Incremental authoritarianism, creeping totalitarianism; Ellens and Lotufo on “Monster God” (core themes in human narratives); Climate updates; Fighting the ultimate monster; Alarmism patterns; Climate physicist William Happer on the warming influence of CO2 (warming influence declines logarithmically with rising levels, warming influence is already “saturated” in terms of ability to absorb and re-emit infrared radiation); Some metaphysics (love as the core nature of ultimate reality); Matt Ridley on the benefits of global warming; The Woke outrage cult; Breaking retaliatory cycles; and much more…
The comment below on “Monster God” and “Fighting the Ultimate Monster” is not a call to abandon religion wholesale but to deal thoroughly and properly with the single most critical failure of religion- that of the highly conditional deities at the core of religious traditions, deities that distort entirely and bury the unconditional nature of God, deities that embody the pathology of “threat theology”. Also deal with the entire complex of related ideas/myths that have been created to affirm those conditional deities, such as the varied features that portray deities as more animal-like than human- i.e. the portrayal of gods as tribal lords favoring true believers over unbelievers (small band orientation), the portrayal of gods as dominating lords, kings, rulers (alpha males), and the portrayal of God as the ultimate destroyer of dissenting others/outsiders (destruction through apocalypse or in hell).
While I affirm all endeavors to reform religion, too much religious reformism is just tinkering around the periphery and avoiding the core pathology/malignancy of the “monster gods”.
“Secular” alarmism movements today are fueled by the same core mythical themes that have incited religious apocalyptic eruptions across history. Secular alarmism often rehashes the same old mythological/religious pathologies as ever before.
Again, here is a summary of the more prominent and endlessly repeated mythical pathologies, the complex of related “monstrous” ideas that support monster gods (persisting in both religious and secular/ideological versions):
“The myth of a better past (original paradise) that has been ruined by corrupt humans. The myth of life now declining toward something worse (note the contemporary expression of this Declinism mythology as detailed by Arthur Herman in “The Idea of Decline in Western History”). The belief that humanity consequently deserves to be punished and suffer for ruining the perfect world that God originally created. The decline of life eventually ends in apocalyptic destruction and that incites the felt desperation for salvation. Salvation/atonement in mythical versions has long been based on blood sacrifices. Secular salvation schemes (“save the world”) still demand sacrifice/payment, even suffering for salvation as in giving up the good life for the “morally superior” simple life.
“The apocalyptic ending of the world is always “imminent”, with dates for the “end-of-days” usually set a few years or decades out. The imminent end-of-all demands “instantaneous transformation” of society as necessary for salvation. And instantaneous transformation requires the use of coercive, even violent purging of the purported threat because, as apocalyptic prophets argue, normal democratic processes are too slow to prevent the imminent apocalypse (“delay is murder”). Hence, totalitarian responses/policies are validated by apocalyptic alarmism. The purging of some purported evil threat is necessary to restore lost purity, perfection. Once the alarmist conditions are met then the lost paradise can be restored, or a new utopia installed. Salvation is thus accomplished for true believers in the apocalypse and related salvation scheme.”
(Note: Alternatives to the above complex of ideas are presented in sections further below, in “Humanity’s worst ideas, better alternatives”. Note particularly the “stunning new theology of a non-retaliatory, no conditions God”. This single most transformative, liberating insight into metaphysical/”spiritual” reality overturns entirely the God theories of historical mythologies and world religious traditions.)
The same old mythical pathologies summarized in paragraphs above have repeatedly resulted in mass-harm, even mass-death outcomes, across history. Watch these themes/myths operating today in the climate alarmism movement.
Ah, for people with courage to move beyond peripheral reformism to confront the monsters at the core of human belief systems and slay them. “Wise men” have given us the sword to slay such monsters and their supporting complexes of bad ideas (one of Joseph Campbell’s points on “the hero’s quest or journey”). This project is about going to the root causal factors behind primal human fears, and alarmism movements in general. Wendell Krossa
“Incremental authoritarianism, creeping totalitarianism”, Wendell Krossa
(Note: As with most movements- e.g. MeToo, BLM- there is generally a core concern that most people share and wholeheartedly affirm. But unfortunately, fringe elements in every movement sometimes drag what could remain widely-supported movements towards expressions of extremism/radicalism that many can no longer fully support. All movements need moderate voices to assure that the core concerns remain on track, remain clear and balanced, so that most supporters can comfortably, or uncomfortably, continue to support a given movement.)
We are all watching an interesting phenomenon taking place today as a new authoritarianism is aggressively pushing to dominate societies with ideological strains like “Woke culture/Identity politics” where many issues are framed in terms of highly restrictive speech prohibitions and racial identity. This new authoritarian crusade is tinged with resurging Marxism where the old “class warfare” polarization is now framed in racial terms (i.e. one race as oppressor class, another as oppressed class- and yes, this oppression has existed in the past but is no longer “systemic” as surveys of the US population now show almost universal support for mixed marriage, mixed neighborhoods, and mixed everything else. We have come a long way, baby.).
While Woke/Identity ideology still loosely associates with contemporary liberalism, more with Progressivism, the new authoritarians openly dispense with any pretensions to the Classic Liberalism that many of us once associated contemporary US liberals with. Many of today’s “liberals” exhibit dogmatic and highly illiberal stances of absolute intolerance for any disagreement (similar to the intolerant prohibitions of free speech/free press under Socialist/Marxist regimes, as most recently practiced in Venezuela and elsewhere). The new intolerance is now regularly displayed in hissy fits of morally superior outrage and calls for censorship, silencing, banning, de-platforming, de-monetizing, and full cancelling on public forums of any disagreement voiced by dissenters to the orthodoxy. The threat to the most basic of all freedoms- freedom of speech- has rarely been so pronounced in Western society. (Note: The calls for censorship are validated with hysterical claims that disagreeing others are promoting views- “misinformation”- that inevitably result in “death… murder”. Sheesh, eh.)
It is difficult to assess how seriously these authoritarian strains of ideology are embraced by the general population. There are surveys suggesting the new authoritarians are a minority but their exaggerated eruptions of public outrage and hysteria give the sense of widely accepted dominance. Mainstream media, obsessed with Woke and Identity politics, give prominent space to these extremist voices and that promotes the sense that Woke ideology is moving to a place of public domination. (Note: The media source of final authority- “Twitter erupts in rage”. Really? Who and how many people? That’s your ultimate authority?)
However, contrary voices like liberal Bill Maher offer a different take on things. Maher, on a Chris Cuomo interview (near the end of a 2019 interview- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrqWNDIOWtA), noted that surveys of Democrats found that a vast majority hate political correctness and think it has gone way too far (“no one wants to be living on eggshells”). Those liberals want what conservative/Republican voters wanted in 2016- an end to PC culture. Other surveys of the US population found that majorities on both sides identify as “moderates”. Those surveys, hopefully, bespeak a general common sense still holding in the population (i.e. avoidance of extremist positions).
Some have suggested that moderate majorities have been cowed by the fear of being targeted for not affirming the Woke orthodoxy/dogma. Silent majorities fear they may suffer censorship, demonetizing on social platforms (loss of income, banned, silenced), and outright cancellation. Hence the emergence of the worst form of totalitarianism that George Orwell had warned us about (1984)- i.e. “self-censorship” out of fear of tyrants and consequences for opposing tyranny.
Its hard to believe the emerging generation has forgotten what should never be forgotten and allowed to repeat itself- the horrors of last century’s totalitarian madness. Did we not learn anything from the Marxist mass-death movement? (Note: All forms of socialism- whether more straightforward Marxism/Communism or Social democracy/democratic Socialism, communalism, Socialism, Progressivism- are versions of collectivism where the individuals, and individual rights/freedoms, are subject to the collective that is run by “enlightened elites” who claim to know what is best for all. And yes, some democratic socialism models do function sufficiently well, especially if the democratic element is not overwhelmed and crushed by the collectivist element.)
Historians have noted that decades ago the Russians and Chinese decided to play a long-game for the downfall of Western culture and the domination of authoritarian governance https://www.brookings.edu/essay/the-long-game-chinas-grand-strategy-to-displace-american-order/
Further, others note that 60s Marxist radicals chose to burrow into US higher education to indoctrinate the next generation and that generation has already moved into mainstream media and other public arenas. Similarly, older generations of Marxists found that affiliation with Feminism and Environmentalism were useful associations for advancing their cause. Hollywood liberalism also seems comfortable with the new intolerant Leftist authoritarianism that validates their favored positions/policies as morally superior, now rendering Hollywood (and its highly influential role as main public story-teller) mainly a “one party state” of Woke Leftism. It is highly unsettling how so many still identifying as liberal are silent in the face of this new authoritarianism/totalitarianism.
If there is any remaining “Classic Liberalism” in the US version of liberalism, then where is the Classic Liberal defense of tolerance, inclusion, diversity, free speech, and protection of individual rights and freedoms? Where is Classic Liberal courage when it is most needed in the face of a new totalitarian threat?
Additional to the basics of Classic Liberalism, where is the common human decency that forgives human failure/offense, the common generosity of spirit that assumes good, not evil intentions in others, that grants second chances, third chances and more, that does not think the worst of others, is not quick to judge and then condemn harshly, and that does not demand full-on cancellation/destruction of the differing other?
Another: There is a proverb in the Old Testament that says something to this effect: “Only a fool judges a matter before he has fully looked into it”. How many of us do this today? How many of us rush to judge negatively, condemn harshly, and demand cancellation before fully inquiring into someone’s apparent failing?
Some surveys of the emerging generation show majority support for socialism… https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/14/fewer-than-half-of-young-americans-are-positive-about-capitalism.html
Other surveys show mixed support… https://news.gallup.com/poll/268766/socialism-popular-capitalism-among-young-adults.aspx
Overall, support for authoritarianism appears to be growing among the next generation…
Another note: The best defense against the centralizing of power in governing elites/bureaucrats (as in collectivist totalitarian movements) is to disperse power among competing individuals as in liberal democracies (i.e. the classic liberal defense of individual rights and freedoms from the threat of subjection to power-centralizing collectivist approaches).
Ellens and Lotufo on “Monster God”, Wendell Krossa (core themes in human worldviews)
Christian psychologist Harold Ellens and Christian psychotherapist Zenon Lotufo offer the following plain-spoken assessment of the impact of “Cruel God” features on human personality in Lotufo’s book “Cruel God, Kind God”.
(Note: They also include comment on “Kind God” features and the beneficial consequences of such features on human personality. However, that gentler, kinder deity image is overwhelmed and distorted by being embedded in contexts of cruel God features. Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy stated that the kind God of Jesus was buried in the New Testament by the overwhelming context of Paul’s, and other New Testament writer’s, Cruel God theology.)
Ellens says that “The pathological nature of mainstream orthodox theology and popular religious ideation… has plagued Christian communities throughout the 20 centuries of the developing church”.
Both Ellens and Lotufo state that Cruel God features include metaphors of God as monarch and judge, and God as an angry, vengeful deity who cannot forgive unless appeased with a bloody sacrifice (what Ellens calls the “monster God”). This Cruel God theology has produced in the social arena- wars, religious oppression, Crusades, the Holy Inquisition, and in the psychological domain- fear, anxiety, neurotic guilt, shame, dysfunctional feelings of condemnation and rejection, fanaticism, and violence. They conclude that the impact of Cruel God ideas has overall produced “impoverished personalities exhibiting infantilization and inhibition of full development of personality”.
Ellens then affirms that the monster God image prevails in Western culture. The dominance of Cruel God theology in Western minds is also evident in the widespread embrace of Cruel God ideas in “secular” deities like “vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, and payback karma”. Everything changes but everything remains the same, eh. (Note: The East also has its Cruel God versions, e.g. Lord Shiva the Destroyer)
Noting the effects that certain ideas produce in human psyches, even if the beliefs are largely unconscious, Ellens argues that the cruel God metaphor has existed “right in the center of the Master Story of the Western world for the last 2000 years” and the unavoidable consequence for human minds is a strong tendency to similarly use violence.
He adds, “With that kind of metaphor at our center and associated with the essential behavior of God, how could we possibly hold, in the deep structure of our unconscious motivations, any other notion of ultimate solutions to ultimate questions or crises than violence- human solutions that are equivalent to God’s kind of violence?”
As Bob Brinsmead rightly noted: “We become just like the God that we believe in”.
And this is why this site repeatedly goes after features like judgment/condemnation, tribal exclusion/separation, domination, and punitive justice (i.e. destruction in apocalypse or hell) that have been projected onto humanity’s highest ideal and authority- deity. Such features, when idealized and made sacred in deity, have dangerous consequences for human thought, feeling, response, and behavior.
A persistent point argued on this site? Humanize God fully with “no conditions love”. Purge God theories of all else that is subhuman/inhuman. Again- we become just like the God (i.e. the highest ideals, authorities, ultimate realities) that we believe in.
Note: Reincarnation is another element in Cruel God theories. It is the belief that because you fucked up, you must come back and try to get it right once again (or again and endlessly again according to the specific version of reincarnation that you hold). Repeats of life on Earth as punishment from the divine.
