Can scientists be AGW Skeptics?

In the real world of science not the bullshit world that has been manufactured by the Church of Global Warming, scientists reserve the right to be tentative about any assertion. In fact tentativeness is next to objectivity as one of the two most important scientific principles that any good scientist must covet. So if one disregards all the hype about AGW including the Copenhagen shenanigans and the political blowhards (mostly European but lets throw in Al Gore) and look objectively at the weather in Europe “its bloody cold” as the Brits would say. The satellite picture shows Great Britain covered in a frosty coat, the result of the “Arctic Oscillation”. This is reminiscent of the River Thames frost fairs of yore. Apparently there are other reasons for cooling and warming that the IPCC (UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) hasn’t fully accounted for in its rush to blame human produced CO2. There are these things called oceanic cycles that switch between “warm” (were in) and “cold” (are now in) modes. Professor Mojib Latif, a leading member of the IPCC has suggested that a large part (up to 50%) of the so-called global warming that the IPCC has noted is due to these oceanic cycles that he says could last 20 to 30 years. Prof. Latif and his colleague, heretics of the AGW Church, don’t believe in the computer models:
“I do not believe in catastrophe theories. Man-made warming is balanced by the natural cycles, and I do not trust the computer models which state that if CO2 reaches a particular level then temperatures and sea levels will rise by a given amount. These models cannot be trusted to predict the weather for a week, yet they are running them to give readings for 100 years.”

Its too bad really, I was ready to throw in the towel and join the Church of Global Warming. Oh well just when I thought the science was settled maybe it's time to be "tentative".

Mystical/Religious Belief on the rise!

Last month a new poll was published by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion and Public Life. In their "about" this research goup claims "to promote a deeper understanding of issues at the intersection of religion and public affairs. It studies public opinion, demographics and other important aspects of religion and public life in the U.S. and around the world." The graph on the left was a product of this poll and it shows that the number of Americans (polled) that have had a "religious or mystical experience" now exceeds those that have not. Many people (including myself) will find this troubling. Here we are in the 21st Century, our lives here in North America completely shaped by advances in science and technology especially in the urban environment, yet irrational thinking seems to be on the rise. What's going on? Clearly there is a disconnect between scientific thinking and a significant portion of the population.

Of course at the same time there has been a rise in atheist groups like cfi or the Brights and many authors of late have extolled the virtues of atheism. So why are the atheists losing the fight? First let me say that there are atheists who still have mystical beliefs, they just have no religious affiliation and do not believe in a diety but they may believe in vampires, werewolves, horoscopes etc..

Years ago when I was teaching, I introduced some of my classes to an article written by a York University professor James Alcock. Professor Alcock wrote The Belief Engine, which tries to explain the roots of human mysticism. In it Alcock explains that we are hardwired to have “Magical thinking” as children and its not until we start to think critically that we can suppress our tendency to magical thinking and function in the real world. Even as adults we all succumb to magical thinking each time we enter a theater or go to a movie and suspend our disbelief for two hours. The simple truth is that people can have the most irrational belief system imaginable yet still be successful business people, doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers etc... Look around you, it’s a fact, some of the smartest and most successful people are deeply religious or have strong mystical beliefs.

Alcock's Belief Engine explains how this irrational magical thinking may be an advantage in certain situations and that its origin in humans is genetic not just from our immediate ancestors but further down the evolutionary tree and it has conferred on these creatures a survival advantage. I tend to agree that religious belief and irrational thinking confer on humanity a survival advantage. Otherwise why does this "belief engine" in our brain still persist? There are many who will support that idea. This brings me to the point, if the Pew Research can be believed than the arguments, the anti-God campaigns all of it may just be a waste of time.

