaf with the attitude & the clown with the bicycle.

    60

    • #
      Eddie

      My apologies. At 7:00 and at 14:20, to save you from ploughing the through all of the nevertheless further exemplary testimony, though you will have probably seen it before.

      30

  • #
    Gary in Erko

    1984 is a novel NOT a manual

    60

  • #
  • #
    el gordo

    ‘Progressives need to start with manners — honest conversation, accurate English, and acknowledging errors. Some apologies for bad behaviour are long overdue.’

    Social reforming zealots spit on the traditionalists (metaphorically speaking) thinking them old world reactionaries.

    The so called Progressives have got it badly wrong on this particular issue, but the green blob elite won’t give up just yet. At least not until we come up with a irrefutable new paradigm which will shock them to the very core.

    60

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      I disagree – just keeping speaking the truth ( inlcuding the decpetion of the temperature “corrections” ) will eventually nail them….enough people will eventually realise they have been conned.

      One thing Australians cant handle is being conned and made look like fools…it doesnt go down well.

      60

      • #
        el gordo

        Steve half the population has been brainwashed and will not gradually come around to logic.

        Take for example the regional warming we are experiencing in Australia at the moment, people smugly tell me its global warming. What can I say as a retort?

        The Subtropical Ridge is too far south for this time of year and the Southern Annular Mode is in positive phase, we can observe a mini bipolar seesaw and by the way global cooling has begun.

        How they laffed.

        40

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          I agree, probably half are pure cannon fodder, roll on the next war….

          But half arent. They will listen to reason….eventually the truth will come out, I just keep the pressure on asking for the scientific proof. When the typical hysterics start to try and back me off by dropping an emotive “depth charge”, I just ask for the science to prove me wrong.

          If the hysterics contiues, I ask why arent they pursuing hydrogen if its such a problem, then they change tack and I go around and around and around and keep pumelling them with ( quite reasonably ) request for data and proof …..never let up, never give up….people watching see that they have no answer, they realise its a con….never stop asking for proof. Its the one thing they cant defend against – press on that wound, make them cry “uncle” and admit its a lie….remember we are the ones who have truth and science on our side….

          00

  • #
    Analitik

    The red thumbers are sleeping in today. Once they get busy, we will see “The Desolation of Smug”

    91

    • #
      AndyG55

      You do have to wonder about the lack of intelligence of the red thumb bots.

      It must be very bad for their egos to know that pressing the red thumb is the very best they can offer as an argument. :-)

      83

      • #

        “You do have to wonder about the lack of intelligence of the red thumb bots”

        And also green thumb bots

        ‘It must be very bad for their egos to know that pressing the red thumb is the very best they can offer as an argument. :-)

        Be much more concerned of those that never internet click or write thereon. They practice each day. They do ‘perfect’ reloads for all skillful neighbors, and vice versa!
        All the best! -will-

        02

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      The Smugs are getting complacent.

      40

  • #
    pat

    Nye won’t stop digging a hole for himself:

    25 Apr: The Hill: Bill Nye: Climate deniers: It’s time to stop denying
    I also hear people worry that the U.S. will fall behind economically if we clean up our energy supply. But what about this very real possibility: What if most or even all of the other 191 countries who signed on at the COP21 conference go renewable? What if they decide to enforce a multilateral, 191-against-1 carbon tax? And what if they put a high, but reasonable, price on any goods exported from the U.S. based on the U.S.’s carbon emissions?..BLAH BLAH
    http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/277259-climate-deniers-its-time-to-stop-denying

    never mind, Bill, it’s business as usual:

    25 Apr: Mail&GuardianAfrica: Uganda president Museveni’s oil polygamy and the East African pipeline race
    Tanzania has been competing with neighbouring Kenya for the cross-border pipeline, which will tap Ugandan oil deposits being developed by France’s Total SA, China National Offshore Oil Corp. and London-based Tullow Oil Plc…
    Quoting a Ugandan proverb to explain his philosopy on the Tanzania and Kenya pipelines, Museveni said : “if puppies are young, you don’t know which one will be a better hunter, so you feed all of them and when they grow you see which one emerges the best hunter,” Museveni said that for now, the two projects should be allowed to go ahead…
    MAP: Oil pipelines Africa
    Africa’s pipeline network is shown below, with red lines representing gas pipelines, green for oil, and blue for oil products such as refined gasoline, propane and heating oil. Planned pipelines are shown as dotted lines. North Africa is the continent’s most pipeline dense region, followed by Nigeria. The planned East Africa pipelines are shown in the box…
    http://mgafrica.com/article/2016-04-25-uganda-president-musevenis-oil-polygamy-and-the-east-african-pipeline-race/