Climate updates: Countering fear with fact
An article by Larry Hamlin “Facebook Spamming Climate Posts with “Climate Science Center” Propaganda” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/01/31/facebook-spamming-climate-posts-with-climate-science-center-propaganda/
The report in link above covers the declining trends in global wildfires, history of US heatwaves (the worst were in the 1930s, not becoming worse today), droughts (not becoming worse), and much more on exaggerated and false climate alarmism claims.
Hamlin says, “Facebook also fails to present long standing EPA data (perhaps because EPA attempted to conceal this data as addressed in a recent WUWT post) that clearly shows that the U.S. is not experiencing increased heat waves or droughts since the 1950s period with measured data covering the period between 1895 and 2020 demonstrating the greatest occurrences of heat wave and droughts occurred in the period of the 1930s as shown in EPA data presented in the diagrams below.”
“Additionally, NOAA’s Palmer-Z-drought index data also shows U.S. droughts declining as shown below.
Another note: If it was 1.5-2.0 degrees C colder during the Little Ice Age of 1250-1750, then we have still not returned to the more optimal temperature range of most of our interglacial that was 3.0 degrees C warmer than today. Note the data on the Holocene Optimum and Medieval Warm Period compared to our Modern Warm Period. And note that we are on a long-term cooling trend since the Holocene Optimum ended some 6,000 years ago. Not good news. We should celebrate any further warming we might get during our cold era. All life flourishes with more warmth and more CO2- the basic food of plant life.
And… News – Teachers and Students Finally Given Access to the Truth About Climate Change | Heartland Institute
This is worth a read: Why media hate Joe Rogan. It has to do with the battle for free speech that concerns all of us.
Some quotes from this link just above: “The anti-speech activists in the media hate Rogan because they fear him”, Krakauer said. “Because if an audience can be empowered to think for themselves by a media personality who refuses to tell people what to think, what do they need the mainstream press for?”… “…its still amazing that someone like Joe Rogan has become the subject of such hatred and venom from the leftist media and their allies in academic and public medicine. Rogan has drawn such strong levels of invective for simply going against the ruling class on issues such as Covid-19 and, more broadly, (standing for) classic liberal principles of free, open, and rigorous debate with diversity of thought… It’s not only important to point out how he’s not to be confused with a conservative, but its almost an imperative to illustrate just how authoritarian and close-minded too many on the left have become.”
Jimmy Dore on the unhinged hysteria over podcast phenom Joe Rogan. Dore puts up quotes from these people in defense of Rogan… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNJdkJB3HxM
Justin Amish: “People trust Joe Rogan not because he’s always right but because he’s transparent, curious, humble about knowledge, and willing to consider perspectives that challenge and reshape his own thinking. We need more of this in media, in politics, in business, in life”.
Democratic presidential candidate Mariane Williamson: “I’m triple vaxxed, but (unless they’re standing for hate or calling for violence) banning someone’s podcast is too much like burning a book to me. Joe Rogan should talk on his podcast about whatever he damn well pleases”.
Meghan McCain: “I think a lot of people are really missing the point. Ask yourself why so many Americans have fled mainstream media and gone to Joe Rogan. He gets 200 million listeners a month and Jim Acosta can’t even break half a million in prime time. Why doesn’t anyone trust you anymore?” (Note the 80% drop in CNN’s audience this past year and the 60% drop in MSNBC’s audience over same period.)
Musician James Blunt (able to poke fun at his own syrupy songs): “If Spotify doesn’t immediately remove Joe Rogan I will release new music onto the platform”.
David Sacks: “How the modern Left thinks about causation: Joe Rogan’s responsible for “killing people” by virtue of conducting interviews but Fauci is absolutely blameless despite lifting the Obama-era ban on gain-of-function research and funding the Wuhan lab”.
Dore (also a comedian) says that Joe Rogan is the most honest and sincere guy he has ever met in showbusiness.
Fighting the ultimate monster, Wendell Krossa
A main project on this site: Go after and bring down the monster. What monster? And Why?
My monster-slaying project here stems from my personal life experience of growing up in Evangelical Christianity. Over a few years in my later teens/early twenties I took that religion seriously due to family pressure. I gave it a shot. I took seriously and felt the terror (“the fear of the Lord”) of an angry God obsessed with human imperfection and with punishing imperfection. I felt intensely the threat of ultimate judgment (rewarding/punishing deity), and the threats of after-life harm in hell. For a brief period I played with religious zealotry and got a personal sense of what the fundamentalist religious spirit felt like.
An example of the religious spirit (Christian version): Previous to my religious experience, I had held an inclusive non-tribal approach to people, no matter their religion, ideology, race, gender, or any other identity markers. Evangelicalism drilled into us a strong sense of tribal division and exclusion. We were told that we were “the chosen children of God” set in irreconcilable opposition to unbelievers, all those outside of Evangelical Christianity, the “children of Satan”. Other religious groups indoctrinated their followers with the same sense of tribal division and separation.
It took subsequent years, even decades, to think myself free of the monstrous myths/ideas of a mainstream world religion and its Cruel God themes.
Consequent to the above personal history, the Christian God and related Christ myth, became my personal monster. The features of this monster are still propagated everywhere today in major world religions, and throughout many “secular/ideological” systems also. Joseph Campbell was right that the same mythical themes have been repeated all across history and across all the cultures of the world.
It is interesting to watch young contemporary moderns, self-identifying as “secular, materialist/atheist”, yet zealously and dogmatically mouthing the very same themes of all past primitive mythology/religion. Evaluate your own belief system against the 18 main themes in “Humanity’s Worst Ideas, Alternatives”, further below. Surprises await.
Many today still fear some great monster that will get them (along with the deeply embedded feeling that they deserve to be punished/destroyed, and the felt need for “salvation”). Abandoning religious traditions has not resulted in any widespread abandonment of metaphysical monsters of varied types.
Example: I see the same complex of destructive “apocalyptic millennial” ideas (centered by an apocalyptic Force/Spirit) operating today in climate alarmism with irrational decarbonization as the salvation scheme. The outcomes of such ideas in “secular/ideological” versions will be the same as ever before- massive harm to the most vulnerable people. Just as past apocalyptic movements resulted in people abandoning daily life to “wait for the end” (i.e. abandoning crops to rot in fields) so people today, alarmed by climate apocalyptic narratives, are abandoning the fossil fuels that are critical to the functioning of human civilization, to human well being, safety, and progress.
What then was my personal alternative to my monster? Not atheism. That is too inadequate and incoherent an approach for explaining reality or life. Granted, more broadly materialist, or better “natural” science, functions spectacularly well at some levels- i.e. at the level of explaining how material reality functions or behaves (natural law). But natural science is limited in its ability to properly deal with the ultimate meaning issues that concern all of us, the big questions of origins, purpose, ultimate realities, and overall meaning (a real TOE). Materialist interpretations of science (“scientism”) fail when crossing the science/philosophy boundary to speculate on ultimate realities and answer ultimate questions. That failure is due to the denial of the reality of a creating Consciousness/Mind at the core of reality and life, and to miss the humanizing, liberating nature of that reality.
Most of humanity across the millennia (and today) have intuitively recognized that it is more rational to understand there is some great Mind, Consciousness, or Self at the core of reality, something that is creating and sustaining all in existence, and that we are part of that. (Note: I part company with most of humanity in that the features projected out to explain deities across history and across the world- i.e. mythical, religious explanations- have often been more animal-like than human. Again- tribal exclusion of some, domination of others, and vengeful destruction of differing others.)
Despite the subsequent abandonment of my early-life religion, I continue to affirm that Historical Jesus got the core nature of the ultimate Consciousness/Mind right- i.e. that God was “non-retaliatory, no conditions love”. Something so entirely opposite to the retaliatory, highly conditional deities of world religions like Christianity and opposite to the deities of “secular/materialist” ideologies (i.e. vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, payback karma).
Historical Jesus was someone entirely opposite to Paul’s Christ myth, known as Christian “Jesus Christ”.
With Thomas Jefferson and Leo Tolstoy, I affirm that the Historical Jesus insight that God was “non-retaliatory, no conditions love” has been buried in the New Testament under Paul’s Christology (his retaliatory, highly conditional Christ myth).
The adjective “unconditional”, as the primary definition of deity, overturns the features of the Monster God- i.e. the mythology of an angry God threatening to judge, punish, and destroy imperfect people/unbelievers. Unconditional liberates us with the truth there is no such reality behind life. There never has been such a reality. To the contrary, there has always been only love, inexpressibly wondrous no conditions Love at the core of reality and life. And that means, no matter what we endure in life- personal failure, natural world disasters, disease, suffering- all of us are safe in the end. There is no monster God behind reality and life. No ultimate threat to fear.
My project continues: To counter fear, primal fears, and especially fears of apocalypse, with hope and love. Hence, I persist in going after apocalyptic movements at all levels, at the level of physical evidence and at the deeper level of underlying themes that incite apocalyptic movements- i.e. subconscious archetypes (impulses and validating themes/myths). This explains my going after the current worldwide apocalyptic movement of climate alarmism (yes, its a profoundly religious movement) and my pointing out that this alarmist movement is incited by the same themes as all past apocalyptic movements. I see the same mythical fingerprints (bad mythology) all over these “secular, ideological/scientific” apocalypses.
I have set out the core themes in “Humanity’s Worst Ideas, Alternatives”.
Added note: Humanizing deity with unconditional love is about going to the very heart of human belief systems to fully humanize our greatest ideals and authorities. This is about a radical refocus of the primal human impulse for meaning, reorienting this impulse away from the core themes of past mythologies/religions and toward the more humane features that most people are more aware of today. This is a liberation project- liberation at the very core of human thought, consciousness, emotions, and spirit. Let the wonder of unconditional reality work its way out from there.
Climate facts: Cold kills far more people every year than warmth does. In the US, while heat kills an additional 18,750 vulnerable people a year (elderly, health compromised), cold, to the contrary, kills 154,800 vulnerable people a year. The same is true worldwide where cold kills 5-10 times more people annually than heat does (study conducted across years 2000-2019). So what is the greater threat?
While global warming will increase the number of heat deaths, it will decrease the number of cold deaths by a far larger number, meaning that more warming is exceedingly net beneficial to human life.
Again, all life will benefit immensely from several more degrees of warming.
The most basic issues in the climate debate are the claims that CO2 is the main influence on climate warming and that CO2 is causing “catastrophic climate warming”. Climate physicists (see sources just below) have shown these two claims to be entirely false. CO2 is a “bit player” in climate change/climate warming and the warming trend of past decades has been very mild (0.5 degree C since the 1970s) and is not becoming “a climate crisis”. We do not yet know if the future will bring more warming or a cooling trend. We do know that we are on a longer-term cooling trend since the end of the Holocene Optimum over 6000 years ago.
Hence, there is no need to tax carbon, and no need to cease our use of fossil fuels (i.e. decarbonize our societies). The climate alarmism crusade is fueled by mythologically and ideologically-based hysteria. It is not based on scientific evidence.
Note: Despite endless media claims that extreme weather events are becoming worse, climate data shows that is not true and even the IPCC admits this. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/despite-what-youve-heard-global-warming-isnt-making-weather-more-extreme/
A brief history of the origins of bad ideas/bad theology
We originate from an animal past and we have thus inherited varied animal impulses that prompt us to think and interpret many things in terms of those inherited impulses.
For example, we feel a tribal impulse due to our small band past. We then view ourselves sometimes simplistically as “good insiders of our group” versus the “bad outsiders of other groups” (the different “other”).
We experience the impulse to dominate weaker others, to lord over, to control, or manipulate coercively the differing other (alpha male/female).
We may even feel the impulse to destroy the competing or offending other. And this impulse to vengefully destroy finds expression in punitive justice systems (i.e. in extreme versions- the death penalty).
Our ancestors also projected these and other base features out to define ultimate realities/deities, thereby giving such features ultimate authority (i.e. hiding them “under the canopy of the sacred”- see, for example, Hector Garcia’s “Alpha God”). And that helped embed some of our worst impulses/ideas as “archetypes” in the subconscious- archetypes defined as inherited impulses validated by related myths/ideas.
Alarmism patterns, Wendell Krossa (contributing causal factors, responses)
We say “never again” after having experienced the dangerous patterns of alarmism crusades work their destructive horror twice last century with mass-death outcomes. Now, here we go again, watching the same sequence of incitements and responses being expressed in the climate alarm crusade.
The sequence of factors:
Today’s environmental alarmism eruptions are too often the result of irresponsible panic-mongering, whether from scientists, politicians, celebrities, or news media. Alarmism outbreaks begin when real problems are exaggerated, too often to apocalyptic scale. That panic-mongering arouses the survival impulse in populations and contributes to the abandonment of rational thought and prohibition of free and open debate. Consequent to panic-mongering, people are then made susceptible to irrational alarmist salvation schemes (i.e. society-destroying schemes buttressed with claims they are indispensable to “save the world”).
Alarmists hysterically claim “imminence” (about to happen, close, soon approaching) and the apocalyptic prophets then predict the actual “end of days”, setting “end of civilization/life/world” dates usually a few years or decades out. Imminent catastrophe then, logically to an alarmist, demands “instantaneous transformation” of societies with coercive force as there is no time to waste before the “final tipping point” is passed (hence the push for rapid decarbonization today).
