Abstract: Certain people, when graced by
some award, earned or not, have a tendency to become freshly-minted sterling
advocates on topics in which they have no training. This becomes an endowment
and a basis for a grand crusade and a wonderful political privilege for those
award earners as they can now drop names and issue authoritative opinions ex cathedra by merely parroting those
who either composed the instant political theme or are major chum chuckers for
the cause. Krugman’s achievements in economics are meager at best and his Prix
Nobel was a political gesture by the Swedes similar to the ugly mistake they
made in granting a similar prize to Obama for doing exactly nothing. We have to separate crude sophistry from
political advocacy and media stoogery to get a clear picture of what many
people are recommending and why. In the Krugmanical kase[1] this is pure political
fluff of the most sordid kind and ranks up in the air with his political
screeds. Today, Paul Krugman spouts from
his podium of Ignorance about climate of which he has no credentials other than
getting a paycheck from the New York Times.
Paul Krugman[2] is a
political operative working for the New York Times, or, better known, as the
Walter Duranty Papers. The word tautological must be first inserted and
then carefully expanded in scope and depth to be able to analyze most of the
hackneyed scribbles and coached mental gyrations of the near-financially
bankrupt New York Times—aka the Walter Duranty Papers.[3]
To suggest that there is little
more than a short stack of soiled, but politically sanctified clichés, to guide
the ‘writers’ in their narrow written
works in the Opinion section of this ragzine is to offer too much latitude to
those who are intellectually and morally chained in such a narrow media
latrine. Words like drone or stooge must be intercalated with the existing
context of popular tautology of the day and assessed using the current text of
the political assignment to describe what passes for thought in this section.
This will become self-evident shortly.
How to best read my blogs:
[I offer extensive quotes in this blog so that the
reader can view the exact language and can be confident that nothing was taken
out of context or that nobody was misquoted. The easiest way to take in the
salient points is to read the emphatic points
in the quotes and then peruse my comments.
Comments on my comments are always welcome:
We
begin to view this current absurdity with this enlightening statement:
“A couple of weeks ago
the Northeast was in the grip of a severe heat wave. As I write this, however,
it’s a fairly cool day in New Jersey, considering that it’s late July. Weather
is like that; it fluctuates.”[4]-Loading
the Climate Dice By PAUL KRUGMAN OP-ED COLUMNIST Published: July 22, 2012
The causal statement, probably the most bland and uninteresting
lead-in in modern media screedery[5]
almost expunges the rest of his comments. This is a difficult beginning.
He then
concocts an analogy with mixed metaphors and circular logic that might make
Plato blush:
“And this banal
observation may be what dooms us to climate catastrophe, in two ways. On one
side, the variability of temperatures from day to day and year to year makes it
easy to miss,
ignore or obscure the longer-term upward trend. On the other, even a
fairly modest rise in average temperatures translates into a much higher
frequency of extreme events — like the devastating drought now gripping
America’s heartland — that do vast damage.” -- Loading the Climate Dice By
PAUL KRUGMAN [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]
This concoction presumes much like the ability to
accurately measure the average temperature of the planet with any degree of
confidence. Averages are constructed from data sets[6]
and present only the most probably values. Error calculations are frequently
dismissed by advocates, sophomores and the enthusiast due to embarrassment over
the range of numbers that could be included in any conclusion. Imagine if the mathematics
revealed that the temperature increase predicted by their ‘models’ was exactly
2 degrees centigrade + or – 10 degrees. We could be in a cooling trend! Actually, we will as we shall see below from competent scientists.
The
focus is set:
“On the first point:
Even with the best will in the world, it would be hard for most people to stay focused on the big
picture in the face of short-run
fluctuations.” -- Loading the Climate Dice By PAUL KRUGMAN
We can only presume what the ‘big picture’ is here. I think
it is new and massive tax revenues and issues for
left-liberal political types to use against their opponents. What else could a carbon tax due but bring
more money to the left?
In this
next paragraph, the Evil Ones are named and the nasty practice of ‘denial’ is firmly
stated as a crime and probably one against humanity:
“Making things much
worse, of course, is the role of players who don’t have the best will in the
world. Climate
change denial is a major industry, lavishly financed by Exxon, the Koch
brothers and others with a financial stake in the continued burning of fossil
fuels. And exploiting variability is one of the key tricks of that
industry’s trade. Applications range from the Fox News perennial — “It’s cold
outside! Al Gore was wrong!” — to the constant claims that we’re experiencing global cooling,
not warming,
because it’s not as hot right now as it was a few years back.” -- Loading
the Climate Dice By PAUL KRUGMAN
But, before we traverse too much hokum and blow it is of
interest to quote Phil Jones as to
his true feelings about temperature effects on the earth although he was a
major advocate of Global Warming before he was undone by certain e-mails that
detailed his data fudging, cabal formation, attempts to exclude critics from
publishing in certain scientific journals and more.
