Dear
K,
“Global
Warming Hoax Hoax”
is excellent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=N4wxHCYevTY
Thanks
for sending.
When
the CGI female notes that the
media present false “debates” by pitting uninformed opinion
against scientitific finding,
she goes on to say that opinionated sound bites can be spewed in a matter of
seconds whereas scientific findings require lengthy explanation.
"Global
Warming Hoax Hoax" reminds me of fine work done by Minnesota
scientist, John Abraham, who explains global warming in a point by point
refutation of "climate deniers."
Some
of the most adroit denial has been propagated by British Lord, Christopher
Moncton.
Professor
Abraham's explanation of climate science (as it relate to Moncton's relentless
mendacity) is meticulously well done but - ironically - hobbled by its very
meticulousness.
Complex
scientific matters cannot be clarified through sound bites, whereas sound bites
are an excellent vehicle for presenting falsehood as Truth.
Resources:
1.)
Lord Christopher Moncton - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley
2.) A
comprehensive view of Monckton's global warming denial - http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jun/08/monckton-gift-climate-denial
3.)
Minnesota climate scientist, John Abraham - http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham/
(I
also recommend NPR’s “Climate Change: Public Skeptical, Scientists
Sure” -http://www.npr.org/2011/06/21/137309964/climate-change-public-skeptical-scientists-sure)
***
Meta-level
politics...
Recent
work by Jonathan Haidt, Drew Westen and E.O. Wilson focuses the
psychological dimension of each person's "political positioning.”
1.)
Bill Moyers interviews Jonathan Haidt, author of “The Righteous Mind.”
“How
Conservatives and Liberals See the World.”
2.)
Interview with Drew Weston, author of “The
Political Brain.”
3.)
E.O. Wilson: Our
primary affiliation is to “the tribe.” http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/04/01/biologist-e-o-wilson-on-why-humans-like-ants-need-a-tribe.html
We
have long known that humans "hear what they want to hear and disregard the
rest.”
It is
now coming clear that our motivation for "hearing what we want to
hear" is rooted in axiomatic norms consciously and unconsciously
communicated by our social, political and religious "tribes."
In
addition to such tribal conditioning from infancy on, humans are also subject
to cerebral re-wiring based on "social control" of "individual
thought."
In
recent years, I have grown keenly aware that conservative Christians are heirs
to a medieval mindset subsequently ratified by Protestantism's focus on
"individual conscience." Together, these harmonic outlooks
established a conservative moral code that was (and is) radically individual.
Furthermore,
these self-sealed believers are existentially compelled to disavow any
need for "collective” human action, and, as a result, the catastrophes of
global warming accumulate.
If
conservative Christians were to acknowledge any need for “collective” action,
their centuries-old assumption that all morality (and all responsibility) is
individual-and-personal would give way to a categorically different assumption
that large swathes of morality impose social, political and economic
obligations that can only be discharged by collective action.
According
to the received wisdom, eternal salvation has “always” depended on
each individual's “personal relationship with God.” It is therefore
“impossible” for Christian conservatives to conceive any need for collective
action without simultaneously acknowledging that collective action obliges
abandonment of the only "ground" that guarantees personal “salvation.”
This
situation is complicated by a widespread Christian belief in "providential
patriarchy."
According
to the patriarchal view of Providence, God knows our needs and always answers
them individually.
Part
of this “bargain” is that God simultaneously insures – by miracle if necessary
-- the smooth functioning of all “large-scale, over-arching, non-individual
systems” such as environmental stability, dependable water-and-energy supplies,
and providential "healing" for everyone who submits to The Patriarchal Order mandated by God.
If
anything goes wildly wrong with this divinely-ordered scenario, Christian
conservatives are prepared to defer, immediately, to the massive psychological
"default" that God has, at long last, chosen to unleash The End Times.
Ironically,
this psychological arabesque supplies bedrock justification for personal irresponsibility, and does
so in the minds of those Christians most eager to proclaim personal responsibility.
By this
weird gymnastic contortion, Christian conservatives obviate all need for the
kind of personal responsibility they have always touted as The Foundation of all that is good - whether
"the good" is individual, social, political or economic.
In
the end, conservative Christians profess The Transcendental Good of
Religious Freedom while
painting themselves into "ideological corners" from which there is NO
escape unless they admit their individual sinfulness as unfaithful
servants who no longer trust
in God's providence.
Which
brings us back to The Middle
Ages and The Protestant Reformation when individual conscience (completely
divorced from collective conscience) was deemed "the human half" of a
two-way bargain in which all overarching "collective needs" were
submitted -- with complete faithfulness! -- to the ministration of God’s
Providence.
Pax
Alan
From: KK
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 4:13 PM
To: Alan Archibald
Subject: The Climate Change "Hoax" Hoax
Spot on:
For several humourous cartoons, search youtube for xtranormal .
Ken
No comments:
Post a Comment