Democratic processes and freedom must then be set aside as democratic freedom is too slow and messy to save the world in time. Collectivist coercion is then promoted by governing elites who claim to know better than others what is good for all. Taking the stance of righteous moral superiority, they claim to be acting for a “greater good” (i.e. the alarmist vision of good as “saving the world from capitalist/industrial society based on fossil fuels”).
Through these elements of alarmism movements, “creeping/incremental totalitarianism” is introduced as necessary and even good. Skeptics to the apocalyptic scenarios are dismissed and demonized as murderous deniers putting all in danger, unbelievers that must be silenced, banned, and even criminalized as dangerous enemies, as intolerable evil.
Guilt, along with fear, is also part of the alarmist menu of manipulation of populations. Guilt is promoted with the primitive narrative that corrupt humanity, the “virus and cancer” on Earth, has ruined the original paradise. While this myth has roots in antiquity (Adam sinning and ruining Eden) today’s version states that human industrial civilization has ruined a formerly paradise world and humanity must now make amends now by sacrificing/abandoning the good life in this civilization for the “morally superior” simple lifestyle (i.e. the restricted engagements of bioregionalism, localism, organic foods, and more).
Add here also further effects of alarmism such as fostering fatalism, resignation, withdrawal, and even nihilism in populations. Examples: Young couples refusing to have children in a world they believe will soon be destroyed, or children disillusioned with education or their futures because they believe they may die before reaching maturity in a world they have been told will soon be destroyed, according to the apocalyptic claims of alarmists.
Added note on surveys of a generation raised on alarmism hysteria…
Science is critical but…
Scientific data is critical to counter the distorting narratives of alarmism crusades. But scientific evidence alone does not change many minds because at heart alarmism crusades are also about mythology/theology. Climate apocalyptic is very much a religious movement.
As with all areas of human life, the human impulse for meaning also involves itself in alarmism movements. We are always dealing with these factors that are critical to human meaning and story…
1. Tribal dualism and the desire to place oneself on the side of truth and right, over against wrong and evil.
2. The desire to fight a “righteous battle against evil”.
3. The desire to engage a hero’s quest or adventure, to engage some heroic crusade.
4. The felt need to make a sacrifice, to suffer for salvation (guilt over living the good life of plenty, giving up the good life like monks/nuns).
5. The hope to save someone/something threatened, to restore a lost paradise.
See more on these and other factors below in “Speculating with Campbell on the meaning of human life and experience” (“Interacting with Campbell’s points on human story”).
To effectively counter alarmism movements, we must also deal with the above contributing factors that are foundational to human lives/stories.
This site offers a persistent focus on one singular transforming feature- “no conditions love”- that goes to the very core of human narratives to overturn the single most dominating idea of human belief systems across history (dominating in both religious and “secular” belief systems).
Quote from climate physicist William Happer (full set of quotes further below): https://www.independent.org/issues/article.asp?id=13458&omhide=true
“The best way to think about the frenzy over climate is to consider it a modern version of the medieval Crusades. You may remember that the motto of the crusaders was “Deus vult!”, “God wills it!” It is hard to pick a better virtue-signaling slogan than that. Most climate enthusiasts have not gone so far, but some actually claim that they are doing God’s work. After decades of propaganda, many Americans, perhaps including some of you here today, think there really is a climate emergency. Those who think that way, in many cases, mean very well. But they have been misled. As a scientist who actually knows a lot about climate (and I set up many of our climate research centers when I was at the Department of Energy in the early 1990s) I can assure you that there is no climate emergency. There will not be a climate emergency. Crusades have always ended badly. They have brought discredit to the supposed righteous cause. They have brought hardship and death to multitudes. Policies to address this phony climate emergency will cause great damage to American citizens and to their environment.”
More on a new core ideal– “no conditions love” (Without strings, free, unconditional- absolutely no conditions, none.) Wendell Krossa
“Unconditional as an inspiring, guiding ethical ideal provides the safest route through life, causing the least harm to others”, W. Krossa (See qualifier below on Ultimate Reality as no conditions- an Ultimate inspiring/guiding ideal, but the responsibility of love to hold all responsible for behavior in this life as necessary for human development/growth.)
Some additions on promoting unconditional as the defining feature of deity, Wendell Krossa
For one- an unconditional God reassures that ultimately there is nothing to fear in life or after life. That has long been a central concern of this site- to reassure people that no matter what suffering life hits us with, we are all ultimately safe. This sense of ultimate security (the assurance of ultimate unconditional love) provides a deeply embedded background sense of assurance/peace as we journey through our human experience in this imperfect world.
Embedding unconditional at the core of belief systems (redefining the core nature of deity) is also potent for disarming destructive alarm movements. Redefining deity as unconditional overturns the core idea/theme that has always driven apocalyptic alarmism across history- i.e. the myth of punitive, destroying deities or Forces. This is true of both religious and secular apocalyptic movements. Religious apocalyptic has long been driven by myths of “angry, punitive, destroying God” while secular apocalyptic is fueled by similar myths of punitive, destroying deities: “vengeful Gaia, angry Planet/Mother Earth, punitive Universe, or payback karma” (or just the cold carelessness of a meaningless material world, run according to blind natural laws and elements of randomness).
Unconditional theology overturns that mythology of threatening forces/gods entirely, revolutionizing the core idea. Unconditional moves beyond tinkering at the periphery to slay the monsters that work from the center of belief systems, monsters that incite fear through entire complexes of related bad ideas such as the “apocalyptic millennial” complex of themes (see “Humanity’s Worst Ideas, Alternatives” below).
Another take on this issue…
I have focused comment here on overturning of the central or core idea of human worldviews, whether religious or secular versions (i.e. notably, the historically dominant idea of punitive, destroying Force or deity behind reality/life). I have advocated replacing that old core theme of threatening deity with the new feature of “non-retaliatory, no conditions love” as the primary defining feature of deity. This radical redefining of ultimate ideals and realities has to do with our primary impulse for meaning and the big ideas that we embrace to shape our overall worldviews (i.e. how we understand things). It is about the ideas that influence how we feel about reality and the issues affecting our lives/societies. It is about the ideas that guide our responses to all sorts of issues (i.e. policies/programs that we support). And it has to do with the outcomes of ideas- both good and bad- for others.
Unconditional offers a core humanizing theme that will radiate out from the center to reshape and transform all else- again, how we understand things, how we feel about things, and how we respond and act in our interactions with others. Unconditional as a guiding ethic inspires more humane treatment of human imperfection and failure, notably in justice systems. Reshaping deity with the basic feature of unconditional is to go directly to humanity’s long-term ultimate ideal and authority and begin a mind revolution there by fully humanizing that central most critical ideal.
The central cohering theme of most public worldviews today, both religious and secular, still has to do with ideals and entities (Forces, deities) that advocate and promote retaliatory, punitive justice. Evidence? Note the dominant themes of religious traditions (e.g. angry God destroying world in apocalypse, punishing unbelievers in hell), contemporary story telling forums like Hollywood (obsessed with apocalyptic destruction of humanity and the world), and literature in general. Ideas/ideals that embrace retaliatory, punitive responses or treatment of others, incite similar responses in human lives that too often lead to ongoing cycles of “eye for eye” payback and we all suffer the outcomes of those downward spiralling cycles. Retaliatory, punitive myths also foster unnecessary human anxiety, depression, despair, fatalism, resignation, and even nihilism.
But many react…
Much instinctual reaction to unconditional as a guiding ideal has to do with the wrong-headed perception that embracing unconditional love will promote weak, mushy response to offense/evil (i.e. the need to feel fuzzy or warm toward horrific offense/offenders). Advocacy for unconditional automatically leads many to assume that it means engaging dogmatic pacifism (“turn the other cheek”). Hence, there is the need for qualifiers that caution that the term is used to re-define deity and ultimate reality (ultimate ideals), not as a dogmatic prescriptive for human response to offense and evil in this world. Offenders unable or unwilling to self-control their worst impulses should be forcibly restrained and incarcerated and that is why we have police and military forces- to protect the innocent and make life safe for all of us. However, unconditional will reshape police/military/justice systems away from punitive approaches (now common) and toward restorative approaches, and this is seriously needed reform today.
Again, unconditional is about the ethical ideal that enables us to maintain our own humanity as we navigate the messy situations of life. Retaliatory, punitive approaches exacerbate situations, render us all petty, do not resolve conflicts over the long term, and do not encourage us along an improving path toward a better future.
Some more parsing of unconditional as an ideal or ethical guide…
We affirm that ultimate reality of deity is absolutely unconditional love. Meaning- there is no ultimate judgment, exclusion of anyone, or ultimate punishment/destruction (no apocalypse, no hell). Yes, this still needs to be said given the surveys showing that many still believe such myths.
And embracing unconditional love as an ethical guide for human relating- i.e. treating others with unconditional love- means that we affirm that unlimited forgiveness is the humane way to treat all others. And we affirm that unconditional will inspire us to treat human offenses with restorative justice not punitive justice. Research shows that restorative approaches, such as used in Norway, have better outcomes with criminal offenders (i.e. lower recidivism rates). See also Karl Menninger’s “The Crime of Punishment”.
Restorative justice does not abdicate the need for incarceration of dangerous offenders (for public safety). And it is not about feeling warm or fuzzy toward offenders. Unconditional/restorative justice approaches are about intention and action/programs to treat all humanely, no matter how we feel toward offenders or their offenses.
Even the issue of forgiveness needs qualifying parsing: As some have suggested, forgiveness is more for the benefit of the victim, to free victims from the corroding effects of hate and bitterness that can darken life. It is not so much about the offender, some of whom are not able to be rehabilitated, as in cases of severe psychopathy.
This from climate physicist William Happer on climate alarm as religious crusade. Happer covers the basic physical factors influencing climate, factors that are ignored by climate alarmists and media. Factors that contradict the climate alarm narrative entirely.
Happer and following physicists go to the very heart of the climate debate with the issues at core- what role does CO2 play in climate change and is climate change becoming catastrophic. On both points- emphatically no. CO2 is a “bit player”, overwhelmed by other natural factors. And climate warming has been net beneficial and further warming will continue to be net beneficial in a world where 10 times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth. Conclusion- there is no need to tax carbon, limit our use of fossil fuels (i.e. decarbonize our societies). The alarmism crusade is not based on science. It is a religious/ideological movement.
Extended quotes from above link: (The first paragraph is a repeat from earlier comment above…)
“The best way to think about the frenzy over climate is to consider it a modern version of the medieval Crusades. You may remember that the motto of the crusaders was “Deus vult!”, “God wills it!” It is hard to pick a better virtue-signaling slogan than that. Most climate enthusiasts have not gone so far, but some actually claim that they are doing God’s work. After decades of propaganda, many Americans, perhaps including some of you here today, think there really is a climate emergency. Those who think that way, in many cases, mean very well. But they have been misled. As a scientist who actually knows a lot about climate (and I set up many of our climate research centers when I was at the Department of Energy in the early 1990s) I can assure you that there is no climate emergency. There will not be a climate emergency. Crusades have always ended badly. They have brought discredit to the supposed righteous cause. They have brought hardship and death to multitudes. Policies to address this phony climate emergency will cause great damage to American citizens and to their environment.
“Climate frenzy is really heating up recently. On February 4th Senator Bernie Sanders, Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, and Congressman Earl Blumenauer introduced “legislation mandating the declaration of a national climate emergency. The National Climate Emergency Act directs the President of the United States to declare a national climate emergency and mobilize every resource at the country’s disposal to halt, reverse, mitigate and prepare for the consequences of this climate crisis.” (This is from Mr. Blumenauer’s website.) But this is utter nonsense. There is no climate crisis, and there will not be a climate crisis…
“… that’s the way crusades are. This is really not a question of science. This is a question of a secular religion for some. It is a question of money for others. It is a question of power for others. But whatever it is, it is not science…
“Climate fanatics don’t know or care any more about the science of climate than those medieval Inquisitors knew or cared about the teachings of Christ…
“So, let’s talk about CO2. Number one, it is not a pollutant at all…
“Renewable energy is what I would call the inverse Robin Hood strategy—you rob from the poor to give to the rich. Utilities are permitted to raise rates because of their capital investments in inefficient, unreliable renewables. They junk fully depreciated coal, gas and nuclear plants, all of which are working beautifully, and producing inexpensive, reliable energy. But regulated profits are much less. Taxpayers subsidize the rich, who can afford to lease land for wind and solar farms. Tax incentives pander to the upper class who live in gated communities and can afford to buy Tesla electric cars. They get subsidies from the state and federal government. They even get subsidized electrical power to charge up their toys. The common people have little spare income for virtue signaling. They pay more and more for the necessities of life in order to subsidize their betters…
“… for those of you who share my view that this climate hysteria is serious nonsense, it helps to know what the facts are. I hope I can arm some of you with the real scientific facts…
“There is more solar energy coming in at the tropics than goes out as cooling radiation to space. The excess heat must be convected to polar regions by warm air and ocean water…
“Earth maintains its temperature by balancing the solar heating during the day with thermal radiation cooling to cold space, both during the day and night.
