Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Choose

Bjorn Lomberg is a major figure in the Climate Change debate, having had his book The Skeptical Environmentalist savaged in a hatchet job by the once great Scientific American. He gives a great TED talk about what the most important global social problems are, and how to effectively prioritize solutions:



The problem, alas,is that he's thinking like a scientist. He's misidentified the actual problem, confusing it with the stated problem.

It's not about helping poor people, it's about grabbing power and making sure that The Right People are in a position to do The Right Thing. We know it's The Right Thing, because they're The Right People, see?

I mean, how is the environmental movement supposed to stamp out fossil fuels prevent Bangladesh from flooding if you keep distracting us with nonsense about keeping babies from getting Malaria? Never going to get any votes that way. Send a check to Oxfam, or something. Besides, the science is settled, I say!

Hey you deniers - get the heck off my lawn!

1 comment:

TOTWTYTR said...

This post and "Revenooers" make similar points. There is a lot of intersection between the two universes. In fact, it's probably more accurate to see that they are different galaxies within in the same universe. In neither case is the stated goal the real goal. Although the agricultural industry may be the overt beneficiary of increased Ethanol consumption, this issue it also about control.

In fact, as a blanket statement, all liberal issues are about control. While they divert our attention with loud protests about gay rights, affirmative action, abortion and other big issues which they say are matters of freedom and privacy, they work stealthily and steadily to reduce individual freedom in this country.

Be it Global Warming, energy policy, gun control, or anything else, it's about more and more intrusion into our daily affairs, not about what ever the stated issue is.

Liberals is not the correct term for them, Statists is. Or as Kim du Toit might have called them "Statist Pricks".

I'd of course never use such invective.