Ghost of a flea

Monckton has been putting out some very good pieces of late and provides a great summary of what we're not hearing from most of the media.

I'd recommend Brian Fagan's very interesting "The Little Ice Age"; although he accepts Anthropogenic Global Warming as fact, he does communicate an interesting tale of how life changed for Europeans between 1300 and 1850. Also, E.C. Pielou's "After the Ice Age" on the return of life to North America over the last 15000 years or so. None of the wildlife that I can see out my window was present 15000 years ago; it all moved in from elsewhere. Climate change happens all the time and it comes quickly and dramatically.

The sun as a forcing agent for global climate change is, perhaps, about to get its due.

http://greenspin.blogspot.com/2006/10/do-i-detect-first-tiny-rumblings-of.html

I find it odd that radiocarbon, which is related to solar activity, is very closely related to temperature over the last millenia. CO2 is not, but that's all we hear about. Not so "odd" I guess, we can't try to control the sun ... yet.

Fagan doesn't get into it enough, but I would like to see more work done on life during the Medieval Warm Period and how it differed from previous periods. Fagan does discuss it a bit -- everything from the wars of that period to the construction of the great cathedrals of Western Europe were due to the wealth and relatively easy life afforded by the warmer weather.

Excellent references there.... thanks! I think of the whole sorry spectacle masquerading as science it is the attempt to erase the Medieval Warm Period that worries me the most. This is totalitarian, he who controls the past controls the future, Memory Hole thinking. It is as if the 500 year Norse settlement of Greenland never happened...

I wonder why I do not care one way or the other like you two gents do. I'll admit to plenty of massive gaps in my personality so that is at play but why is this conspiracy of authority so worthy of concern relative to the others we face relating to, say, food security, terrorism and...stuff. What is it about about this perceived error in science and the bureaucratic response driving the debate which interests? At the end of the day, either is something which is and it is largely too late to deal with or it is not in which case it is puffery. I am in no way chastising but in a way it is like the ecclesiastical foul language of Quebec, something others seem to care about far more than I would consider reasonable. That would include hype on both sides including the otherwise huggable "warm mongers" which is as deep and purposeful as any pun.

It is a fair question. You might also ask why I react so strongly to most opposition to same-sex marriage or ignorance about basic evolutionary biology. There are stupidities which I find offensive not only for their consequences in matters of policy but for their irrationalism and their distortion of logic. Could I be arguing about other things? Certainly. Though I should point out my Cheeky Girls post of yesterday attracted no comments whatsoever. Perhaps their beauty could only inspire mute worship; it would only be fitting.

I did not mean to inspire introspection and your Cheeky Girls comment is quite right. I live, however in a 24-hour nsfw world so I must excuse myself in such matters.

But it is that first bit I need to know about. I understand and place "opposition to same-sex marriage or ignorance about basic evolutionary biology" highly and am encouraged by your activism. But I see Global warming as something different, like cold fusion or Segways - if it is true that it is not true. So what you seem to have left is a bureaucratic hullabaloo about puffery. But we have these hullabaloos all the time. Others are more (as far as I can see which is usually not far) actually injurious to humans such as we may find in the active public and commercial infrastructures dedicated to ignoring Darfur or the disposal of poisonous IT infrastructure or labour laws of China.

Are not the Warmists merely creating a bureaucracy? Does this cause not merely replicate the part-vacuum that is sometimes present in such areas as state business development agencies or heritage departments? That is what I think I am missing, that heightened moral offense that drives both sides of the debate.

Yes the anti-globo/capitalism/West lot have jumped on the envirofascism bandwagon now they don't have the Soviet Union to champion. They hate the free market and see the climate change excuse as a way of destroying it or severely damaging it. The trouble is that all three parties in the UK have bought the entire load of hooey hook line and sinker.

"They hate the free market and see the climate change excuse as a way of destroying it or severely damaging it."

Funny that they are also such an affluent society with some of the largest most prosperous corporations providing wealth for all. But the moralist dreams of collapse are surely a day or so away from fulfillment. Gotta be.