“Climate involves a complicated interplay of the sunlight that warms us, and thermal infra-radiation that escapes to space. Heat is transported from the tropics to the poles by the motion of warm air and ocean water…
“If you look at the viewgraph, you can estimate where Phoenix is, just over the Mexican border. That is where the color changes from yellow to green. This area is often under the descending branch of the Hadley Cell, air that rises up near the Equator, hot air, moist air, full of water vapor. There is tremendous rainfall down there. As the air rises to really high altitudes, 10 to 15 kilometers, most of the water is wrung out. Some of this freeze-dried air heads north and some heads south. The air that heads north eventually falls back down to the Earth, often onto Phoenix. On average, this dry air pours down at latitudes around 30 degrees north and 30 degrees south of the Equator. That is where we find the great desert belts of the Earth. That is where the Sahara Desert is, the Chihuahuan Desert, and to the south, the Kalahari Desert…
“Here is a picture of Earth’s energy budget. I mentioned we are warmed by the Sun. About half of the sunlight eventually gets to the surface. What prevents it all from reaching the surface are clouds and a small amount of scattering and absorption by the atmosphere…
“It turns out that the sun’s energy can get through the Earth’s atmosphere very easily. So essentially all sunlight or at least 90 percent, if there are no clouds, gets to the surface and warms it. But radiation cooling of the surface is less efficient because various greenhouse gases (most importantly water vapor, which is shown as the third panel down, and CO2, which is the fourth panel down) intercept a lot of that radiation and keep it from freely escaping to space. This keeps Earth’s surface temperature warmer than it would be (by about 20 or 30 degrees). The Earth would be an ice cube if it were not for water vapor and CO2; and when I say water vapor, you should understand that I really mean water vapor and clouds, the condensed form of water. Clouds are at least as important as greenhouse gases and they are very poorly understood to this day…
“All atmospheric gases are transparent to sunlight, but greenhouse gases are partly opaque to thermal radiation. We now call the gases that block heat-radiation “greenhouse gases.” CO2 is indeed a greenhouse gas. But it is not a very good greenhouse gas at today’s concentration…
“The message I want you to understand, which practically no one really understands, is that doubling CO2 makes almost no difference…
“On the basis of this, we are supposed to give up our liberties. We are supposed to give up the gasoline engines of our automobiles. We are supposed to accept dictatorial power by Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, because of the difference between the red and the black curve. Do not let anyone convince you that that is a good bargain. It is a terrible bargain. The doubling actually does make a little difference. It decreases the radiation to space by about three watts per square meters. In comparison, the total radiation to space is about 300 watts per square meter. So, it is a one percent effect—it is actually a little less than that, because that is with no clouds. Clouds make everything even less threatening…
“… the greenhouse effect of CO2 is already saturated. Saturation is a jargon term that means CO2 has done all the greenhouse warming it can easily do. Doubling CO2 does not make much difference. You could triple or quadruple CO2 concentrations, and it also would make little difference. The CO2 effects are strongly saturated…
“… the takeaway message is that predicted warmings, which so many people are frantic about, are all grossly larger than the observed warming, which is shown by the red bars. So, the observed warmings have been extremely small compared to computer calculations over any interval that you consider. Our policies are based on the models that you see here, models that do not work. I believe we know why they do not work, but no one is willing to admit it…
“Nobody knows how much of the warming observed over the past 50 years is due to CO2. There is good reason to that think much of it, perhaps most of it, would be there even without an increase in CO2 because we are coming out of the Little Ice Age. We have been coming out of that since the early 1800s, before which the weather was much colder than now…
“The alleged harm from CO2 is from warming, and the warming observed is much, much less than predictions. In fact, warming as small as we are observing is almost certainly beneficial. It gives slightly longer growing seasons. You can ripen crops a little bit further north than you could before. So, there is completely good news in terms of the temperature directly. But there is even better news. By standards of geological history, plants have been living in a CO2 famine during our current geological period…
“The vertical scale, RCO2, is the amount of that CO2 in the past that was greater than it is today. You can see on that scale that over most of the past, CO2 levels have been five times, ten times. even twenty times greater than today. This period, approximately the past 540 million year since the Cambrian Period, is the Phanerozoic Eon, when we have good fossil records of life on Earth. So, we know pretty well what life was doing during that time from the sediments. During all of this period, with much higher CO2 levels, life flourished on Earth. In general, it flourished better when there was more CO2. Plants really would prefer to have two, three, four times more CO2 than we have today, and you can see plants already responding to our currently increasing CO2 levels…
“This is the greening of the Earth measured from satellites. This picture shows areas of the Earth that are getting greener over the 20-year period. What you notice is that everywhere, especially in arid areas of Sahel (you can see that just south of the Sahara) it is greening dramatically. The western United States is greening, western Australia is greening, western India is greening. This is almost certainly due to CO2, and the reason this happens is that CO2 allows plants to grow where 50 years ago it was too dry. Plants are now needing less water to grow than they did 50 or 100 years before…
(On plants, photosynthesis, and plants surviving drought better, improved by more CO2)
“Take a low-power magnifying glass and you will see the leaf is full of little holes or “stomata.” The little holes are to let carbon dioxide diffuse from the air into the moist interior of the leaf, where the leaf, using the special enzyme called rubisco, (one of the most ancient enzymes in the world and the most abundant protein), combines CO2 with a water molecule, H2O, to make sugar. The energy to run this little chemical factory within the leaf is provided by sunlight. The problem with this is the need for holes in the leaf. Not only do CO2 molecules diffuse in from the air, but H2O molecules diffuse out through the same hole and dry out the leaf. For every CO2 molecule that diffuses into the leaf there can be a hundred water molecules that diffuse out. So, the plant has an engineering dilemma: it has to have holes in its leaf to get the CO2 that it needs to live. But those same holes desiccate it; they dry it out, and the plant needs water to live. But plants are not stupid. All over the world, they are growing leaves with fewer or smaller holes in them in response to increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2. If there is more CO2 in the air outside, leaves do not need as many holes, and they do not leak as much water either. That is why you are seeing the greening of the earth. It is from the plants themselves taking advantage of CO2 coming back to more historically normal levels…
“First of all, in science truth is not voted on. It is not like voting on a law. It is determined by how well your theory agrees with the observations and experiments. I just showed you that the theories of warming are grossly wrong. They are not even close and yet we are making our policy decisions based on computer models that do not work. It does not matter how many people say there is an emergency. If it does not agree with experiments and observations, the supposed scientific basis for the emergency is wrong. The claim of a climate emergency is definitely wrong.
“Secondly, even when scientists agree, what they agree on can be wrong. People think of scientists as incorruptible, priestly people. They are not that at all. They have the same faults as everybody else, and they are frequently wrong…
“So, the takeaway message is that policies that slow CO2 emissions are based on flawed computer models which exaggerate warming by factors of two or three, probably more. That is message number one. So, why do we give up our freedoms, why do we give up our automobiles, why do we give up a beefsteak because of this model that does not work?
“Takeaway message number two is that if you really look into it, more CO2 actually benefits the world. So, why are we demonizing this beneficial molecule that is making plants grow better, that is giving us slightly less harsh winters, a slightly longer growing season? Why is that a pollutant? It is not a pollutant at all, and we should have the courage to do nothing about CO2 emissions. Nothing needs to be done…
“CO2 is really good for life on Earth. Plants love more CO2…
“The Earth’s climate turns out to be remarkably stable. If there are feedbacks, they may well be negative feedbacks, and they probably involve clouds…
“… the scientific support for a climate emergency really does not exist. But so many people are scared now, and so many people have been brainwashed since childhood! I know. I watched our children and grandchildren in school and they get an incessant barrage of claims that the world is coming to an end. “You children are unlikely to finish your life because you are going to fry.” And all because your dad’s driving an SUV. A fair fraction of kids are sufficiently independent thinkers, in every generation, that they laugh this off. But there are lots who take it seriously. They go home, and they cannot sleep at night. You have got Greta Thunberg having hysterics in front of the mighty of the world, but she does not know anything about the real science or about the history of science.”
See comment in this link on the influence of greenhouse gases on climate, by climate physicists Wijngaarden and Happer. Comments on Earth’s radiation budget and flows, retained heat from CO2, and more…
Quotes from the link:
“Water vapor is the dominant greenhouse gas, but it is not increasing significantly with a warming planet. Further, the influence of additional carbon dioxide diminishes greatly with concentrations above one hundred parts per million in volume (ppm), which is far less than that which naturally occurs…
“Van Wijngaarden & Happer calculated the intensity of electromagnetic radiation (infrared radiation) leaving the atmosphere above the Sahara desert (low humidity); the Mediterranean (normal humidity) representative of the temperate regions of the earth; and wintertime Antarctica. Antarctica is remarkable since the relatively warm greenhouse gases in the troposphere, [mostly CO2, O3 and H2O] radiate more to space than the thermal radiation from the cold ice surface would through a transparent atmosphere. One can add that this is an example of the importance of convection transporting heat from the tropics to the polar regions where it is lost to space…
“The model of van Wijngaarden and Happer, validated by physical evidence, was used to forecast the effects of increasing greenhouse gases on escaping radiation, which in turn affects temperatures. At current concentrations, increasing water vapor and carbon dioxide have a tiny effect on temperatures; the term is “saturated.” The effects of increasing the other greenhouse gases are virtually imperceptible.
“Consequently, their method is far superior to that used in the global climate models featured in IPCC reports and its followers. Those models begin with different (and highly questionable) initial assumptions, and greatly exaggerate atmospheric temperature increases compared with actual observations.”
And quotes from Physicist Howard Hayden at…
“The surface of the earth (at 288.4 K) radiates 394 W/m2, as determined by the Stefan-Boltzmann radiation law.
“4. In other words, the surface of the earth radiates 150 W/m2 more than is radiated into space. That 150 W/m2 is retained heat, and obviously the atmosphere is responsible.
“5. If the atmosphere had no interaction with IR, but still reflected 30% of the sunlight, its temperature would be 255 K, which is 33 K (= 33ºC) colder that it is now.
“6. The 150 W/m2 of heat retention is responsible for that 33 ºC of warming…
“What matters is that the atmosphere has a net effect of reducing the surface radiation by about 150 W/m2 to equal the net radiation to space. The surface radiation is calculable from the average surface temperature, and the radiation to space must equal the solar radiation absorbed by the earth…
“Now it is time to start thinking about the atmosphere. IR leaves the surface, and less IR goes into space. Obviously, what matters is the interaction between IR and molecules in the atmosphere. Whose expertise should one seek for information about this subject? Most people have no idea, because the subject is so alien to their background. Physicists whose expertise is Atomic, Molecular, and Optical (AMO) physics, and chemists whose specialty is Molecular Spectroscopy may or may not know details of the relevant spectra (of CO2, H2O, CH4, and other greenhouse gases, GHGs). Suffice it to say that these subjects are not to be found in curricula of Meteorology or Climatology Departments, let alone in Political Science Departments or law schools. For a genuine expert, see Will Happer’s recent essay at (link below)…
“The current estimate is that if CO2 concentration is doubled, the additional IR amount that will be absorbed by atmospheric CO2 is 3.5 W/m2.
“8. That is, doubling the CO2 concentration would increase the retained heat from 150 W/m2 to 153.5 W/m2 …
“At present, CO2 (at ca. 400 ppmv) is responsible for about one-fifth, 30 W/m2 of the total heat retention (150 W/m2) of the atmosphere,
“At very low concentrations (compared to the present low 400 ppmv), CO2 is a very effective IR absorber in a certain region of the IR spectrum.
“11. The first 200 parts per million of CO2 are responsible for about 26.5 W/m2 . The next 200 ppmv— taking us from 200 ppmv to our present 400 ppmv—raised CO2’s total to 30 W/m2, and the next doubling—400 ppmv to 800 ppmv—will raise CO2’s total to 33.5 W/m2.
“The very strong GHG property of CO2 at extremely low concentration is likely responsible for the current demonization of CO2…
“The feedback mechanisms in the climate models involve many things (never underestimate the creativity of a determined computer programmer), but there is one thing they do not include: any feedback from CO2 itself. In other words, doubling CO2 concentration causes 3.5 W/m2 of heat retention, but other things contribute to (catastrophic!) global warming…
“The earth’s climate has varied greatly with no help from mankind and will continue to do so. What causes the changes?
“Overall, the temperature of the earth for the last half-billion years has remained within plus or minus perhaps 10 ºC, a small fraction of the nominal 300 K temperature.
“There is a 150-million year periodicity, wherein the earth goes through protracted ice ages. Israeli astrophysicist Nir Shaviv has shown that the ice ages occur when the earth is within an arm of the Milky Way. He identifies the reason as the greater flux of cosmic rays (due to proximity), causing greater ionization in the atmosphere, causing greater water condensation, causing more cloudiness, causing lower temperature…
“… there has been no shortage of natural climate variability… There is doubt—profound doubt—that reducing CO2 emissions would have measurable effect on the climate.”
This on the growing fuel/energy crisis in our world
Jordan and Rex inoculate us with Classic Liberalism or liberal democracy
There is a new pandemic threatening the world today, far more deadly than physical Covid because this other pandemic is threatening and undermining our democracies and basic human freedoms. This pandemic comes in diverse variants that include increasingly authoritarian governments refusing to restore basic human freedoms post-Covid, highly partisan and corrupt media that collude with authoritarian governments, re-emerging Marxism, and Woke/cancel culture strains that propagate divisive identity politics where all who disagree with the extremist Progressive narrative are demonized as “racist, white supremacist, terrorists, etc.”. These are some of the defining features of what has become the highly illiberal ‘liberalism’ of our contemporary world.