I've often told my students that science is counterintuitive; the way you think something works may be the opposite of the truth. Maybe that’s what’s happening here; the anti-God/anti-mysticism groups are asking the wrong questions. Don’t get me wrong, those questions need to be asked but the Pew research shows that mystical thinking is on the rise; maybe because it fulfils another deeper function that is so ingrained in human nature that it is pointless to fight it. I’ve known for a long time that it is pointless to argue with anyone that has strong religious beliefs. But religion doesn’t just confer irrational beliefs; it bonds the believers by providing an instant community of like-minded individuals, and sets goals for their actions. Bringing together a group of independently thinking atheists toward a common goal is a bit like herding cats.

The cold snap here and in Europe doesn't disprove AGW

Yup, that's what the experts say. I knew it would have nothing to do with weather because climate isn't weather, weather changes....err.....climate doesn't? Hmmmm....I suppose climate changes too, but I'm not an expert.
Of course whenever there is a spell of unusually mild weather, as was the case this past November we hear differently.
Just prior to the Copenhagen Conference that slime ball Al Gore, was on Letterman's Late Show peddling his new book. Do you think Gore didn't mention the unusually mild New York weather in November, implying an AGW cause? Of course he did, he's an expert right?

Happy New Year, lets get to work.

More fuel to add to the AGW discussion. Read this: German Physicists Trash Global Warming “Theory”. Science is a process, and the science on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is not entirely convincing in the light of that paper.

The Power of the Poor

The other night I was watching my local PBS station and was fortunate to stumble on a documentary called “The Power of the Poor” about the work of economist Hernando de Soto in his native Peru. The documentary describes the work of de Soto’s non-profit organization called The Institute for Liberty and Democracy (ILD) which he formed almost 30 years ago and continues today as its President. It describes how the ILD through the power of its ideas defeated the Shining Path Guerrillas, a militant Maoist group intent on ruling Peru in the 1990’s. Ultimately the Guerrillas were captured, convicted and jailed by the Peruvian government, and de Soto continues his work in Peru and abroad spreading a form of libertarian capitalism tailored to the poor and intent on lifting them from their poverty.
The video The Power of the Poor is available from Free to Choose Media and is a wonderful explanation of how poverty can be eliminated (as is happening now in Peru) by reducing government red tape and making small changes to the legal status of individuals by granting them property rights.
A great way to start a New Year.

De Soto received The Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty in 2004 from the CATO Institute.

Another victory for Terrorism

It’s worth watching U.S. Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano rationalizing the Christmas Day attack on an Amsterdam to Detroit airliner with these words:
“The system worked, everybody played an important role here. The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action. Within literally an hour to ninety minutes of the incident occurring all 128 flights in the air had been notified to take some special measures.”

Who knew that passengers are part of the system, deputized by the situation to act on behalf of American Homeland Security? Too bad the hero was a Dutchman; I hope he receives honorary U.S. citizenship as soon as he passes the security check.

This latest terror attack highlights the gaping holes in airport security that still exists despite a couple of generations of airliner hijackings culminating with the 9/11 attacks, the shoe bomber etc…etc... Has there been a single attack that has been foiled by airport security measures in use today? Not that I could find.

Sure there was the liquid explosive plot that the British foiled, but that did not happen during an airport security check. That incident and all the others have resulted in passengers being subjected to some pretty stupid rules. But removing your shoes will be just a tiny indignity imposed on us compared to the Full-Body Scanners that the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) intends to implement at all major airports. If Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam had this device, maybe this latest incident on Fight 253 would have been foiled, maybe not. Reading the Globe and Mail this morning I came across the story of one passenger on Flight 253, Shama Chopra, who lives in Montréal. Prior to boarding she noticed Adulmutallab the accused on Flight 253 acting strangely.

“I was looking at this guy and his hands were on his forehead,” she recounted to CTV about her encounter with him in the airport. “He was thinking very hard. I was thinking, ‘Why is he standing like this?' They checked him again. He's the last one they let on the plane,” she said. Too bad.

So here we have a Canadian deputy of Homeland Security, who like anyone getting on an airplane these days has a heightened sense of foreboding about the flight, but in this case she was prescient beyond her wildest nightmares.


