Friday, December 08, 2006

Kooky blogs in England

It's official. Myron Ebell loves global warming. That's the title of his article in Forbes, the magazine for the rich. He writes:
Researchers have warned us that a temperature rise of a few degrees will bring about plagues of jellyfish on our shores, more poison ivy in our gardens, maple syrup shortages, drowning polar bears, invasions by hordes of smaller and smaller ants, and a proliferation of new types of crime (at least in Australia). Dry areas will become deserts, wet places malarial swamps. Sea levels will rise faster and, worst of all, the effects will fall hardest on women, minorities, children and the poorest people in the poorest countries.
... whom Myron believes do not deserve to live because they do not provide any economic benefit to the likes of Exxon. If their crops fail it's not the drought, it's because there's not yet enough CO2 in the atmosphere to make them "grow more quickly, more vigorously and... be more resistant to things like drought." You bonehead!
[R]ising sea levels, if they happen, would be bad for a lot of people. But a warming trend would be good for other people... I'd like to suggest that the debate about climate change include, for once, a fair assessment of the benefits alongside the declamations of harm.
So, we see a shift here: he's finally accepting that everyone now believes in the well-founded scientific predictions, as opposed to the transparent fiction that he's given to us until now, and says that some of the consequences therein stated do not matter.
For example, cold winter storms kill a lot of people. More people die from blizzards and cold spells than from heat waves.
Here's a good bit.
Increased death rates usually persist for weeks after the unusually cold temperatures have passed, which suggests that the cold is killing people who would otherwise live into another season at least. Mortality rates during heat waves are just the reverse. The increase ends and often the rate drops below normal as soon as temperatures cool, which suggests that the higher temperatures are killing people who are likely to die soon anyway.
I have no idea how the logic works here. He's excels himself. Anyway, we move on:
So modest climatic improvement would be to have fewer and less severe big winter storms. Amazingly, that's exactly what we should get if global warming theory turns out to be true. The models say that much of the warming will occur in the upper latitudes and in the winter. At the risk of further ridicule in kooky blogs in England, where global warming alarmism is now a religion, that sounds pretty good to me. Fewer people will die from the cold... Life in many places [only in America] would become more pleasant. Instead of 20 below zero in January in Saskatoon, it might be only 10 below.
And now the punchline. Wait for it...
This promising scenario of milder winters in northern regions, which would become reality in the unlikely event that global warming turns out to be as considerable as predicted, comes with a catch, however. Air-conditioning is now considered a necessity... Air-conditioning takes a lot of energy. But to stop global warming, we're supposed to use much less energy. Given our obvious preference for living in warmer climates as long as we have air-conditioning, I doubt that we're going to go on the energy diet that the global warming doomsters urge us to undertake.
Coincidentally, above the article, was a banner ad which took you to Exxon's new PR campaign.
why not take wastes that would end up in landfills-- and recycle them so they end up as roads. That's travelling in the right direction!
Just what do they take us for? You can't even parody this nonsense. Did they actually pay good PR money for it? Why not take Myron's big book of no longer useful lies, and recycle them as school books?

How are his children doing so far anyway? Have they achieved anything for the Stop Myron Ebell campaign. Maybe they don't want to make a fuss because they need his money to get an education. What's the subject? Environmental sciences. Could be useful to know in a changing world. I hope it's not law school. Lawyers can tell you they own the world, but they will be first on the barbeque when the famine comes. All they're good for is meat.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please refrain from mentioning Mr Ebell's children, whom I know very well. They play no role in discussion of climate.

7:30 PM, December 09, 2006 Permanent link to this entry  
Blogger goatchurch said...

Mr Ebell used his children's college fees as an excuse for his unwillingness to bet money on what he knows are lies about the climate. He made them part of the discussion.

"I have four kids in college," he said, "so I don't take risks with money."

If Mr Ebell goes back and takes the bet that was being offered in the interview, or he substitutes a different excuse for why he is unable to stake money -- something he evidently values more than the continuance of human life on this planet given his greater willingness to play games with it -- then we can move on.

2:53 AM, December 12, 2006 Permanent link to this entry  
Anonymous James Cranch said...

I guess this means you're being noticed, Goatchurch.

What's his source for the claim that there would be "fewer and less severe big winter storms"? Don't they claim that there would be more and more severe storms at all times of year?

This would exacerbate a problem which is already serious even in the US, which is rich and thus should be able to afford solid houses, good disaster recovery teams and equipment, and rapid evacuation schemes.

8:04 AM, December 12, 2006 Permanent link to this entry  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you for responding to this nonesense. I just read the article in Forbes and it made me furious!
This is a new low for Forbes (they should have put this article in a layout format that showed it as a paid advertisement).

6:06 AM, December 15, 2006 Permanent link to this entry  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just read the article in a discarded Forbes, and thought this was so over the top it had to be a parody troll. (The large centered pasty flabby pigeyed photo portrait added to my suspicion.)

I've been googling his also fakey sounding name....apparently this guy is the real deal. Scary.

1:49 PM, December 20, 2006 Permanent link to this entry  

Post a Comment

<< Home