In the link below two respected Canadian thinkers/commentators (Jordan Peterson, Rex Murphy) analyze the degenerating Canadian situation and relate this to the larger authoritarian crusade infecting the US and elsewhere over past years.
“The catastrophe of Canada”…
Holy Wow. James Hansen appears to retreat from climate alarmism.
James Hansen is the “father of global warming alarmism”, beginning with his congressional appearance in 1988.
It appears he is retreating from his earlier alarmism. Note his apocalyptic prediction in 2008 that “Its all over in 5 years”.
So also “father of modern environmentalism” and creator of the Gaia hypothesis, James Lovelock, acknowledged a few years back that he had been wrong with his climate alarmism.
This is admirable integrity, humility, and courage- to admit when you are wrong, even if late in life.
Read and fully absorb this- These two men are the leaders of modern environmental/climate alarmism and they are stating that they have been wrong. Holy sheeesh, eh.
A bit of metaphysics (theology- fundamental ideas/themes in human narratives) Wendell Krossa
I am intrigued, fascinated by the emergence over history of a unique form of consciousness in humanity, and more so by the emergence and development of a unique form of love in the human species. Human love is something that evolutionary biology/psychology does not fully understand or explain when it tries to frame such love too much in terms of our animal past (i.e. “species altruism”). That approach, in fact, devalues and distorts human love.
Love is the primary defining feature of authentic humanity and gives ultimate meaning to our existence as human beings. It is the singular most important ethical ideal to guide human story/life, the feature that enables us to attain mature humanity, even to achieve heroic humanity. We spend a lifetime exploring and experiencing love and still only begin to dabble at the periphery of this most profound reality in the cosmos and in life.
This site argues that love is also the most profound insight into the nature of Ultimate Reality- i.e. the nature of the creating/sustaining Consciousness, what it is actually composed of. And assuming transcendence in Ultimate Mind/deity, we conclude that ultimate Love is infinitely beyond the best that we can imagine, which is to say- “absolutely no conditions”, and that of a transcendent nature.
As a Near-Death Experience person recounted- love is something ultimately basic, like consciousness or energy: “God is made of love. The very substance, very atoms of God are love, a stunning unconditional love”. This says that love is the very core nature of all reality and life.
(Insert note: Why take seriously the personal “spiritual” experience of someone from a contemporary movement like the NDE movement? Well, all the great belief systems across history are based on the personal “spiritual” experiences of their founders: Judaism based on Moses’ mountain-top and related revelations; Christianity based on Paul’s revelations of his gospel from the Christ (Damascus Road and other); Islam based on Mohammad’s cave revelations/seizures; Buddhism based on the Buddha’s enlightenment revelations, and so on. All related beliefs in such systems derive from the original personal “spiritual” experiences of founders. And NDEs offer the self-validating ‘truthfulness’ of a no conditions love at the core of most such experiences. Nuff said.)
Varied others have concluded that Consciousness or Mind is at the basis of all material reality, consciousness is the most fundamental level of reality. As early quantum mechanics theorist James Jeans suggested: “The stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter… we ought rather to hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter”.
I would take that further and affirm that the creating, sustaining consciousness is made of an even more basic reality- love. Love and human or humane consciousness are inseparable realities.
And that is the essence of my TOE (Theory of Everything).
The point that I take away from these insights? We are all ultimately safe. There is nothing to fear, ultimately. No ultimate judgment. No ultimate separation or exclusion of anyone, not even the worst failures in history. No ultimate punishment or destruction.
The entire history of human mythology and religion has gotten this so wrong. Religious traditions have never communicated to people the stunning wonder of no conditions love at the core of reality.
To the contrary, historical/world religions have presented ultimate reality/deity in terms of the features of “monster gods”- the very antithesis of love. Examples: Religions across history have defined deity as tribal in nature (a great cosmic Good spirit versus a great cosmic Evil force/spirit) and that cosmic dualism resulted in myths of gods favoring insiders to a tribe (true believers) while excluding outsiders (unbelievers). Cosmic dualism/tribalism validates myriad human dualisms/tribalisms (i.e. tribalisms of nationality, race/ethnicity, religion, ideology, even gender, etc.). Religious traditions have also presented gods as dominating lords/kings/rulers with humans created to serve the gods (domination/submission forms of relating, the inequality of vertical relating). And religious systems have claimed that gods punished and destroyed enemies. There is no “love your enemy” in such barbaric mythology.
Religious systems (and their monster gods) have distorted and buried the true nature of ultimate reality as supreme love. Most egregiously, religious traditions have buried the unconditional nature of ultimate love with endless religious conditions making religious versions of love highly conditional (i.e. right beliefs, demanded sacrifices/payments, correct rituals, prescribed religious lifestyles).
A stunningly no conditions Love at the core of reality goes to the very heart of human understanding and the human impulse for meaning. It goes to the very foundations of primal human fears (i.e. fears of this-life or after-life harm) and liberates consciousness/subconscious as nothing else can.
I conclude that ultimately, there is only love. Love that is infinitely better than the best that we can imagine. And “that is all I have to say on that” (Forest Gump). The unconditional nature of ultimate reality is the basic feature of my worldview, my TOE.
Note: Fear of “this-life harm” has been one of the most common and damaging religious myths of all- i.e. the myth that there is a punitive deity behind natural disaster, disease, and predatory cruelty (your enemies defeating you). This burdensome myth is still prevalent today in the common belief that the harsh elements of life are punishment for being bad and that we deserve it.
Note: The highest form of love that we have discovered is “no conditions or unconditional love”. Embracing unconditional as an ethical ideal involves embracing the intention to treat every person humanely, even offenders, despite our feelings about their offenses. Loathing and outrage are often the most humane responses to the horrific offenses that some people commit against innocent others. But despite how we feel, an unconditional attitude will choose to treat offenders humanely while holding them responsible for their behavior (much like the human rights codes on the treatment of prisoners of war). This means restorative justice approaches that include locking up those unable or unwilling to self-control their worst impulses, even throwing the key away in some cases (i.e. persistent psychopathy).
Love never abandons common sense in an imperfect world. Dogmatic pacifism (i.e. “turn the other cheek”) is not love when it fails to protect people in the face of evil.
Some thoughts on humanity’s highest ideal- love- and approaches to organizing human societies (see Arthur Herman’s “The Cave and the Light” for the long-term history of the two basic approaches to organizing human societies) Wendell Krossa
Where there is no freedom there is no authentic love. Love and freedom are inseparable elements of one reality. Love respects and affirms the self-control and self-determination of all others as equals.
All forms of collectivism (Socialism, Robert Owen’s communalism, Marxism/communism, democratic socialism, Progressivism) centralize power in governing elites that claim to be more enlightened than average citizens, elites that claim to know what is best for all others. Collectivist enlightened elites believe their cause is “virtuous, righteous” and a life-and-death struggle against apocalyptic evil (those who disagree with them) that threatens the existence of all.
Collectivism subjects individuals, individual rights and freedoms, to the domination of the collective and validates that domination with the claim to advocate for the moral superiority of “greater or common good” (again- the collectivist crusade is virtuous, righteous). Collectivism devalues and prohibits private property (private contracts, private ownership, and private profit) as being about debasing selfishness and greed. Past history shows that collectivism inevitably unleashes the totalitarian impulse and approach to organizing populations.
To the contrary, Classic Liberalism or liberal democracy affirms individual rights and freedoms as natural, as inherent to everyone by virtue of being human. Government does not grant rights and freedoms to people but exists to protect such, and to basically keep out of the way of free people as much as possible. Individual rights and freedoms arise from the populace, and governing officials/bureaucrats exist to serve that population, to protect their freedoms.
Liberal democracy protects us from totalitarianism by dispersing power among individuals, by using mechanisms to constantly disperse/decentralize power. Good illustrations of this include the counter-balancing institutions as in the US situation (i.e. separation of powers between branches of government). Governments and organizations need, for example, inbuilt mechanisms or procedures to decrease the regulatory burden on people that tends to flood from bureaucracies that proliferate such regulations. Governments also need to regularly decrease the taxation burden that endlessly grows, if unchecked, to confiscate citizen’s financial resources and related power.
Another note: Collectivists, drunk from the totalitarian control impulse, want to shape people according to their ideal of the “good citizen” as collectivist/communalist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Soviet_man). They will do so using coercion not democratic persuasion again believing that greater good should dominate individual rights and freedoms (note the repeated use of coercive compliance in socialist regimes, shutting down opposition).
Love, to repeat the point above, respects and affirms the need for free and open learning, gradual development, self-determination of individuals, and self-control.
Uncertainty over rising CO2- a natural trend before industrialization began, Wendell Krossa
CO2 levels have not been connected to long-term warming trends over paleo-climate history. CO2 levels have often very high while temperatures were very cold (i.e. during ice age eras). The Vostok ice core research shows also that rising atmospheric CO2 follows climate warming, not the other way around. https://co2coalition.org/news/the-temperature-co2-climate-connection-an-epistemological-reappraisal-of-ice-core-messages/
On a much shorter time-scale, note that CO2 levels continued to rise when there was a 7% decline in human emissions during recent Covid lockdowns (much of 2020 and into 2021). Also, CO2 was naturally rising before industrialization emissions increased after WW2. Why do we assume the continuing trend of rising CO2 after emerging industrialization was mainly due to human emissions when before it was all natural?
There are huge natural carbon/CO2 cycles on Earth between oceans and atmosphere and land biomass/soil and atmosphere. The perturbations in these cycles (shifts, imbalances) are larger than human emissions.
These factors raise significant uncertainty as to how much humanity really contributes to rising CO2 levels.
Also, CO2 levels over past millennia and even today are at historical lows compared to paleo-climate history. When CO2 was at multiple-thousands of ppm in the past, all life thrived and there was no climate “catastrophe”. Earth did not fry.
Further, while CO2 has a warming influence there is uncertainty as to how large that role is in climate warming. Many scientists say that CO2 is a “bit player” in a mix of many natural factors that impact climate change and consistently overwhelm the CO2 influence. Again, the Vostok ice core research shows that rising CO2 levels follow climate warming not the other way around. And what about the stronger correlations of climate change to natural things like PDO shifts, and solar activity (maximums/minimums)?
Point? You cannot turn a CO2 knob (decarbonization) and control the complex, dynamic system that is climate. That thinking (let’s limit climate warming to just another degree or so) is unscientific, irrational, even absurd.
Then acknowledge the many benefits of more CO2. CO2 levels have been declining across the past 140 million years and became dangerously low just 20,000 years ago, almost descending to the point at which all life dies (i.e. down to 185 ppm- just 35 ppm above the 150 ppm level where all plants die). When CO2 levels were much higher over the past (in the multiple thousands of ppm), life thrived, just as all Iife is thriving again today with more of its basic food.
Conclusion: There is no “settled” scientific reason to demonize CO2, tax carbon, or decarbonize our societies.
See also https://co2coalition.org/news/17-new-scientific-papers-dispute-co2-greenhouse-effect-as-primary-explanation-for-climate-change/
From earlier comment on “Incremental authoritarianism, creeping totalitarianism”: Wendell Krossa
“… some democratic socialism models do function sufficiently well, especially if the democratic element is not overwhelmed and crushed by the collectivist element.”
Further comment on this point of the democratic element not being crushed by the collectivist element:
“The democratic element”- meaning the Classic Liberal element that separates and protects the rights and freedoms of individuals from the collectivist element. Collectivism centralizes power in governing elites and that subordinates individuals and their rights to those collective elites. That centralizing of power in the hands of a limited few is the most dangerous threat to the freedom and equality of all.
We counter the totalitarian threat from centralization of power in the few by dispersing power among many competing individuals/institutions. In our Western societies, centralizing of power often occurs through taxation and government regulation (i.e. control of individual’s resources/wealth, and control of individuals by intrusive regulations covering all areas of life).
Societies/organizations need mechanisms that persistently pushback against the tendency of powerholders/bureaucrats to constantly increase regulations (i.e. the bureaucratic impulse to appear busy, productive, thinking up new protocols, paperwork, things for others to do). One effective mechanism or response that counters the impulse and trend to add endless rules- i.e. for every new rule, eliminate one or more rules elsewhere. British Columbia Liberals did this when last in power, as did Trump during his administration. So also Ronald Reagan cut back government regulation through his Deregulation Commission under the direction of his Vice-President Bush. https://www.theregreview.org/2019/03/11/dudley-brief-history-regulation-deregulation/
Freedom has to be fought for, and maintained, by such responses, by ongoing pushback against “creeping totalitarianism… incremental authoritarianism”.
Collectivists believe and argue that subjecting individuals to the primacy of the collective is about ensuring that all support the “greater good… common good” as the supreme goal in organizing a society. But history has affirmed that greater or common good has been more effectively achieved by protecting free individuals and their rights, while the endeavor to achieve greater good by collectivist approaches has failed repeatedly as an approach to organizing human societies. Collectivist approaches have a history of destroying the common good of populations, and also destroying natural environments by centralizing control of resources under bureaucracies.
