May 23, 2008 — Assigned Reading

The Clean Energy Scam
I didn’t see this piece when it came out. Instead, I read it yesterday in a tattered copy of Time while trying to burn through my love handles on an exercise bike. I loved it immediately. This article should be sent to everyone you know. It should be required reading for everyone. It reinforces what I’ve been saying for a long time now — that we need to slow down the “green” movement for fear of unintended consequences. I’ve talked about not wanting to be the pediatrician who cures an ailing little Adolf Hitler; this article shows how everything about ethanol is more costly, in terms of currency and environmental impact, than pretty much any other source of energy. READ THIS ARTICLE!!! PLEASE!!!

Jupiter’s Spots Disappear Amid Major Climate Change
Thanks to the kind folks at NASA, we have a new photo showing fresh red spots on Jupiter, large storm systems attributed to climate change. Yes, climate change. While this photo, as well as the linked 2004 article may shed light on a correlation between climate change and severe storm activity, it unequivocally refutes any correlation between human beings and climate change. So Mars is getting warmer even though we’re not there, and Jupiter is seeing heightened storm activities due to climate change even though we’re not there, yet somehow human beings are a scourge in the eyes of global warming activists for causing disastrous climate change on Earth. More and more, it should be apparent that, just like PETA are less lovers of animals than haters of people, the tree-hugging, granola-munching, global warming alarmist crowd are less Earth-friendly than human-hating.



  1. Anonymous says:

    Excellent choice on your first article there. It’s a real disaster when politicians are finally listening to the calls of climate change, but they start going about it the completely wrong way. They look at old studies (scientists today do NOT support biofuels) and they pander to Iowa because it’s the first state to vote. It’s completely horrible. No one has ever had any problem with things like wind and solar energy, yet we ignore them. Instead we say “keep buying your SUVs, but fuel them with biofuel so it will be ok!” A better solution involves minor/easy lifestyle changes like buying smaller cars, not blasting the AC (we do that way more than any other country), changing to flourescent lighting.

    As for your second article, I don’t see how this article says anything about human involvement in climate change on earth. It’s talking about Jupiter. The great thing about earth is that because of having liquid water and a foundation of life (plants, etc), the planet is far more stable in terms of climate change than other planets. Yes, there are still ice ages and other major changes that are even larger than the scale we are dealing with now. But you have to look at the whole context. Those who argue for human involvement in climate change consider 1) where the pattern of change was taking us before industry and 2) how temperatures and other measures have changed in correlation to major industrial events. It is extremely unlikely that humans are not playing a role. That doesn’t mean that they are the only cause, but humans are playing a role (how could they NOT be, given what we know about carbon emissions from our activities?!) And regardless of whose fault it is, if we have the ability to slow down or reverse the change we should probably act in order to save our future on this planet. I don’t think that humans will ever render the planet completely inhospitable to all life, but I do think that would could kill ourselves off at the the rate we’re going.

  2. Jeff Schreiber says:

    Climate change on Jupiter, as well as on Mars, is extremely relevant. As a legal term, relevancy has to do with whether the extrinsic fact in question makes the truth of the proposed statement more or less probable. Here, the mere idea that Jupiter and Mars experience climate change with NO human involvement is paramount to the current debate over global warm– er, “climate change.”

    More and more, we’re learning that it is in fact temperature levels which guide carbon levels, and not the other way around. Humans may have a marginal effect upon the change of the climate–I find it hard to believe that we’re not leaving some sort of unfavorable impression–but it is by no means anywhere near detrimental.

    Yes, we need to be gracious stewards of our planet, but the hysteria surrounding man-made climate change has got to stop, for the future of the food supply, for the future of the economy, for the future of our children.

    Personally, I believe that such hysteria may be more detrimental to the planet–and those who call it home–than the very “problem” the hysteria is determined to remedy.

  3. Anonymous says:

    “As a legal term, relevancy has to do with whether the extrinsic fact in question makes the truth of the proposed statement more or less probable.”

    I don’t understand how climate change on Jupiter without human involvement makes it more likely that current global warming on Earth is not due to human involvement. Scientists have more sensitive tests of measuring these things. Earth is fundamentally different from other planets, with properties that make it much less susceptible to climate change (that is how we have life in the first place.) Moreover, no scientist would every deny that climate change is all due to human activity — it is very well established that Earth’s climate has changed enormously over time, going in and out of ice ages and whatnot. So this is why I can’t see how Jupiter has a place here — we already know that non-human-induced climate change is common on Earth.

    What is troubling to scientists is that these patterns are very predictable and changes happen over long periods, but rapid changes have been happening recently that are against what the regular patterns would predict. These changes coincide with rapid increases in industrial activity.

  4. Jeff Schreiber says:

    I have no doubt that we are contributing to climate change. I do, however, think that it is on a miniscule level, and we need to be careful to let nature go through its cycle.

    Furthermore, we don’t need to damage the world economy or the food supply because of a knee-jerk reaction caused by this recent media-fueled alarmism.

    Listen, I won’t pretend to have all of the answers on the climate, but I do know socialism when I see it, and likewise I can recognize a sleight of hand trick. Warm or cold, increasing or decreasing, we need to ensure that the debate channels are kept OPEN. In the meantime, it is a great idea to be more energy conscious — just not for political convenience.

Speak Your Mind