Re: [asa] Why the opposition to global warming

--- David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:

> *the assumption that "the conservative movement" as a whole is
> > "socialist, pantheistic and oppressive" is an overstatement at best.*

Hmm, I presume you meant the environmental movement, George :-)
And I agree that the assumption is an overstatement. Nevertheless,
environmentalists have created the impression among many conservatives that
they are just that ("socialist, pantheistic and oppressive").

Below, David discusses Ehrlich's "population bomb" claims. Also, don't forget
that during the 70's the media were treating us to dire predictions of "global
cooling" And then there were the dire predictions of the Club of Rome.

Remember that most members of the public do not have the scientific expertise
to evaluate technical reports, so they rely on "interpreters". Among those
interpreters have been people like the late Julian Simon, who bet Ehrlich that
resources would increase and won. I frankly think economists are inclined to be
pollyannas, but there is something to be said for not panicking prematurely.

I'm not saying that the conservatives are right. However, for you folks to
just say, "I don't understand it .." isn't helpful. If there is a real problem
(and I agree that there is a problem), _someone_ credible is going to have to
engage in some teaching.
>
> Well, generally, generalizations are too simplistic. But let's be real --
> some very significant streams of the environmental movement tend towards
> socialism and a sort of pantheism. Don't forget Paul Ehrlich's
> environmentalist manifesto "The Population Bomb," with chapter titles such
> as "Too Many People," "Too Little Food" and "A Dying Planet" (
>
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1568495870/ref=sib_dp_pt/002-7169106-6605613#reader-link)
>
>
> What kind of world would we be living in today if Ehrlich had his way? One
> with domestic and international involuntary population control laws, which
> could include things like "sterilants" in the water supply ("The Population
> Bomb" at p. 130). The population control meme was a major tenet of
> environmental globalism until global warming took center stage. I think
> it's good for conservatives to remind us of this, before we hand over the
> keys to the government to a small number of knowledge elites, even if the
> global warming problem has a sounder scientific basis than Ehrlich's
> population theories.
>
> As to "conservatives" and "conservation," that's cute, but the fundamental
> principle of modern conservatism is that people should be free to govern
> themselves to the extent possible. A corollary to that principle is that
> inefficiency and corruption increase along with the size and power of a
> governing body. It's highly doubtful that global governance would do a
> better job at solving environmental problems. More likely, it would only
> produce more opportunities for inequality and graft. International
> cooperation and agreements are necessary, but international rule-making and
> enforcement bodies should be subjected to healthy skepticism.
>
> On 2/3/07, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
> > 1st, >
> > 2d, it's always seemed strange to me that so many "conservatives" are
> > opposed to, or are at best lukewarm about, "conservation." I recall this
> > point being made back around the beginnings of the environmental movement,
> > ~1970, by James Buckley - Bill's brother - who had just been elected to
> the
> > U.S. Senate from New York on the Conservative ticket (if you need any bona
> > fides).
> >
> > Shalom
> > George
> > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Bill Hamilton" <williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com>
> > To: "David Opderbeck" <dopderbeck@gmail.com>; <wdwllace@sympatico.ca>
> > Cc: "Randy Isaac" <randyisaac@comcast.net>; <asa@calvin.edu>; "Andy
> Bootsma"
> > <bootsmaa@rogers.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 8:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: [asa] Why the opposition to global warming
> >
> >
> > I agree with David. The scientists who are convinced that global warming
> is
> > a
> > serious problem (and I agree with David that it is a problem) need to
> > distance
> > themselves from the environmental movement, who have turned conservatives
> > off
> > with their socialist, pantheistic and oppressive government ways. If they
> > will
> > do that perhaps some intelligent discussion can take place, which will
> lead
> > to
> > real solutions.
> >
> > --- David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > We've discussed this before, but I think you need to understand the
> > > context
> > > of the environmental movement to answer this question. The
> environmental
> > > movement has made many doomsday predictions that have failed to
> > > materialize,
> > > the most notorious involving population control. Coupled with those
> > > predictions, some leaders in the environmental movement have operated
> from
> > > a
> > > neo-pantheistic worldview and have made suggestions that smack of
> > > totalitarianism -- again, population control being the most notorious
> > > example. And, as to warming in particular, the most prominent policy
> > > proposal, the Kyoto treaty, represents a massively costly global
> > > regulatory
> > > regime that impinges on state sovereignty and voter oversight -- thereby
> > > weakining some basic building blocks of democratic governance.
> > >
> > > So, among conservatives of any stripe -- not just fundamentalist
> religious
> > > conservatives, but also more serious economic and libertarian
> > > conservatives
> > > -- there is a deep suspicion of *any *suggestion that the world is
> facing
> > > an
> > > immanent, massive crisis that can be addressed only through world-wide
> > > regulation. Personally, I think at least some of that skepticism is a
> good
> > > thing, even if (as I believe) there is a very real problem that needs to
> > > be
> > > addressed in global warming. We need to find ways to address this
> problem
> > > without sacrificing freedom and liberty, and the libertarian skeptical
> > > voices at least remind us of that.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/3/07, Dave Wallace <wdwllace@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On your blog, Randy you ask "Why the opposition to global warming".
> > > > Late yesterday and again this morning the online version of the
> National
> > > > Post leads off with the headline
> > > >
> > > > The real deal?
> > > > Against the grain: Some scientists deny global warming exists.
> > > >
> > > > With the experts on climate change weighing in, the Post talks to
> > > > scientists who go against conventional...
> > > >
> > > > Further down they have:
> > > > # Global warming likely caused by humans
> > > > # Video: Suzuki reacts to climate report
> > > >
> > > > http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/index.html
> > > >
> > > > The National IMHO is Canada's best paper which is not saying a
> lot. We
> > > > used to have much better news papers, however, they have gone down
> hill
> > > > in the last ten to twenty years. Too many do not seem to be able to
> > > > tell the difference between news and editorials.
> > > >
> > > > The ten part series they write starts out at:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=c6a32614-f906-4597-993d-f181196a6d71&k=0
> > > >
> > > > If people read just the headlines let alone some of the lead articles
> > > > and the above series it appears that climate warming is not well
> > > > supported, at least the human causation factor. David Suzuki might
> > > > convince people otherwise, however, some people will say that if
> Suzuki
> > > > thinks global warming is real then it must be at best marginal or even
> a
> > > > hoax. IMHO he has cried wulf too many times.
> > > >
> > > > Dave
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > > > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > David W. Opderbeck
> > > Web: http://www.davidopderbeck.com
> > > Blog: http://www.davidopderbeck.com/throughaglass.html
> > > MySpace (Music): http://www.myspace.com/davidbecke
> > >
> >
> >
> > Bill Hamilton
> > William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
> > 248.652.4148 (home) 248.821.8156 (mobile)
> > "...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> > Finding fabulous fares is fun.
> > Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and
> > hotel bargains.
> > http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> David W. Opderbeck
> Web: http://www.davidopderbeck.com
> Blog: http://www.davidopderbeck.com/throughaglass.html
> MySpace (Music): http://www.myspace.com/davidbecke
>

Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
248.652.4148 (home) 248.821.8156 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

 
____________________________________________________________________________________
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Feb 4 16:15:43 2007