If you hold the view that your system is oriented to achieving “greater or common good” that then buttresses the sense of being morally superior, of being righteous or virtuous, compared to the individualism that is viewed pejoratively as being about “selfishness and greed”. Believing that your system is about greater good (and a righteous battle against the “evil” of individualism) makes it difficult to acknowledge the flaws in your system. Hence, the insistence of socialists to repeatedly implement their system as best for all despite a well-documented history of repetitive failure. Socialism, insist the true believers, just needs one more try to get things right.
We all agree to some restraint on personal freedoms for common good- i.e. taxation to help the more unfortunate members of our societies, to finance shared infrastructure, etc. But there must be constant care that this does not become endless government overreach which is what bureaucracies naturally tend toward. Again, note the counter mechanisms that are vital to prevent excessive overreach by governing elites and bureaucrats.
Bernstein presents this issue in “The Birth of Plenty”- i.e. the question of how big should government become as a percentage of GDP. He noted there is a constant tug back and forth between small and big government advocates over the proper size of government and government programs. Milton Freidman also made some good points on this, arguing that the size of government that would provide the most good for the most people would be government at around 15% of GDP (that includes all three levels of government). Arthur Herman (The Cave and the Light) also deals with the historical tug between opposing approaches to organizing human society- collectivism versus an orientation to the individual.
The danger in collectivism is that of well-intentioned people who believe that they know what is best for all others and will coercively subject others to their vision of good. The worst tyrants are those believing their viewpoints, policies, and approaches are the best for all, and that they should be exempt from contradiction or pushback from others.
Note: Historically, collectivism rejects private property in favor of common property (i.e. state control of resources, nationalization of industry). Private property rights are critical to maintaining dispersed power among competing individuals.
Added note on Incremental authoritarianism, creeping totalitarianism (a post from a discussion group): Wendell Krossa
“The battle rolls on, the hysteria continues, the totalitarian creeping continues… Good analysis in link below by Tim Poole of Timcast IRL. No matter the concessions that you make, you cannot appease the Leftist Woke extremists who will demand more and more concessions, and eventually demand full cancellation. Also, note the Timcast point that most people erupting in outrage are ‘virtue signaling’, and most likely have not even watched the thing that they are outraged at (similar to the Dave Chappelle special that most of the offended people did not watch).
“Outraged Woke mobs are only reacting to some out-of-context distortion from mainstream media, and so on. This is the world of Leftist authoritarianism that we are suffering today… As Tim says, media will refer to maybe 30 people outraged on Twitter, people that do not even engage or listen to the thing that they are outraged at, but that tiny few, throwing a tantrum, get their way in cancelling things that millions of others use and enjoy.”
“Others have noted this with companies that yield to outraged extremists. The yielding does not appease the mobs but only opens you up for more concessions until you are finally eliminated, which is the end goal of Woke extremists.”
“Poole notes well that the outraged mobs are often a few fringe folks, yet they get much attention and public exposure from news media. He notes they are like spoiled brats throwing tantrums with spineless parents that back off and let them have their way. The better parenting response is to confront the hissy fit of the brat, end the tantrum, and demand maturity (“grow the fuck up” kiddo).
“Another point, as noted before- the screaming mobs/tyrants of today are successfully cowing majorities with fear of censorship, banning, demonetization, de-platforming, and outright cancellation. “Many today are embracing the worst form of totalitarianism that George Orwell warned us about- the “self-censorship” out of fear of tyrants.”
“Where is courage today?”
The background meta-story (a consistent project on this site) Wendell Krossa
The big background narrative that humanity has inherited (the mythical, religious heritage of humanity) has long been framed in terms of an original paradise world, humanity becoming corrupted (a “fall” into sin) and ruining the perfect original world, and life then declining toward something worse, toward some great collapse, even ending (apocalypse).
This primitive narrative then logically demands a salvation scheme to “save the world” from apocalyptic ending, something that involves sacrifice/payment (i.e. the sacrifice of abandoning the good life for a return to primitive simple lifestyle). Salvation/redemption also includes the demand to purge the threat to life, a purging that must involve the “instantaneous transformation” of society because the threat is always “imminent”, just up ahead a few years or decades. The imminent element logically obligates the abandonment of democratic processes that are too slow to deal with the purported threat (i.e. abandoning the “gradualism” of true freedom and cooperative democracy).
Add here, the dualism feature of all primitive mythology- the tribal mentality that leads people to believe that they are on the side of truth and right and those disagreeing with them are “evil enemies” and an “existential threat” that must be terminated by coercive force, even violence.
(Note: If you self-identify as “secular/materialist, even atheist” don’t rush to pat yourself on the back as liberated from such primitive mythology as outlined above. You have probably just embraced the “secular/ideological” versions of the same base mythologies.)
We know better today than to continue embracing these primitive themes of historical mythology/religion. We know that life emerged in a violent cosmos that began with the unimaginable violence of the Big Bang. Violence continued with the explosion of stars (supernovae) in a process of death/rebirth necessary to create the carbon that would be the essential ingredient of biological life (just a little side poke at the stupidity of the “war on carbon”).
Human life then emerged gradually out of the violence of the early Earth and the brutality of animal existence and struggle for survival. We emerged out of a wilderness world that was no paradise, despite its elements of beauty. “Pristine” nature includes pathologies like poisons, thorns, parasites, bacteria/viruses, and cruel predation. Natural disasters add to the causes of endless mass-death in nature.
These facts demand a radical reframing of our big background narrative. I would offer, along with others, that we have been given this imperfect reality and world as an arena of learning/development in which we struggle to create something better, specifically something more human or more humane. This gets to the essential point or purpose of this world and life. And the point/purpose of all this becomes obvious from what has happened to humanity over our entire history.
We have slowly, gradually learned to improve life in this world, motivated by our fundamental human desire, not just to survive, but to make life better for ourselves, and for all others, including non-human life. That is love at its most basic.
A most notable stage of the never-ending trajectory of improving life has been humanity’s creation of civilization. Fall/Decline believers claim that human civilization has been a corrupting reality that has ruined the purity, nobility, and power of original primitive humans (i.e. the “noble savage” mythology held by many in academia- that “pure and powerful primitives” became corrupted and weakened in civilization).
While human civilization is far from perfect, it has been moving in the right direction as research on key indicators like the long-term decline of violence has shown, with lessening violence being a major feature of our development. See, for example, James Payne- ‘The History of Force’, Stephen Pinker- ‘The Better Angels of Our Nature’, Stephen LeBlanc- ‘Constant Battles: The myth of the noble savage and a peaceful past’, among others.
Human civilization, despite its ongoing imperfections, has provided the arena where we learn to supress our baser impulses and learn to become more fully human or humane. Civilization in its better versions has affirmed respect for the value of each individual, the importance of freedom and self-determination, the freedom to create a unique life story and make a uniquely diverse contribution to the overall human venture in civilization.
We see the best of human civilization in our affirmation of ideals like the inclusion of all as equals, forgiveness of human imperfection and failure, in mercy and kindness toward one another, in generosity, in courage and persistence in the face of suffering and failure, and in human creativity and innovation to make something better.
All these factors affirm that life and civilization have overall, over the long-term, been on an ever-improving trajectory toward something better. This evidence ought to inform a greater narrative of life that validates hope for our future.
A necessary qualifier:
This needs to be said because of the common tendency to associate love with feeling fuzzy and warm, and being soft or mushy toward wrong.
Embracing an unconditional approach to imperfect humanity does not excuse anyone from the responsibility to hold all accountable for bad behavior, including the forcible restraint of bad behavior (military, police). An orientation to unconditional treatment of human failure (restorative/rehabilitative justice) is not an advocacy for pacifism in the face of evil. As noted before, (“Hear me once, hear me twice”) unconditional treatment of all others is how we maintain our own humanity while engaging our personal battles against evil.
The totalitarian impulse is ever-present in most of us, even surprising us when it erupts in minor ways in our relating to others- family, friends, strangers.
Our defense against this dark urge is respect for the equality of others and the freedom of others, respect for individual freedom. At the societal level that requires institutions/laws that disperse power against the constant pressure from governing elites and others to centralize power in small groups, the elites, bureaucrats, politicians and others in the higher levels of hierarchies. Laws and protocols are needed to maintain the freedom and hence equality of all persons everywhere.
Mechanisms of dispersal (to reduce the potential for centralizing power in upper-level powerholders) include innovations like, for instance, for every new rule that is introduced, get rid of another rule. And mechanisms that diminish the ability of elites to confiscate and control people’s resources and earnings (lower taxation).
These mechanisms (reducing regulations and taxation) must be built into institutions to counter the constant urge of some to centralize power and control under their rule.
Central to this site is an interest in varied issues like climate change and decarbonization. And the tribal political division between Left and Right. And even more of concern here- apocalyptic movements, the dominant ideology of “Declinism”, and “catastrophism”- the belief that life is declining toward some great disastrous collapse or catastrophic ending.
There is a relationship between these things- they all embrace a complex of similar mythical themes. Themes created by our primitive ancestors that have entirely distorted the nature of reality and life and yet have dominated human worldviews since the beginning, both in religious and secular/scientific traditions.
While good social research and commentary deals with these issues, I have long suspected there is more going on at a deeper level of consciousness, at the level of the subconscious archetypes. The same themes have been repeated all across history and across all the cultures of the world.
While some suggest ideas matter little, they do incite consequences, outcomes that have devastated societies. Note the apocalyptic millennial scholars (Landes, Mendel, Herman, Redles) on the ideas/themes that validated/influenced the mass-death movements of the last century (i.e. Marxism, Nazism, Environmentalism).
Western liberalism once stood for tolerance of diversity, inclusion of diverse/different others, non-domination of differing others (non-tyrannical), a general open and merciful generosity toward widely differing others. At least we wishfully thought of it as such, as a form of Classic Liberalism (“Libertarianish”). Wendell Krossa
But no longer. And few liberals today seem aware of the profound shift that has taken place throughout their tradition, a shift into the “creeping totalitarianism” that features a highly illiberal intolerance of difference, a growing harshness toward differing others (tribal exclusion), and a tendency toward domination of differing others. The authoritarian subjugation of differing others is accomplished by censoring, banning, de-platforming, de-monetizing, and outright cancelling. Western liberalism today coerces conformity to Woke/Progressive narratives and dogma, all part of the liberal refusal to tolerate diverse opinions and expression in public.
Why do many of today’s liberals act in this manner? Because they sincerely believe that they are in a righteous battle against an intolerably “evil” threat- i.e. differing people on the other side, the disagreeing others. Liberals/Progressives today portray differing others, not just as political opponents, but as “threats to democracy, insurrectionists and terrorists, white supremacists/racists, murderous threats to life itself”. And yes, the conservative side similarly views their struggle in terms of a righteous battle against intolerably evil “enemies” (though presently conservatives appear less extreme and less of a threat than the Left).
As Kat Timpf (a regular on Greg Gutfeld) noted, she identifies not as conservative or liberal, more as independent, but she feels more comfortable expressing her opinions among conservatives than among woke liberals who are always quick to outrage and cancel responses over any misspoken comments. That says a lot, doesn’t it.
An example of framing issues in extremist terms of crusades against evil: Note the mainly liberal crusade against the food of all life- CO2. CO2 is portrayed as a pollutant, even a “poison” that threatens all life. Skeptics to the climate apocalypse narrative are viewed as murderously preventing true believers (Greens, climate alarmists) from saving the world and all life.
The extremist distortion of disagreeing others as “existential threats” leads liberals to see their struggle as a fight for survival itself (to “save the world”). That extremist view leads to loss of perspective on reality, to irrational hysteria over differences. Consequently, liberalism has now descended into a cultish crusade of apocalyptic fanaticism.
Another example of the extremist distortion of difference as evil: Joe Rogan’s engagement of free and open discussion of differing views is framed as “murderous” by Neil Young and others.
So now, how do independents and moderates pull people on both sides back from their extremist views and stances to co-operative engagement on many commonly shared concerns? Forgiveness, mercy, inclusion, and just “love your enemies” all provide good starting points.
Misinformation mantra, Wendell Krossa
We read this endless mantra of misinformation that “extreme weather events” are indicators of “climate catastrophe” and are therefore justification to take immediate action on decarbonization. The mantra argues that extreme weather events affirm the alarmist narrative that humans are responsible for climate change and that the change will be “catastrophic” (i.e. we may pass the 1.5-2.0 degree C further warming limit).
Note this example on the MSN Canada homepage for Jan.6, 2022:
“The heat dome of 2021, wildfires, atmospheric rivers and floods underscored the need for an effective climate strategy across Canada”. It continued arguing for policies/projects to decrease human CO2 emissions.
It cannot be repeated often enough that the best climate evidence does not affirm this alarmist narrative.
Yes, it has warmed a bit since the world descended into the bitter cold of the Little Ice Age of 1350-1850. This mild 1 degree C of warming over the past century has been beneficial to all life in our still too cold world where 10 times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth. More warming will be further net beneficial to all life.