Almost 40 years ago I took a flight from Tel Aviv back home. Prior to boarding I was questioned by Israeli Security. A young very fit man with a distinctive Israeli accent searched though my luggage and carry-on and asked me series of questions about my business in Israel. Some of the questions were repeated, he was trying to trip me up and I was getting annoyed, I shouldn’t have been. “Open your transistor radio, let me see your watch, let me see your camera”, and on and on. There were no high-tech search devices, just a well trained, persistent questioner. My answers were not recorded; he was not really interested in my personal life, just the way I acted, my body language, speech patterns, ticks, whatever.
No airplane leaving Tel Aviv has ever been hijacked. Ms. Chopra from Montréal points the way to real airline security. Use the Israeli model and just as important let the airlines take care of their own security. They have much to lose if people become more fearful of flying than they already are. Airlines will develop reputations like Israel’s EL AL; safety records can be compared and passengers can be treated with dignity. Water bottles and toothpaste will be allowed again, bathroom breaks prior to landing will be allowed, security, speed and courtesy will be improved under competitive market conditions. As evidenced again, the current model is not working.

You can't take it with you.......

This was posted by The Advocates for Self Government (see links on the left of this page). While the context is American, and the actors are all gone, the message can't be repeated often enough, enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n03_MvqaN4&feature=player_embedded

Another perspective on Global Warming evidence

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mxmo9DskYE

Democracy is over rated!

My daily copy of FEE—In brief arrived by email as usual today. Normally I wouldn’t mention it, but one of the FEE Timely Classics of the day was called “Democracy Versus Liberty” by James Bovard. I don’t recall ever reading it but I read it today. It’s fairly lengthy; there are no snappy catch phrases, just a long and relentlessly persuasive argument that drives home the point that Democracy is mob rule, and that coercion created by elected members of a government is still coercion and that doesn’t make it right.

Of course the focus of the essay is entirely American, but for those of us that inhabit The Great White North the ideas are easily transferable and all the names a recognizable. If you have read it, then you understand, if you haven’t, then do yourself a favour.

Though Ontario Judge is rebuked he is still correct

The Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled that Ontario Court Judge J. Elliott Allen overstepped his position when he spoke at length against harsh penalties for marijuana growth and possession as he gave a conditional sentence to a Brampton area marijuana grower. The article appeared in today’s Globe and Mail.

Perhaps Judge Allen should be recruited to run for the Ontario Libertarian Party in the next Provincial election in 2011.

The judge is quoted as saying: "Nobody has been deterred. People have been going to jail for drug offences for a couple of generations now and the drug plague is worse than it ever was....If something doesn't work, do I try doing it again and again to see if it does work? Isn't that the definition of insanity?"

Can you imagine this coming from a Canadian Judge in court? Canada is going to pot.......the sooner the better. 

Apocalypse Soon?

While I can't agree with everything in Neil Reynolds' most recent column (the Dawkins and Darwin stuff particularly) the gist of it is eminently sensible and ultimately wise. This column injects a little perspective into an issue that sorely needs it. Have a look: For every age, an apocalyptic delusion

Are there alternatives to complex "fixes" for AGW?

Who understands Cap-and-trade? Are you ready to buy and sell carbon credits, futures in carbon credits? Will these "fixes" to AGW be readily accepted by the Western democracies? These are all questions that need answers before governments spend billions, sacrifice jobs and generally dampen an economic recovery that is currently still on life support. Are there less costly fixes? There are, here is a thought:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYWviOjwPGk

Whose Bad?......We're bad.

Gerry Nicholls says we're bad. That's just fine with me.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/12/15/gerry-nicholls-the-new-canada-mad-bad-and-dangerous-to-know.aspx?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

More Sanity, I can't get enough.....

Lysiane Gagnon writes for La Press in Montreal (and weekly in the Globe) and frequently has opinions that bear repeating. Here from the Globe is her view of the Copenhagen Climate Change debate: A dose of skepticism is healthy.

If We Can Put a Man on The Moon...Then Why Does Government Fail at Just About Everything Else?

This is a posting from Reason TV with an interesting insight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGKBDU2bmcw