Will Al Gore Have To Cancel His Subscription Now? - Granite Grok

Will Al Gore Have To Cancel His Subscription Now?

The Economist is a highly regarded global news source, though with admittedly left leaning tendencies.  Its archives provide a global and international perspective on events here in America going back to before the American Civil War.  And until recently it has been a proud sponsor of the intellectual argument for Climate change, formerly known as global warming.  But their sensibility (at least on this issue) may have finally caught up with them.

OVER the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar. The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750. And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, “the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.”

If the weather man says it is “raining” but no one bothers to look out a window….? So somebody looked out a “window” then, did they?

Perhaps the world should seek to adjust to (rather than stop) the greenhouse-gas splurge. There is no point buying earthquake insurance if you do not live in an earthquake zone. In this case more adaptation rather than more mitigation might be the right policy at the margin. …

Now, if we could just get the Economist to take the next step and admit that the entire program is actually just a world-wide progressive call to war to advance the expansion and power of the state then that would be something to behold.  I’m not holding my breath.  It took the Economist 15 years to get to this point, and this is just one small step toward a more civil discussion of the subject.  One that uses actual, observable circumstances instead of adhering to manufactured guesses peddled as facts that never came true.  Call it one small step for liberal-kind.

But there will be resistance to..um…progress.  The supplicants to the faith-based global climate church will be reluctant to believe anything that contradicts their flat-earth mind-set on Piltdown warming so this partial defection will be met with a counter-strike, but this is The Economist, not some backwater blog.

The Economist has a global presence and a global reach.  People in places of power and influence read it every week.  Having seen this from them, there will be those who have questioned the issue in the past but were reluctant to speak out.  With the observations of such a well respected weekly at hand, more than a few may step into the light and begin a cascade effect of a different sort.  They will add voice to those who at least question the scheme on its foundations, even if it is just to nibble around the edges of those foundations a bit more.

And, because we should discuss it, having made this one-small step, will The Economist crack under opposition pressure, and back-track to their standard position on the issue–which has been to promote it as a genuine concern that only governments are equipped to resolve?

H/T Erika Johnsen/Hot Air

>