See links below to research that shows (1) CO2 is not mainly responsible for climate change and (2) human emissions are not mainly responsible for rising CO2 levels and (3) climate change is not becoming “catastrophic”.
“Global warming is indeed a threat”. Really? Where?
Matt Ridley is one of the finest scientific minds and science writers out there today. Here are some points/quotes from one of his articles published in Spike (Feb. 2022).
Research is regularly presented here showing that…
Yes, climate change is real and CO2 contributes to climate warming but evidence shows that-
(1) CO2 is not mainly responsible for climate change, (2) human emissions are not mainly responsible for rising CO2 levels, and (3) climate change is not becoming “catastrophic” but is overall net beneficial to all life.
Quotes from Matt Ridley
“The biggest benefit of emissions is global greening, the increase year after year of green vegetation on the land surface of the planet… NASA data show that global greening has added 618,000 square kilometres of extra green leaves each year, equivalent to three Great Britains… All studies agree that by far the largest contributor to global greening – responsible for roughly half the effect – is the extra carbon dioxide in the air.”
CO₂ makes world 𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿
Climate net problem
but breathless reporting ignores global greening is "highly credible evidence of anthropogenic climate change"
— Bjorn Lomborg (@BjornLomborg) February 6, 2022
“Another bit of good news is on deaths. We’re against them, right? A recent study shows that rising temperatures have resulted in half a million fewer deaths in Britain over the past two decades. That is because cold weather kills about ’20 times as many people as hot weather’, according to the study, which analyses ‘over 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 countries’.”
“On the whole more warming is happening in cold places, in cold seasons and at cold times of day. So winter nighttime temperatures in the global north are rising much faster than summer daytime temperatures in the tropics.
“Summer temperatures in the US are changing at half the rate of winter temperatures and daytimes are warming 20 per cent slower than night-times. A similar pattern is seen in most countries. Tropical nations are mostly experiencing very slow, almost undetectable daytime warming (outside cities), while Arctic nations are seeing quite rapid change, especially in winter and at night. Alarmists love to talk about polar amplification of average climate change, but they usually omit its inevitable flip side: that tropical temperatures (where most poor people live) are changing more slowly than the average.”
“But are we not told to expect more volatile weather as a result of climate change? It is certainly assumed that we should. Yet there’s no evidence to suggest weather volatility is increasing and no good theory to suggest it will. The decreasing temperature differential between the tropics and the Arctic may actually diminish the volatility of weather a little.
“Indeed, as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) repeatedly confirms, there is no clear pattern of storms growing in either frequency or ferocity, droughts are decreasing slightly and floods are getting worse only where land-use changes (like deforestation or building houses on flood plains) create a problem…
“Globally, deaths from droughts, floods and storms are down by about 98 per cent over the past 100 years – not because weather is less dangerous but because shelter, transport and communication (which are mostly the products of the fossil-fuel economy) have dramatically improved people’s ability to survive such natural disasters.”
“The geological record shows greater climatic volatility in cold periods of the Earth’s history than in hot periods. At the peak of recent ice ages, the temperature fluctuated dramatically between years and decades, while decade-long mega-droughts ravaged Africa, drying up Lake Victoria at least twice. Those mega droughts happened 17,000 years ago and 15,000 years ago respectively, when the world was much colder than today and cooler oceans meant failed monsoons. One theory about the invention of farming argues that it was impossible until the climate settled down in the post-glacial warmth of around 10,000 years ago: ‘Recent data from ice- and ocean-core climate proxies show that the last glacial climates were extremely hostile to agriculture – dry, low in atmospheric CO2, and extremely variable on quite short time scales.’ It then became calmer as it became significantly warmer than today between 9,000 and 6,000 years ago, when human civilisation emerged.
“The effect of today’s warming (and greening) on farming is, on average, positive: crops can be grown farther north and for longer seasons and rainfall is slightly heavier in dry regions. We are feeding over seven billion people today much more easily than we fed three billion in the 1960s, and from a similar acreage of farmland. Global cereal production is on course to break its record this year, for the sixth time in 10 years.”
“Nature, too, will do generally better in a warming world. There are more species in warmer climates…
“Of course, climate change does and will bring problems as well as benefits. Rapid sea-level rise could be catastrophic. But whereas the sea level shot up between 10,000 and 8,000 years ago, rising by about 60 metres in two millennia, or roughly three metres per century, today the change is nine times slower: three millimetres a year, or a foot per century, and with not much sign of acceleration… The land area of the planet is actually increasing, not shrinking, thanks to siltation and reclamation.”
Response to discussion group posts- Note carefully the patterns of alarmism movements (incitements, responses, policies), whether in regard to climate or Covid, or other…
Post from a friend commenting on the climate change movement- “Wendell. It’s really all about money, funding, the tax trough not carbon, not climate change. Who benefits by arguing that we are frying the planet???”
My response: “It is very much about these things and more.
“An added point ____- it is also about “frying the planet”. This is how alarmism works. Keep in mind H. L. Mencken’s comment that Steve Koonin quoted on the “Joe Rogan Experience” (Spotify, episode 1776)- “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”.
“The use of fear is how you manipulate and control populations and get them to support your “salvation” scheme (e.g. “save the planet”). Fear is how you incite irrationality, getting people to abandon rational thinking, rendering them susceptible to support your salvation scheme, because you have incited their survival impulse.
“Then you add “imminence” to your salvation scheme- i.e. the end is just up ahead a few years and then its all over. Make some predictions of “last tipping points, last chances” to enforce your imminence claim. The claim of “imminence” then logically demands “instantaneous transformation” (Arthur Mendel in “Vision and Violence”). And instantaneous transformation further requires “coercive purging” of the purported threat because normal democratic processes are obviously too slow to save the world.
“Now you have validated the totalitarian responses and policies that we see everywhere today pushed by politicians. Add in the element of suffering and sacrifice- i.e. the felt need to suffer for our “sins” for having ruined a better past (the original paradise). Appeal to people’s natural belief that we all deserve punishment for being bad (i.e. the human conflict with imperfection and subsequent natural guilt/shame and feeling that we should suffer and make atonement with sacrifice/payment). So, in today’s version of voluntarily atonement, lets embrace suffering by abandoning the good life in industrial civilization with all its comforts provided by cheap fossil fuels.
“Also add the ‘millennial hope’ element- that once we have purged the great evil of industrial civilization fueled by cheap carbon fuels, then we can restore the lost paradise, or install a new collectivist utopia.
“All these elements, inherited from primitive mythology and transformed into “secular/ideological” versions, are now presently exhibited in climate alarmism. Oh, I have repeated this so often on my site- “Patterns in alarmism movements”. Drawing on good research from many others saying the same things.
“Amazing, how many say that we must never repeat the horrors of the past, yet here we are repeating them once again in climate alarmism. And the costs to billions will be horrific as Koonin pointed out on Rogan (i.e. decarbonization).”
Note: There are legitimate problems all through life that we ought to be concerned about. But alarmism exaggerates those problems, often to apocalyptic-scale (i.e. “existential crisis… looming catastrophe… final tipping point… last chance…”, etc.) thereby distorting the true nature of problems, making it difficult to respond rationally. Alarmists then coercively push salvation schemes to the apocalyptic scenarios they have propagated, salvation schemes that are often far more damaging than what the original problem posed. Decarbonization is a striking example of outcomes worse than the purported problem of climate change. Note the regular reports coming from Global Warming Policy Forum on the growing mess that rushed Green policies have created across Europe.
A former military man and pilot speaks to the creeping authoritarianism of governments today, notably in Canada…
This from Rex Murphy on the authoritarian insanity coming from the Trudeau government…
Jordan Peterson warning about the creeping totalitarianism emerging from the Canadian government and media…
More on fracking- lies and facts
This excellent summary of global warming benefits from Matt Ridley– there is no “climate crisis”
The actual history of “worst on record” heatwaves in the US
The errors in the IPCC AR6 SPM (Summary for Policy Makers)
Notable elements in the contemporary battle for freedom
Joseph Campbell said that we attain human maturity when we orient our lives to “universal love”- that is, treating everyone with the same no conditions forgiveness, inclusion, equality, mercy, kindness, and generosity.
The Woke outrage cult, Wendell Krossa
Too many of our contemporaries today sit on the edge of their chairs, watching their screens, ready to scream outrage at the alleged failings of others. We see this response pattern operating today on all sides of political and social spectrums.
And yes, things happen in life, people do terrible things, that deserve the only natural and sane response from all of us- outrage. There are legitimate forms of outrage, outrage as the most humane response.
But much of the outrage fed to us daily on news and social media smells of something different, something not fully and maturely human. Something profoundly immature and even subhuman/inhuman.
Taking Campbell’s comment on mature humanity as a baseline, subhuman/inhuman forms of outrage occur where people embrace a tribal view of humanity as divided between good and bad people. That restricts their focus to the faults of disagreeing others, the “enemies” on the other side, the outsiders to the tribe. In the tribal mind, those on the good side (our side) are given a pass and any failures, even though similar to the faults of enemies, are ignored or dismissed. Example: Observers sense the unfairness when mainstream media obsess over the failures of the “other side” while ignoring the same failures on the side that media favor. Such unfair treatment of one side rankles throughout the population, disillusioning many, hence the huge ratings decline particularly for mainstream/Woke media outlets.
People engaging subhuman forms of outrage spend their days on the alert for some enemy slipup, even if the slipup in word or comment was originally intended as humor. There is no space for humor when we embrace hatred of differing others as a dominant emotional stance. Likewise, in subhuman outrage there is no attempt at considering the intention of the other.
Then when some inevitably inappropriate comment comes to light, because we all fuckup at times, people committed to a sense of easily triggered and offended victimhood immediately laser in on that with outrage. The offensive words/comments usually have to be taken out of context because context reveals the purported “sin” to be less evil than offended people claim. Context often invalidates wounded outrage.
Then also note the intent/motivation of the person exhibiting outrage over the alleged offenses of others. Too much outrage appears to come from a place of unrestrained hatred, malice, even cruelty. Normal human impulses to love, mercy, or forgiveness appear to be suppressed.
To summarize again the pattern of outrage responses: (1) First, find some suspicious comment (perhaps from the present but often from the distant past of a person, when they were younger, still immature and developing). (2) Then give that comment the worst possible interpretation, judge it as the worst of evil without probing into the author’s intent or the larger context of the accused’s comments. (3) Follow by condemning the author/offender harshly, and (4) then seek the harshest possible punishment, even destruction of the offender. Additionally, (5) frame the comment as causing devastating harm- i.e. contributing to “the end of democracy… causing death” (as in any questioning or challenge to Covid “experts” and orthodoxy, similar to Joe Rogan’s open discussions). That framing of purported offenses as “murderous” then justifies your outrage, harsh judgment, and your punishing action to shut down the offender. You have convinced yourself that you are on the righteous side of a battle against intolerable evil. You are a hero fighting for truth and right.
(Insert quote from Campbell: “For love is exactly as strong as life. And when life produces what the intellect names evil, we may enter into righteous battle, contending ‘from loyalty of heart’; however if the principle of love (Christ’s ‘love your enemies’) is lost thereby, our humanity too will be lost. ‘Man’ in the words of the American novelist Hawthorne, ‘Must not disclaim his brotherhood with even the guiltiest’,”)
Today the cancellation and destruction of enemies involves censoring, silencing, banning from communities and the public in general, de-platforming, de-monetizing (taking away income), and canceling outright. The end goal is to destroy as entirely as possible.
Outraged people are a small minority of the population, according to surveys, but they scream the loudest and expect their outrage to be honored as the sole and supreme standard that must trump all other considerations and must be accommodated by all others. Unfortunately, cowed majorities continue to acquiesce to these infantile tantrum throwers.
And on the other hand…
The mature humanity that Campbell spoke of views everyone as an equal but imperfect member of the one human family. Mature humanity is not surprised by human failure but generously assumes good intention in others even though poorly expressed sometimes. Mature humanity will enquire further if some word or comment appears offensive on the surface. Mature humanity will probe intention and assume the best about the other, not the worst.
If failure of some sort is admitted by someone, mature humanity will generously forgive and grant second, third, and more chances for change, growth, and development. Mature humanity will proffer mercy and no conditions love, even where there may be defensive recalcitrance in an offending other, as in the initial refusal to accept criticism and acknowledge failure.
Mature humanity will also understand and accept that there are many things to be hurt and offended by in a free world where diverse opinions are held by the human family, and sometimes expressed in offensive language. But as Akaash Singh (Flagrant 2) has said so well, “You may feel hurt and offended but you are not oppressed” (meaning- suck it up, buttercup). So keep things in proper perspective. And if you value freedom of expression for yourself then make sure you affirm the same freedom for all others. This is what respecting and protecting equality involves.
Breaking retaliatory cycles- embracing heroic humanity, Wendell Krossa
We are all familiar with the impulse to retaliate- the urge to return hurt for initial hurt caused, pain for pain, humiliation for humiliation. And we all have experience of engaging retaliatory cycles that only get worse with ongoing responses of similar retaliation (the descending cycles of eye for eye, tit for tat).
An example: When one spouse feels miffed, that person may withdraw affection from the other spouse. The other spouse, sensing the cooling of affection, may then in turn also cool expression off a bit. Its often played out subtly in relationships, but a form of retaliation nonetheless.
