Prof. Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Physics (at MIT), has made a very fitting remark describing our dilemma:
Go into the anteroom of an opera house, a theater, or wherever you are having a cultivated conversation. Then ask who knows the 2nd law of thermodynamics. For those educated in the humanities this is the equivalent when someone asks them whether they have read this or that of Shakespeare. Those who think they are educated know at least their Shakespeare. When asked about physics, hardly anyone knows the answer, even worse, most people don’t even think it worthwhile to know.
As a substitute, because that was perhaps too difficult, one asks: “Can you define mass or acceleration? The equivalent question for the ‘educated’ would be: “Can you read?” In this sense, the question about the definition of physical basics could be considered an impertinence. It is generally assumed that anyone can read. But one can assume that for 95% of people the knowledge about physics is close to zero. Largely, even as a Western society and despite intensive schooling, we are at the level of Stone Age people when it comes to very basic knowledge about nature.
This ignorance. And I would also say that the pride in this ignorance is pathetic. Who would proudly announce that he cannot read? But there are lots of people who proudly announce that they have no idea about math and physics and no interest in it at all. And this ignorance empowers all sorts of windbags and pied pipers to shamelessly exploit these ignorant people. So you can sell people a CO2 tax, and they think it’s a good thing. Just as the Catholic priests made the sale of indulgences palatable to the people, because they couldn’t read the Bible for themselves.
The first political push against CO2 came from people who wanted to promote nuclear power plants. The green anti-nuclear movement came at a bad time for them. In order to justify the huge investments in nuclear power plants, the CO2 emitted by coal, oil and gas power plants had to be demonized. In the 80’s the measures of the governments were still relatively moderate, since the physicists did not play so much politics yet. There came exhaust gas regulations for power plants. The oil crisis panic and the estimation that we will run out of oil by the turn of the millennium (19 years ago) (Peak-Oil fairy tale) also came during this time. With fracking this date is postponed by another 50-100 years. Then the energy used to extract oil and gas from the earth will/may be higher than the energy that can be obtained from it.
The Greens have not only fallen for a largely unfounded nuclear panic, they have also been befogged by the unfounded CO2 panic of the nuclear proponents. Two wrongs don’t make a right. The highest concentration of dumbasses is really to be found among the Greens. But in the meantime the old socialists and communists have recognized their chance to use this for their own purposes.
You can do anything with people whose knowledge of physics is at Stone Age level. You can make them afraid of the doom of the world in 12 years, if they don’t pay their climate indulgences in the form of the CO2 tax, today, not tomorrow. As you can see, the methods of corrupt politicians and journalists (in the Middle Ages these functions were performed by priests, as they still are today) never changed, only the terms were adapted. One wonders: What has Luther really done? Are we heading for climate religious wars?
It remains to be seen whether the climate religion is stronger than the religion of socialism, which is constantly on the rise again. The latter is currently the driving force behind climate madness. It is never said what has to be done with all the money collected for ‘the climate’. It’s all about taking as much money as possible from the rich, the companies, the capitalists. This is mainly used for the parasite class, a class that Karl Marx created in the first place and which thinks of itself that those are always ‘the others’. Even the monks of the Middle Ages could not rely on parasitizing, but mostly produced beer, wine, schnapps and medicine to survive.
Lecture – Prof. Richard Lindzen
Mr Willie Soon exposes many of the deliberate lies of climate hysterics (I know, facts that unfortunately are of no use to religious people). Nevertheless, for my readers, and he also makes it quite funny.
Climate fanaticism, like socialism, will hit the poor hardest. In France at least a comprehensible defensive measure took place with the yellow vests. Those who already have hardly any money don’t want to pay even more for petrol, oil and gas. But since the same poor depend entirely on the welfare state, this is easy for a government to contain.
The states of the third world, however, are in a dilemma. On the one hand, they are heavily dependent on the Western states for food supplies and the sale of raw materials. On the other hand, they are denied their own industrial development with cheaply available electricity. It is the Africans of all people who are supposed to produce their electricity most expensively and unreliably with wind turbines and solar cells. They will no longer receive loans from the World Bank for coal-fired power plants or nuclear power plants. An industrial revolution will never take place there, they will remain poor and have more children.
Why do so many of the Western ‘elites’ sing along in the chorus of climate hysterics and what do they expect from it?
Only a very small proportion of these elites have studied STEM. Most of them have studied social sciences, economics and politics, consider themselves unbelievably educated, but have almost no knowledge of mathematics and physics.
They think they are rich enough to afford this ‘green luxury’. They don’t even notice the retired women collecting returnable bottles, the street bums or the Allah Akbar people standing at corners. They’ve never been hungry, they’ve never had their electricity turned off, or their heating.
The elites are groomed for conformity and indulge in a cheerful conscience to do good if they never contradict the alleged 97% ‘scientists’ who predict the IPCC climate. If they disagree, it would quickly become apparent that they have no idea about STEM. Such a bleakness does not fit the elite status.
None of this applies to the normal working population. Every roofer or baker has more knowledge about physics than a politician. They will all quickly realize that they cannot afford the expensive CO2 idiocy. For them it’s no big deal to admit that they don’t understand the subject. That would be an argument for more populism, i.e. that ‘we the people‘ decide by direct democracy rather than leaving it to politicians. Unfortunately, in our welfare states over 50% of the population depends on the state. So far they ALWAYS have voted for more redistribution, and they will continue to do so until the bitter end.
Another question is why so many alleged ‘climate scientists’ but also so many other scientists, even from the STEM fields, participate in and/or don’t disagree with the climate frenzy although they know better. Nearly all scientists are paid for out of taxpayers’ money, so they are funded by the state. In order to get money for their projects, they have to submit applications, which are ultimately decided by politicians or their officials. The “Investigation of the annelid worm with regard to climate change” is positively assessed. The same ringlet worm with regard to the coming ice age would end up in the round bin after reading the title.
So there is pressure for scientists to conform, because that is what politics wants. On the other hand, most scientists today are extreme specialists. Colloquially: they know (almost) everything about (almost) nothing. It would take a huge amount of time to get to grips with detailed climate issues in order to uncover subtle fraud and counterfeiting (see Willie Soon). You’d rather keep your secure, pleasant and well-paid job instead of rolling around in the dirt with the climate pigs.
As we have all experienced, conformity is now being brutally enforced again. The rebellious professor will probably lose his job, or his research funds will be cut completely. Some are bombarded with lawsuits until they have either used up their savings or give in. The incentives for scientists to involve themselves scientifically in other disciplines are not only ZERO, but strongly negative. The majority of academics at the universities, some say over 80%, are politically left. Even if they do not conform to the climate mania, they accept it because it serves to promote socialism.
I had once indicated to the commentator “gelbkehlchen” that I would reuse his comment in one of my future texts. Here it fits like a fist on the eye 😀
[…] Proletarians and capitalists (the productive forces) of all countries: Unite against leftists and other exploiters! […]
Quote from the commentator “gelbkehlchen”