“Comrades!” he cried. “You do not imagine, I hope, that we pigs are doing this in a spirit of selfishness and privilege? Many of us actually dislike milk and apples. I dislike them myself. Our sole object in taking these things is to preserve our health. Milk and apples (this has been proved by Science, comrades) contain substances absolutely necessary for the well-being of a pig. We pigs are brainworkers. The whole management and organization of this farm depend on us. Day and night we are watching over your welfare. It is for your sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples”
“ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL BUT SOME ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS”
Remember George Orwell? He was a vicious satirist of tyrannical government, critical of its tyranny and the utter hypocrisy of its “leaders”. The quotes above are from the exquisite pig Minister of Propaganda named “Squealer” in Orwell’s Animal Farm, written in 1944. Squealer was likely modeled after Stalin’s propaganda czar and foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov. Animal Farm is an unsubtle satirical mockery of the Stalinist regime where pigs get to play the role of the ruling elite in an animal takeover of the human world. Satire comes from a mind that sees such things like tyranny as obvious, but sometimes realizes this “obviousness” is missed by people when merely exposed to rational argument. Exasperation “causes” the author to express himself in a controlled rage that manifests itself in exaggerative, yet truthful, humorous writing or speech. The novella Animal Farm is the gold standard of such controlled rage.
Joseph Stalin did not first become “Stalin” until about 1956 when he was declared historical leader non grata during a Khrushchev denunciation speech. We forget (or more typically, never learned) that Stalin was viewed positively by many in the West in the 30s. NY Times Pulitzer Prize winning reporter, Walter Duranty, won his prize in a series of articles about the regime in 1931. Duranty himself was later proven to be a willful fraud, not merely a useful idiot. However, an observation from historian S.J Taylor summarizes nicely the views of Duranty and other Stalin supporters in the West during the 20s and 30s.
“Despite present imperfections (Duranty) had come to realize there was something very good about the Soviets’ “planned system of economy”. And there was something more: Duranty had learned , he said, “to respect the Soviet leaders, especially Stalin, who [had grown] into a really great statesman.”
The point about “obviousness” and “satire” is that things are not obvious until they are, and satire is often the battering ram that can break through. But enough about satire and Stalin; just what does any of this have to do with Al Gore? Squealer Gore has become a complete and utter repetitive bore. I hesitate to spend any time thinking, reading or writing about him because his pronouncements and motivations are so transparently ridiculous and nonsensical. It is like wasting time persuading people that the Sun rises in the East. Except apparently it is not. This clownish and hypocrite of a man (Manbearpig - 1006 - Watch - South Park Zone) is still viewed with respect by the press. The latest and most utterly absurd of all his pronouncements has been broadcast worldwide. (Gore Calls for Carbon-Free Electric Power - NY Times.com)
The most irritating and "obvious" of Gore's attributes is his "Squealerness". We have all read about his hypocrisy on being a massive CO2 emitter “over and over and over” again. But until he stops being taken seriously by the public, the media, politicians, the UN, and presidential candidates like McCain and Obama, it is useful to keep reminding ourselves. Squealerism is the most extreme form of hypocrisy. A Squealer seeks control over others. A Squealer is an avaricious and greedy consumer of that which he condemns. We all know Squealer Al lives in an enormous house with a carbon footprint 10-15 times the national average. We also know he loves private jets, SUVs, and living large on the international high fee speaking tour. We also know he will achieve enormous wealth by artificially limiting the supply of carbon based energy which will drive up the cost of all other energy, particularly so called "green" energy. (Al Gore’s Carbon Crusade) Say what you will about former Green Party candidate for president Ralph Nader, who I disagree with on the large majority of issues (I do agree with much of his "corporate welfare" views). But he is no Squealer. He may be a dreary socialist, but he at least lives like one. (Ralph Nader: Millionaire hypocrite?)
Squealerism is also the ultimate of red flags, as Orwell clearly believed. It is a sure sign the promoters of a cause do not really believe in the cause. Anthropogenic Global Warming or “AGW” is one of the most phenomenal examples of influential bad science of the post Newton scientific era. The only historical field or practice in the scientific era which compares in scope and influence is Alchemy. Alchemy was a 2500 year old pseudo-science and spiritual movement which among other things believed gold could be made from common metals. It eventually died out in the 1800s. Even Issac Newton was a passionate Alchemist. The great irony of turning metal into gold is that gold would no longer have any value if it became as common as any metal. But Milton Friedman was not yet born to teach the world monetary theory. Alchemy is also wonderful evidence that “consensus” and “science” have nothing to do with each other.