These cycles can be broken. But it takes people with exceptional courage to resist the urge to retaliate, to break out of a retaliatory cycle, and then take things in a better direction. It takes supremely heroic determination to take the last slap on the face (metaphorically or physically), to not hit back, but to swallow hard and then respond with forgiveness and love. In the moment, we may feel nothing heroic in turning things around but if we make the difficult choice to do the right thing, the appropriate feelings will follow later, or maybe not. Doesn’t matter. Just do the human thing. You will feel better about yourself over the long-term, especially on your deathbed.
People who break free of vengeance responses are exhibiting extraordinary human maturity and take their communities and societies to a better place, to a better future. They become inspiring examples for all of us. They even turn out to be the heroic figures of history. Note Nelson Mandela as a singular example. And the Railway Man, the mother in The Forgiven, among others.
Mandela developed his humane approach to enemies after decades of suffering in prison. During that time, he chose to abandon his previous violent responses toward oppressors and instead decided to engage enemies with forgiveness and inclusive love. His reasoning? Forgiveness and love of enemy turns enemies into friends (not all but most) and brings out the best in others (again, not all but most). Such a great human spirit. Richard Stengel argued that Mandela’s approach spared South Africa the horrors of civil war (Mandela’s Way).
The meaning of life is uniquely defined by love, our highest ideal. Love gives ultimate meaning to human existence, Wendell Krossa
Human love is something more than just “species altruism”, as defined and illustrated in the common impulse of people to rescue strangers (i.e. love as an impulse oriented to “species survival”). Human love is not properly and fully represented by the evolutionary biology/psychology approach that defines it too much in terms of our animal past. While some aspects of that approach are useful, overall, it tends to degrade and devalue human love.
Human love is something special in this world and is taking us in a uniquely new direction from animal reality/existence.
Love embraces the related ideals of unlimited forgiveness, full inclusion of all others (universalism), the resolute ability to hold others fully responsible for behavior, respect for the equality and self-determination of every human person, and many other good human things. Human love reaches beyond the human species to include animal and plant life, to even include the protection of predatory animal life that threatens human life.
Most important to defining love is to recognize that there is no love without freedom, no love without respect and advocacy for free choice and the self-determination of others. Love is non-controlling. It relates horizontally to all others as free and full equals.
On this site optimism/hope is not merely about choosing to hold a positive view of life. Optimism is about embracing the most truthful perspective on life, based on the evidence from the main indicators of the true state of the world (i.e. the main indicators of forests, soils, ocean fisheries, animal species, atmosphere). Julian Simon did some of the more notable pioneering research on the true state of the world, and many others have subsequently followed (Greg Easterbrook, Bjorn Lomborg, Ronald Bailey, Indur Goklany, Matt Ridley, Szurmak and Desrochers, Hans Rosling, and others noted in sections below).
The evidence is overwhelming that, where we may have once fucked things up, we have learned to make corrections and changes, and we have subsequently done much better, and now more commonly get things right. The long-term trends associated with all the main indicators of life on Earth now show ongoing improvement and progress toward a better future. Masses of solid, hard evidence affirm that life is getting better, not worse. See sites like Humanprogress.org.
Optimism is a rational conclusion to evidence.
Louis Zurcher long ago (1977) wrote a brilliant little book– “The Mutable Self: A self concept for social change”. He argued that we should remain selves in open flowing process, ever-changing, ever-developing, and not become immutable or unchanging selves. We should remain open to embracing the new throughout our life story.
He said that too many people have become immutable selves- i.e. fixing their identity rigidly on “objects” like occupation, ideology, religion, nationality, or race/ethnicity (add gender today).
Then, when someone challenges something in our fixed identity object, such as challenging an idea in our religion or ideology, we feel threatened. We may even perceive the challenge to the object of our identity (i.e. to our ideology or religion) as a threat to our very self. The challenge is then viewed as a threat to our ego and survival. Hence, the sometimes desperate and even violent reaction to challenges that are made to the objects of basic human identity (religious violence, ideological violence).
Are we watching this desperate survival response today in the reaction of alarmists to the skeptical challenges to the climate apocalypse narrative that they have staked their very identity on? Richard Landes in “Heaven On Earth” details the sometimes hysterical and authoritarian reaction of apocalyptic true believers as their movement becomes discredited and begins to collapse.
There is little hope to offer apocalyptic believers, religious or secular. Apocalyptic movements have a 100% historical failure rate.
Climate updates- summary points from good climate science (the evidence element for evaluating “secular” apocalyptic movements), Wendell Krossa
The complete big picture and long-term trends help us understand “the true state of things”.
The Holocene Optimum of 10-6,000 years ago was the warmest part of our interglacial (3 degrees C warmer than today). Since the end of the Holocene Optimum some 6000 years ago our interglacial has declined across a long-term cooling trend. This cooling trend was interrupted by the Roman (250 BC to 400 AD) and Medieval Warm periods (950-1250 AD) that were both about 1 degree C warmer than today. After the Medieval Warm period, climate descended into the coldest part of our interglacial- the “Little Ice Age” of 1350-1850.
Today, we still have not recovered from that 1350 AD descent into abnormal cold and we remain at the coolest part of our interglacial. Hence, we could benefit immensely from several more degrees of warming that might bring us back to the optimum temperature range of the past when human civilizations and all life flourished from more warmth, just as they did during the Holocene Optimum (that, to repeat, was 3 degrees C warmer than today). There was no “climate catastrophe” during those much warmer periods. To the contrary, life thrived.
(Note the graph of “Holocene Temperature Variations” in this link https://perhapsallnatural.blogspot.com/2022/01/how-global-warming-is-driven-by-pacific.html)
Climate is changing today because it is and has always been a complex, dynamic system influenced by a multitude of natural factors.
CO2 is not mainly responsible for climate change but is just a “bit player” compared to other natural factors that influence climate change. Natural factors continue to show stronger correlations to the climate change that we have observed over past decades and centuries.
I will affirm this point again: Climate change is not becoming “catastrophic” but has been beneficially mild, about one degree C of warming over the past century as Earth recovers from the earlier descent into the bitter cold of the Little Ice Age (1350-1850). We are still far below the much warmer climate of most of our Holocene interglacial.
Climate alarmism is based on discredited models that were shaped by political ideology not good climate science. The climate models exaggerated the amount of warming. Actual empirically observed climate change has been very mild.
Alarmists and media have ignored the significant benefits of more warming. 10 times more people die every year from cold than die from warmth. With more warming, far more people are surviving the threat of cold than are harmed from more warming. We will benefit from further degrees of warming. Alarmists, politicians, and media ignore or dismiss this fact entirely.
It is irrational to alarm people over the very thing- warming- that saves more lives and benefits all nature. Cold is far more destructive to all life than warming is.
More warming will not make already warm areas of Earth hotter. More incoming heat is distributed by ocean and atmospheric convection currents to the colder areas (polar regions), to colder seasons (winter), and colder times of day (night). Again, this benefits life with extended habitats, extended growing seasons, and more.
Alarmists and media have also ignored or dismissed the huge benefits from more CO2, the basic food of plants. The increase in CO2 since 1980 has resulted in an amazing 15% increase in green vegetation across the Earth. This has resulted in more food for animals and increased crop production for humanity. Why are Greens not celebrating CO2 for this amazing benefit to all life?
Further, alarmist media have obsessively lied about a growing threat of extreme weather events (the endless mantra of “Hottest… worst on record”). Even the IPCC admits there has been no noticeable increase in severe storms, floods, tornadoes, wildfires, heat events, or droughts. See, for example, Jim Steele’s excellent report on heat waves https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/02/08/heatwaves-are-100-natural/
Far fewer people are dying from extreme weather events, natural disasters, or climate change today. There has been a 99% drop in deaths from such things over the past century. Note the graph of steeply declining climate deaths here- https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/02/10/climate-hype-leads-to-climate-anxiety-and-undermines-constructive-efforts/
Ocean rise continues at the slow rate of about 1.5 mm per year (the thickness of a penny, about an inch per decade). Oceans have been rising over our entire Holocene interglacial (a total of about 400 feet so far).
Climate change is best understood in terms of paleo-climate history. That long-term view shows that we are in a period of dangerously low levels of CO2 compared to most past history. That history also shows we are in one of the coldest periods compared to most past history (i.e. the past 500 million years of life’s development). Life flourished over the long-term past when CO2 levels were in the multiple-thousands of ppm and world temperatures averaged 5-10 degrees C higher than today. Over most of the past history of life there was no ice at the poles and tropical plants and animals enjoyed extended habitats into the polar regions.
Review of CO2 basics
The carbon/CO2 cycles on Earth are huge and the perturbations (fluctuations, shifts) in these cycles are larger than human emissions. So we do not know with finality that humans are responsible for the rise in CO2 over past decades and centuries. CO2 levels were naturally rising before industrialization and climate was also naturally warming before industrialization. Why and how did that natural rise before 1950 then become mainly human-caused since that time?
And what about the 7% worldwide drop of human emissions during the Covid lockdown, yet CO2 levels kept rising as before? Meaning- it was obvious that natural factors were more responsible for the ongoing rise.
We do know that CO2 has reached “saturation”, not in atmospheric levels but in its “warming influence”- i.e. its ability to absorb and re-emit infrared radiation that contributes to the greenhouse effect and warming. Doubling from 400 to 800 ppm will contribute very little more warming effect from CO2, maybe another 0.5-1.0 degree C of warming according to numerous studies by respected climate physicists. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/01/14/nearly-140-scientific-papers-detail-the-minuscule-effect-co2-has-on-earths-temperature/
And we do know that warming is not becoming “catastrophic” but has been only a mild 1 degree C over the past century. The models predicting much more warming have all been discredited as shaped by political ideology and not science (i.e. anti-fossil fuel, anti-industrial civilization ideology).
With what we don’t know and what we do know- I continue to affirm that it is irrational to demonize CO2, tax carbon, and decarbonize our societies. Fossil fuels are vital to our survival and progress.
Notes on the fraudulent claim to 97% consensus
The endless anti-science mantra of politicians both left and right: That climate change is a threat, and that we must do something (i.e. decarbonize). No. The mild climate change that we have experienced over past decades is not a threat, not a “catastrophe”, and we do not need to do anything except adapt to ever-changing climate just as humanity has always done. And we do need the abundant and inexpensive fossil fuels that enable us to successfully create the wealth in industrial society that enables all of us to properly adapt. (Note: “Inexpensive fossil fuels” if we reject the Green government policies that block fossil fuel development, and burden fossil fuels with unnecessary taxes, etc.)
“Why the cost of Net Zero is too high for the country – and for Boris too”
The Sunday Telegraph, 6 February 2022 By Matthew Lynn
An example from the above Sunday Telegraph article re the endless political mantra of “climate crisis threat” and demands for climate action as in mitigation policies: “Everyone… agrees that climate change is a serious issue and one that needs to be addressed.”
“The plot against fracking: How cheap energy was killed by Green lies and Russian propaganda” by Matt Ridley Dec. 2019
Human response to asteroid/comet threat
“Globally, 2021 had the fewest hurricanes in the satellite era (1980-2021)”
And this good one from Eric Worrall “The Hill goes Full Climate Hysteria”. We could handle more degrees C of warming and life/humanity would adapt just fine. In fact, more than 2 degrees C more warming would be net beneficial, outweighing any negatives. It certainly would not be “catastrophic”. Paleo-climate history affirms this also. All life thrived during the times that Earth was much warmer than today, with extended habitats and growing seasons.
This from Benny Peiser of Global Warming Policy Forum
“Editor’s Note: Attentive observers are beginning to acknowledge what readers of this newsletter (Net Zero Watch) have known for some time: the green bubble has burst and the green policy rollback has begun.
“Of course, it’s not all over yet for the eco-socialist Net Zero agenda, but the economic, political and energy security pressure and the global demand for energy that is both affordable and reliable will eventually overwhelm climate fanatics and green activists, leading to a gradual sobering up and a slow return to more realistic climate and energy policy approaches.
“Sadly, sobering up after a period of collective hysteria is a rather slow process as Charles MacKay (1814-1889) noted almost two centuries ago: “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.”
— Benny Peiser
Patterns in apocalyptic alarmism movements– the incitement of hysterical fear and anxiety
Freedom, notably the foundational freedom of speech, is under assault today from new forms of authoritarianism/totalitarianism that originate mainly from the left side of our societies- i.e. from Woke cultism and Progressivism/liberalism that has allied with strains of resurging Marxism/Socialism. This concerns all of us and the future of our children. Pay attention to the cancellation crusade against Joe Rogan that has become a key illustration of the shape of this battle.
Also, check out some of the great new voices advocating for freedom today. They affirm hope that the future will remain free. Examples: Jimmy Dore (YouTube), Timcast IRL (YouTube, Spotify), Tim Dillon, Saagar and Krystal of Breaking Points (Spotify), Glen Greenwald, Joe Rogan Experience at Spotify, and many others. Interesting that many of these are from the Left/liberal side. This affirms, despite a large-scale descent into illiberalism, that Western liberalism still produces some rational, courageous voices.
And this from a black man (Tyrus of the Gutfeld show) on Rogan’s use of the “N-word” and context/intention.