Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Environmentalism versus human life

I wrote a short comment below a published article Time to get real about climate change.
I started studying this question a decade ago and immediately found plentiful scientific data that directly contradicts all the major claims of global warming alarmists. From the basic physics of atmospheric CO2 (a diminishing potential warming effect as concentration rises) to the claim that sea levels are rising faster than normal (the change is precisely in line with historical patterns), from the claims of unprecedented warming (easily shown false by historical documents and geological, sedimentary and plant growth records) to the projections of warming to come (every single IPCC climate model is now proven to have overstated projections, some by wide margins, thus all of them proven useless), anyone with the desire to learn about this science can find hard data to contradict the scary claims.
The basic motivation of the alarmists is to gain control of political power to force people to bend to their will and dictate their lives. This corrupt ideology has now spread to almost every corner of the economy and threatens the lives of millions of actual living human beings. No denouncement short of total condemnation of the environmental movement in this subject can be strong enough. Just look for yourself, use your own mind and see what is unsubstantiated claim versus established fact.
This prompted a question from another reader:
Dave, can you explain this in more detail?
The basic motivation of the alarmists is to gain control of political power to force people to bend to their will and dictate their lives. This corrupt ideology has now spread to almost every corner of the economy and threatens the lives of millions of actual living human beings.
If we develop alternative energy sources, esp if we can reduce carbon, we can solve the problem. Plants have been doing this for a billion years or so. How is this going to threaten lives?
I responded in more detail:
Sure I can explain more. I am a dedicated advocate of reason and its application to science and progress. I know that the rediscovery of the power of human reasoning to discern the properties of existence is what led to the enlightenment and the industrial revolution that followed. In just two centuries under a relatively high degree of political and economic freedom humanity advanced many times more by any measure than in all prior history combined. We live far longer, healthier, safer and more comfortable lives than ever and each of these if due to industrial progress rooted in scientific discoveries.
Among the technologies that has contributed (perhaps more than any other) to improvement in human life, is that of fossil fuel energy. A part of the physical environment that has always been here but we had no knowledge of how to use it, oil, gas and the like have enabled us to increase our productivity in every area. Our current state of housing, agriculture, clothing, health care, education, communication, transportation, arts and entertainment and every aspect of society I can think of has been tremendously leveraged upwards through the use of abundant energy released from fossil fuels. We owe our very lives and health and existence to the discoverers and commercial producers of this life-giving energy.
From early on, opponents of progress (and thus of human life) have made arbitrary assertions about flawed concepts such as "shortage" and limited supply. These people do not understand the principles of economics, principles that operate to motivate us to use the most accessible, least expensive sources of energy first and then to move on to discover more and even better sources. People of pre-capitalist mentality cannot understand how both consumption of energy and energy resources can grow at the same time. As one exciting example of this, I refer you to the fusion energy project under development by Lockheed Martin that appears to be quite close to reality. This is just one example of the limitless potential for human production of energy.
I am completely in agreement that humanity must (and totally believe we will) develop additional energy resources - so-called "alternative" sources that do not involve fossil fuels. Where I vehemently disagree with those who do not understand economics and progress is the methods by which progress is achieved. Environmentalists assert their moral right to use force against innocent citizens to prematurely impose non-fossil fuel energy upon us as if progress is to be achieved by dictates and not a gradual process of free experimentation and discovery. Photovoltaic and wind energy are the most prominent examples of this. At this time these methods of energy generation are fantastically more expensive than fossil fuels, so using them requires massive subsidies - that is to say wealth taken from citizens and given to those who build and run these energy systems. This destroys total wealth in society and thus permanently retards our standard of living and progress.
While photovoltaic panels are coming down in price and rising in efficiency, they are still a long way from being commercially viable except in remote areas. It may be 20 years until solar panels are on par with current power generation sources, and in any case they require backups and storage since they are unreliable and intermittent by nature. Meanwhile, sinking lost billions into this pet technology stifles innovation in other areas.
The crusade against fossil fuels makes it harder for pre-capitalist countries to progress, suppressing the lives and goals of their citizens, causing preventable disease to persist, shortening life, reducing technological and economic innovation and depriving the whole world of the opportunity to have millions more human minds functioning at a higher level, with all the potential gains to be achieved for all of us from this. Instead of being highly educated and thinking about production, science, technology and progress, these people's minds remain focused on basic needs such as food, shelter, health and survival. An incalculable waste of the potential of the human mind.
The advocates of so-called green energy are thus the major ideology opposing human life at this time. Since the clear failure of socialism and its variant communism as a means of organizing society, environmentalists have taken over the role once occupied so prominently by overt socialists. Socialists proclaimed they knew the path to heaven on Earth but asserted that much suffering and sacrifice was needed to achieve the egalitarian workers paradise. Since their premises were so patently false and this could be proven in this life and on this planet, outright socialism is now regarded rightly as a flawed ideology.
The environmentalists do not proclaim a future paradise on Earth for humans but rather that mankind is not a part of nature and that human interests must be sacrificed so that snails, bugs, plants and even rocks and the atmosphere can remain untouched by man's influence. Their ultimate goal is nature without man - the annihilation of all human values - known as nihilism. They ignore the fact that man's essential survival method is the modification of his environment to suit the needs of his life. As you will see if you search for quotes, a number of the most prominent and powerful environmentalists have overtly stated that the best thing for the Earth would be the elimination of humanity. A more evil and horrific philosophical position cannot be imagined.
I hope this helps.

No comments:

Post a Comment