    25 Apr: Bloomberg: Feliz Njini: Kenya to Tender for Own Oil Pipeline After Uganda Rejection
    A number of financial institutions are interested in funding the Kenyan pipeline, Kasuku said, without identifying them…

    30

  • #
    Analitik

    OT

    Hydro Tasmania won’t be issuing a dividend for at least three years and water storage levels are now at 12.8%
    Budgetary fallout of Tasmania’s big dry becoming clearer

    Then again, with the attitude that the Tasmanian greenwash (incl Hydro Tasmania) had about the greenness of their hydro power, maybe it isn’t so OT after all

    30

  • #
    Leo Morgan

    @ Jo and the rest of us.

    I recommend that we don’t use jargon that we have to explain to the people we’re speaking with. Or if we must, then we should place the explanation immediately after the term. For example, “Virtue signalling (Posing)”. Warmists (Eco-loons). IPCC (Climate’s FIFA).

    It’s all well and good to use jargon amongst ourselves, but if the ordinary everyday person think’s we’re babbling like a leftie pseudo-intellectual (posing fool), he’ll be less open to the evidence.

    10

  • #
    Dave in the States

    The article is aimed at the Democrat Party in the US, but it really can be applied to the Republican Party in the US since 2006. In 2006 The Republicans lost Congress. That was when the party elites began to transform themselves into Democrat Lite. Not able to take the mockery they joined the mockers. Accusations of being for dirty air and dirty water, and being anti-science, if not onboard the whole Green agenda were too much to take. They couldn’t stand being called deniers. Then came Obama and with him fears of losing all future elections if they took stands that were unpopular with the political and media elites. They cow towed to political correctness. All of the sudden there was AGW, and we needed to do something about it. They became tacit supporters of green energy-partly from fear of mockery and partly from greed for promised abounding Gov revenues. By 2010 they ceased to be an opposition party.

    But the people rebelled and we saw the tea party movement.

    Now a decade later they are the mockers of the people as well. They look down their noses at those that run for president with success but are not one of them. “Not those two!” And they respond with disdain for the electorate that would prefer somebody not chosen for them.

    10

    • #

      “Now a decade later they are the mockers of the people as well. They look down their noses at those that run for president with success but are not one of them. “Not those two!” And they respond with disdain for the electorate that would prefer somebody not chosen for them.”

      Since the end of WWII the American “doers” vs ‘leaders’; have assumed that the next one (president or congress), cannot be as bad as the last one! So far; they have always been disappointed!
      All the best! -will-

      11

  • #
    JPeden

    Low Intellectual Capacity is then used/preyed upon by those with a Will To Rule:

    “Ridicule is especially effective when it’s personal and about expressing open disdain for stupid, bad people.”

    The problem with naked ad hominem is that it’s a logical fallacy. It means that whoever employs it has no case on the merits. That’s all I have to tell such people. Any repeat attempt is met with a QED. Of course on the issue of Catastrophic CO2-Climate Change, I throw in the fact above all, that the hypotheses involved are Scientifically Falsified by their own [100%] Prediction Fails. If people dispute this fact, I simply ask them to name one correct Prediction.

    But the real problem is that such people don’t understand what I’m saying. They have no idea what a logical fallacy is, what an hypothesis is, that hypotheses must make empirical Predictions, what the Predictions involved with Catastrophic CO2-Climate Change are, and that if they fail to materialize there’s something deeply wrong with its hypotheses.

    Imo, this is almost always a problem of Low Intellectual Capacity, until proven otherwise. Which I haven’t seen yet in those Warmists who I’ve come across. But at least I can usually get them to shut up by using only simple facts, or else outlast them. They are probably confused by words and ideas that they in-effect haven’t heard before.

    I know that my intellectual capacity is lower than that of many other people, but I do know it and try to make sure that the problem is not mine instead of theirs. The idea, after all, is to learn more and think better so as to improve myself, my life, and then hopefully that of others.

    I take the significant prevalence of Low Intellectual Capacity as a basic Fact of Life, along with the Will to Rule, gain enrichment, ‘status’ and “save the World”, by any means necessary, on the part of other people making use of the former kind. Imo, it’s really all about Totalitarianism vs Freedom, all over again.

    00