Saturday, June 27, 2009

The WSJ, "Climate-Industrial Complex", and the Big Lie

Here's the WSJ editorial:

Mr. Lomborg is director of the Copenhagen Consensus, a think tank, and author of "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming" (Knopf, 2007).

This is certainly true of climate change. We are told that very expensive carbon regulations are the only way to respond to global warming, despite ample evidence that this approach does not pass a basic cost-benefit test. We must ask whether a "climate-industrial complex" is emerging, pressing taxpayers to fork over money to please those who stand to gain.

Bjorn Lomborg? Who is that guy?:

Australian National University academic, John Quiggin, writing in the Australian Financial Review in March 2002, pointed out the number of refereed publications Lomborg has produced on statistical or other scientific analysis of environmental issues "is zero".
.
The concern over Lomborg's misrepresentation of the science was so great that three complaints were lodged with the Danish Committee for Scientific Dishonesty, which Lomborg describes as "a national review body, with considerable authority". [8]
.
The committee found "the publication is deemed clearly contrary to the standards of good scientific practice". [9] They stated "there has been such perversion of the scientific message in the form of systematically biased representation that the objective criteria for upholding scientific dishonesty ... have been met".
.
Back to the WSJ editorial:
.
Spain has been proclaimed a global example in providing financial aid to renewable energy companies to create green jobs. But research shows that each new job cost Spain 571,138 euros, with subsidies of more than one million euros required to create each new job in the uncompetitive wind industry. Moreover, the programs resulted in the destruction of nearly 110,000 jobs elsewhere in the economy, or 2.2 jobs for every job created.
.
This sounds familiar! Cue George Will:

The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating "green jobs" in "alternative energy" even though Spain's unemployment rate is 18.1 percent -- more than double the European Union average -- partly because of spending on such jobs?

It is true that Calzada has come to conclusions that he, as a libertarian, finds ideologically congenial. And his study was supported by a like-minded U.S. think tank (the Institute for Energy Research, for which this columnist has given a paid speech).
.
The WaPo must be cracking down on poor George, making him print a disclosure.

In any case, here's Gabriel Calzada, per the NRDC.

ExxonSecrets.com reports that the "Center for New Europe" - where Gabriel Calzada is a visiting fellow - has received $170,000 form ExxonMobil since 1998. Calzada also is tied into the Heartland Institute, another well-known hub of climate science denial.

Yet these energy industry funded hacks have the nerve² to warn about the "Climate-Industrial Complex".

² This clown, Bjorn Lomborg, even had the gall to allude to President Eisenhower's famous quote:

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.


If the Wall Street Journal were ever to take this as a warning rather than as a goal, I'll eat my hat.



P.S. Many of our Senators have sold their souls to the Oil, Gas, and Coal Industries. Wind farming? Not so much. (Thanks Cliff, for the link.)
~

5 comments:

Righteous Bubba said...

Lomborg's such an obvious whore. I don't understand why they just don't trot out new whores instead of tipping their hands by continuing to trot out the old ones.

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...

It's a fair question.

What if they figured that no one who is paying attention will buy their b.s. anyway...so why not trot out the same old reliable whores?
~

Another Kiwi said...

Maybe this is the only whores they got. It can't be easy to get high class whores e.g. won't fart and giggle at the dinner table. That sort of class costs money knowhatuhmean.

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...

The bottom line is revealed when your mouse crosses R. Murdoch's picture.
~

Another Kiwi said...

Wouldn't it be cool if one could wear glasses that displayed little messages that expressed the ethos of the person in such a way. Of course mine would be "just leave me alone" and therefore a little alienating but it would be worth it.