This is
interesting and several references are supplied:
“Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer
in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be
a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no
‘statistically significant’ warming.[7]-- Climategate U-turn as scientist at
centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995 By JONATHAN
PETRE 14 February 2010
But, True Believers, like our hero today, will pursue this topic even if it is proven to be false because there is money on the drum and power to be had from scaring the public and exacting higher and higher taxes. Tax-whoring is like saintly conduct for the left. They need other people’s monies fast and badly.
The current ‘science’ in the GW
arena is a silly as the famous and phony ‘computer
study’ conducted by MIT in 1970 and published in a book title: Limits to Growth [8]
whose sophistical computer models clearly predicted, with ringing praise from
the ‘scientists,’ that we would run out of oil, copper and lead by 1992 by and
natural gas reservoirs by 1993. Much of
this junk science resembles the political works of Carl Sagan (big time pot
smoker) who was twice refused AAAS membership because of his sloppy,
inaccurate, sophomoric and juvenile articles about the “Nuclear Winter” he
submitted in the respected scientific journal Science. His ‘computer model’ was
analyzed and shown to be a farce by respected scientists. Any high school
algebra student could have defeated Sagan’s phony hypothesis. It was found that
very small changes in parameters and numbers into his math model would convert
the predicted ‘winter’ into an instant sauna. The math model waxed hot and cold
like a flopping fish on the pier with small changes in inputs. It is numerically unstable and any undergrad
math student would be given an F on
this rubbish by any respectable university except, perhaps, for Cornell or
Harvard or now Penn State. There was a grand political point to be made so they
could afford to neglect the defects.[9]
“How should we think
about the relationship between climate change and day-to-day experience? Almost
a quarter of a century ago James Hansen, the NASA scientist who did more than
anyone to put climate change on the agenda, suggested the analogy of loaded dice. Imagine, he
and his associates suggested, representing the probabilities of a hot, average
or cold summer by historical standards as a die with two faces painted red, two
white and two blue. By the early 21st century, they predicted, it would be as
if four of the faces were red, one white and one blue. Hot summers would become
much more frequent, but there would still be cold summers now and then.
And so
it has proved. As documented in a new paper by Dr. Hansen and others, cold
summers by historical standards still happen, but rarely, while hot summers
have in fact become roughly twice as prevalent. And 9 of the 10 hottest years
on record have occurred since 2000.” -- Loading the Climate Dice By
PAUL KRUGMAN
This is what Hughes Rudd would have done: bring the title theme
back into play with some clever artifice and word play. Hansen is not exactly
wart-free and has many critics and appears to be some kind of public
chum-chucker his movement even joining radicals in a march to protest the
Capitol Power Plant in Washington, DE. He was arrested.[10]
“Hansen said that he had to speak out, since few others could
explain the links between politics and the climate models. "You just have
to say what you think is right,…" he said.”-- Does NASA's James Hansen Still Matter in Climate Debate?"[11]--
By Christa Marshall, New York Times Climate Wire, published July 14, 2009
So, he
is right because he thinks so? Krugman has that disease.
“And so it has proved.
As documented in a new paper by Dr. Hansen and others, cold summers by
historical standards still happen, but rarely, while hot summers have in fact
become roughly twice as prevalent. And 9 of the 10 hottest years on record have
occurred since 2000.” -- Loading the Climate Dice By PAUL KRUGMAN
The
facts are that the globe is cooling:
“Climate change itself
is already in the process of definitively rebutting climate alarmists who think
human use of fossil fuels is causing ultimately catastrophic global
warming. That is because
natural climate cycles have already turned from warming to cooling, global
temperatures have already been declining for more than 10 years, and
global temperatures will continue to decline for another two decades or more.”[12]--
Sorry Global Warming Alarmists, The Earth Is Cooling
And
more:
“Met Office releases
new figures which show no warming in 15 years.
The
supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge
after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not
warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be
heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost
fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based
on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last
week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia
Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures
ended in 1997.”—Daily Mail.co.UK 29 Jan 2012.
So,
Krugman selects the krap rather than proven science.
This is typical of political variants: they tend to cobble
up what makes a sensitive and tear-jerking story along their favorite or
mandated political themes and state that as FACT while neglecting the salient
facts.