The reason Squealerism is a red flag should be apparent. What are the “odds” that an idea is true when it just happens to be the case that the most influential promoter of that idea benefits greatly from its broad acceptance? (He is far from the only one who benefits--but lets stick with Al in this essay). How much lower do the odds go when the idea itself is unobservable and unproven? The late Cornell physics professor Carl Sagan popularized a maxim of science first noted by philosopher David Hume. Sagan famously said that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
AGW is an extraordinary claim and an untested theory about the future. It is a theory which many scientists support. It is also a theory which many other scientists do not support. You may believe in AGW. Great. But understand that factually it is an unproven theory. A theory is proven (technically, scientific theories are not proven, they are “not rejected” or "not disproven") only after the evidence comes in to support the theory. This evidence has yet to appear. The promoters of AGW believe it will appear over the next 100 years. Let me repeat. AGW has not yet been proven. No scientist can assert that it has. The best scientists can say is that it will be proven. Like Gore's "science adviser" James Hansen you may be 99% sure it will be proven---but it is future tense only. To say anything else is fraudulent. (A topic for another essay). I happen to have the opinion it will never be "proven". I believe AGW is a speculative assertion at best and the product of a will to believe. This statement is an opinion. My statement that "AGW has not yet been proven" is a fact.
But Bore Gore "believes" the science is settled. James Hansen (James Hansen: Man of Science) believes deniers who work for oil companies should be put on trial for crimes against humanity. Which brings us back to odds and red flags. In 1997 Europe, Canada and others signed the Kyoto Treaty. The treaty's objective was to lower greenhouse gas emissions, or CO2. The moron Bush of course did not sign (oh, I forgot, Bush was not yet president--the Senate voted 97-0 against signing). Even though the US did not sign we are closer to meeting the goals of Kyoto than those who did sign.
But no country is remotely close to meeting the Kyoto objectives.(The EU's Kyoto shell game) What does this tell you? The most obvious thing it tells you is that no matter how many treaties are signed or how many times the P.T. Barnum-esque Gore tells you the science is settled, in reality no one cares or believes enough in global warming to do anything about it. It costs too much and delivers too little. Like the Loch Ness Monster, it is often evoked but never seen.
We are all for anything that is free.
"If I take this pill I will live forever? Really? How much does it cost? It is free? You are telling me that if I take this special sugar pill I will forestall death? Seems odd but if all these scientists say so, why not? Wait, it cost what? $200 dollars a pill 3 times a day? If I skip one day it does not work? Let me look at that UN report again"
This is what is happening now. The combination of the enormous costs, the physical impossibility of compliance, and the unobservable nature of AGW is giving all second thoughts. This summer the remarkable and astounding Warner-Lieberman bill collapsed of its own weight as the public realized the government was proposing to forcibly sell to the American people the right to use energy. Normally this would be called a "tax". In DC, politicians prefer more euphemistic terminology.
For example, we pay the gasoline company when we buy gasoline. But the government wants in. They already tax purchases, but that is not enough. They want to "wet their beak" or "take their cut" and charge us for the right to use gasoline whether we purchase it or not. This goes under the obscurantist term "Cap and Trade". They also want to limit what we can use. They also want the power to grant exceptions; whenever they feel like it to whomever they feel like it. They accomplish this by setting up an agency which like the god Zeus determines who gets energy use rights and who does not. Does that not sound like Squealer heaven? Warner-Lieberman was shelved. There will be another crack at it as soon as Obama or McCain gets elected.
Kyoto has been in place 12 years. Nothing has happened to reduce CO2 emissions. Nor will anything happen to reduce CO2 (not that it should matter) except as technology develops to create energy more cheaply with less CO2 emissions. This has been demonstrated already. If Squealerist Al Gore gets his way and a bill like Warner-Lieberman passes in the US or around the world the same results will occur. No government can stay in power in a democracy by restricting the freedom and wealth of its people unless the reason is straight forward and obviously necessary. World War II is one such example, when the US Government rationed most goods and services, including energy usage. The extraordinary claim of a man induced theoretical 2 degree increase in temperature 100 years from now just does not cut it. Governments can still cause great havoc, however. A Stalinist CO2 emissions review board will, like Kyoto, accomplish zero on greenhouse gas emissions. But it will provide plenty of opportunity for rampant corruption and economic inefficiency. Squealerists like Gore are fearing their opportunity and window of time may be slipping away.
So repulsive Al and his mad man scientist James Hansen are tripling down and saying in 10 years we can and should eliminate all CO2 emissions. Al met Jim about 20 years ago. My guess is he actually did believe this screwball at first, or at least had some sympathy for his views. When the good people of Florida could not read ballots or whatever in 2000 Gore needed to find another gig. The MoveOn.org PAC and others basically hired him as their Squealer. He figured he could get ahead of the curve and started up this private equity company to invest in Cap and Trade credits and other green schemes. He was not counting on temperatures dropping this decade back to levels in the 70s (when we were about to enter a man induced ice age according to the environmental dupes of that era). UAH: Global Temperature Dives in May « Watts Up With That? The language of politicians still is heavily pro "global warming". But no one really wants to step too deeply into this bog. Support is the proverbial mile wide and inch deep.
It is a loser's game. The American Physics Society or "APS" has now opened a debate on global warming in its journal Physics & Society. APS's official position is best described as "pro AGW light". James Hansen:Man of Science and the Squealer should get the Hague World Court on these guys immediately before anyone notices the science is getting unsettled.
Comments