eek.
Apart from the staggering racism isn't it scary how the deniers have
quietly slipped from "it isn't happening" to "we will adapt to it"
(the rich white elite of course) I wonder how many deniers are
building and stocking their fortresses while telling us not to worry
our little heads about it.
Harriet
On 21 January 2011 21:23, Christian Hunt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> George - I think your analysis is spot on. I went to a global warming
> policy foundation event a couple of months ago where nigel lawson
> talked about the flooding in pakistan. His line - (paraphrased - but I
> have a transcript)
>
> "we will adapt to climate change as mankind had always adapted.
> Indeed, today around the world people make a Go of it in very
> different circumstances. The people who don't make a go of it are the
> pakistanis - they are corrupt, they have a rapidly golrowing
> population..."
>
> Etc.
>
> Sent from my mobile.
>
> On 21 Jan 2011, at 19:23, Brian Orr <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> George,
>>
>> You may have a bit of a point that some will bother to come up with a construct
>> that will appease their consciences a little, but my hopeless reading of history
>> suggests that for those to whom it applies, the simple logic of "might is right" is
>> always sufficient when the chips are down.
>>
>> Brian
>>
>> On 21 Jan 2011, at 09:42, George Marshall wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for calling it an 'ecology' Brian because that is what it is- a
>>> habitat for opportunists who each seek out a niche (and change to a better
>>> one if they can).
>>>
>>> Those who denied that it is happening have been switching for a while. I
>>> think Lomborg's appearance in 2001 represented a paradigm shift. When he
>>> asserted that "it is happening, it is serious, but mitigation fails on a
>>> cost benefit analysis" (ie the costs of action hugely outweigh the benefits
>>> of holding back climate change) he occupied a smart position that enabled
>>> him to seem very reasonable and intelligent and cherry pick whatever
>>> information he wished from either side. I've noticed that most deniers have
>>> been moving into this space gradually over the past few years. i would love
>>> someone to hold what Singer or Michaels say now against what they said 10
>>> years ago...but of course they would say that they were rightfully sceptical
>>> and that now the evidence is stronger.
>>>
>>> But there is a constant shift in the denier pop charts and it seems to me
>>> that the fastest rising new tune is "it's too late for mitigation but we
>>> can engineer the atmosphere" (a catchy little ditty).
>>>
>>> But wait for the biggy (and most dangerous)- "its now too late for anything
>>> other than adaptation and only the strongest (and most deserving) people
>>> will adapt and survive". This fits nicely with a certain aggressive right
>>> wing world view and my prediction is that it could become the dominant frame
>>> in coming years. It's already latent in the arguments that adaptation funded
>>> by full growth is more economic than mitigation funded by inhibited growth
>>> because this already assumes that the economies that can grow and adapt are
>>> the most deserving of survival. The parenthesis: " (and most deserving) "
>>> is an inseparable part of this- it is a way of resolving the ethical
>>> conflicts and blaming the victims. It is, I'm afraid, a natural
>>> psychological response to crisis and one with many ugly historical
>>> precedents.
>>>
>>> George
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Discussion list for the Crisis Forum
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brian Orr
>>> Sent: 20 January 2011 19:32
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Met Office announces 2010 is second warmest year
>>>
>>> James,
>>>
>>> George Marshall has studied the ecology of deniers as much as anyone
>>> but it would seem to me a first broad division of deniers would separate
>>> those who deny that global warming is happening at all and those who
>>> accept
>>> it is but assert it has nothing to do with human behaviour.
>>>
>>> The former are feeling more beleaguered because of the steady drip, drip
>>> of the evidence. The latter are proving\will prove harder to budge.
>>>
>>> But neither group would seem to be showing any reluctance to think about
>>> the subject. If, as both believe, it's nothing to do with human
>>> behaviour then
>>> whatever is driving it could easily go into reverse. I mean "the
>>> world's temperature
>>> has always gone up and down over the millennia!"
>>>
>>> Brian Orr
>>>
>>> On 20 Jan 2011, at 17:54, James Pavitt wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Bob
>>>>
>>>> I don't think the 'sceptics' have much to go on, and I think they are
>>>> beginning to realise it. According to the NOAA 2010 was virtually
>>>> the same
>>>> temp as the hottest year - 2005. The third hottest year was 1998.
>>>> The gap
>>>> between 2010 and 2005 was easily within the recognised margin for
>>>> error and
>>>> precipitation was the highest ever.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure you are aware of this, but I am increasingly of the opinion
>>>> that
>>>> there is a change in the flavour of denial as we continue to get
>>>> record
>>>> rains and hot temps. My opinion is that the fashion for saying 'it
>>>> is not
>>>> true because the science is wrong' is morphing into 'it is probably
>>>> true but
>>>> it is too scary to think about'.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> James Pavitt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Discussion list for the Crisis Forum
>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bob Ward
>>>> Sent: 20 January 2011 13:55
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Subject: Met Office announces 2010 is second warmest year
>>>>
>>>> The Met Office has just announced that 2010 was the second warmest
>>>> year
>>>> on record:
>>>> http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2011/2010-global-tempe
>>>> rature
>>>>
>>>> This will no doubt be spun by 'sceptics' as further evidence that
>>>> global
>>>> warming stopped in 1998 (the warmest year on record, according to the
>>>> Met Office).
>>>>
>>>> Bob Ward
>>>>
>>>> Policy and Communications Director
>>>> Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
>>>> London School of Economics and Political Science
>>>> Houghton Street
>>>> London WC2A 2AE
>>>>
>>>> http://www.lse.ac.uk/grantham
>>>>
>>>> Tel. +44 (0) 20 7106 1236
>>>> Mob. +44 (0) 7811 320346
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic
>>>> communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer
>>>
>
--
taking steps to prevent the earth from becoming completely unlivable
should, for the moment, take precedence over tasks that do not do that
|