Comments: ryckki@gmail.comn
[1] A new word.
[2] The
Eternal Whine for More Taxes from Krugman
Krugman Spins Muppet-Grade Fables to Defend the
Defenseless: Solyndra
Mysterious Math Emanating from the Conscience
of a Liberal
Tax
Mongering at its Pinnacle: Krugman invokes the Social Contract
Hijacking the Hijacked Crisis
According to Paul Krugman
[3] In honor of that celebrated Communist
stooge and liar and winner of the Pulitzer Prize for the NYT. The
color RED is used in my
essays in honor of Walter Duranty,
a saint, if there could be one, in the Marxist Archives of Honor.
“He said that these
people had to be "liquidated or melted in the hot fire of exile and labor
into the proletarian mass". Duranty claimed that the Siberian labor camps
were a means of giving individuals a chance to rejoin Soviet society but also said that for those who could not accept the system,
"the
final fate of such enemies is death." Duranty, though describing the system as cruel, says he has
"no brief for or against it, nor any purpose save to try to tell the
truth". He ends the article with the claim that the brutal collectivization campaign which
led to the famine was motivated by the "hope or promise of a subsequent
raising up" of Asian-minded masses in the Soviet Unionwhich only
history could judge.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty
[4] Loading the Climate
Dice By PAUL KRUGMAN OP-ED COLUMNIST Published: July 22, 2012 835 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/23/opinion/krugman-loading-the-climate-dice.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB
[5] Almost a new word.
[6] Sometimes fudged as
Phil Jones taught many to do.
[7] “Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the
observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his
office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as
good as it should be’. Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre
of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995 By JONATHAN PETRE 14
February 2010”-- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html
“The
data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change
advocates to support the theory.
Professor Jones also
conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now –
suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for
the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.
The admissions will
be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the
heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in
temperature are largely man-made.”
Leading Global Warming Believer Now Admits There Hasn’t Been Any for 15 Years http://news.newclear.server279.com/?p=1460
Climategate:
CRU's Jones Admits Science NOT SETTLED!
[8] The Limits to Growth in
1972. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limits_to_Growth.
[9] Phony
(Political) Science from the Left
Posted by rycK on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 12:46:13 PM
http://rycksrationalizations.blogtownhall.com/2006/10/24/phony_political_science_from_the_left.thtml
Andrew Freedman, an environmental
journalist and columnist at the Washington Post, believes the American Meteorological Society erred in giving
Hansen its 2009 Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal: "His body of
work is not at issue... Rather, the problem arises due to the AMS' recognition
of Hansen's public communication work on climate change."[90] Former AMS
member Joseph D'Aleo, a skeptic of human
caused climate change, also criticized the award.[90][91]
Physicist Freeman Dyson is critical of
Hansen's climate-change activism. "The person who is really responsible
for this overestimate of global warming is Jim Hansen. He consistently
exaggerates all the dangers... Hansen has turned his science into
ideology."[92] Dyson
"doesn't know what he’s talking about", Hansen responded. "He
should first do his homework."[92] Dyson stated in
an interview that the argument with Hansen was exaggerated by the New
York Times, stating that he and Hansen are "friends, but we don't
agree on everything."[93]
After Hansen's arrest in West
Virginia, New York Times columnist Andrew Revkin wrote:
"Dr. Hansen has pushed far beyond the boundaries of the conventional role
of scientists, particularly government scientists, in the environmental policy
debate."[86] In 2009, Hansen
advocated the participation of citizens at a March 2 protest at the Capitol Power Plant in Washington, D.C. Hansen
stated, "We need to send a message to Congress and the president that we
want them to take the actions that are needed to preserve climate for young
people and future generations and all life on the planet".[94]
New Yorker journalist Elizabeth Kolbert believes Hansen
is "increasingly isolated among climate activists."[95] Eileen Claussen, president of
the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, said that "I
view Jim Hansen as heroic as a scientist.... But I wish he would stick to what
he really knows. Because I don't think he has a realistic idea of what is
politically possible..."[95]
New York Times climate
columnist Christa Marshall asks if Hansen still matters in the ongoing climate
debate, noting that he "has irked many longtime supporters with his
scathing attacks against President Obama's plan for a cap-and-trade system."[96] "The right
wing loves what he's doing," said Joseph Romm, a senior fellow at
the Center for American Progress, a think tank.[96] Hansen said
that he had to speak out, since few others could explain the links between
politics and the climate models. "You just have to say what you think is
right," he said.[96] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#Critics_of_Hansen
