Obama Declares War on Reality

Evil-looking Obama

Occasionally, there is an article in the mainstream media which is as good as you will find on the best blogs: honest, well-written and fearless. James Delingpole wrote such a piece yesterday. I will reproduce it here, lest the Telegraph realise their mistake and pull it. Fasten your seat belts…

When George W Bush declared war on an abstract noun – “Terror” – he was widely and inevitably mocked by the left for his foolishness. Not to be outdone, Barack Obama has used his second inaugural address to declare war on an even more nebulous threat to the security of the world: reality, itself.

Here’s how he put it in his inaugural address: (H/T Theo Spleenventer; Bishop Hill)

We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.  Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms.

The first sentence is a blatant untruth. Concerted global action so far to deal with the threat of climate change has resulted in: higher energy prices; more deaths from fuel poverty; more intrusive regulation; the destruction of rainforests and the squandering of agricultural land on biofuels; higher food prices; famine and food riots – as a result partly of the drive for biofuels; the entrenchment of corporatism and rent-seeking to the detriment of free markets; the ravaging of the countryside with ugly solar farms and even uglier wind turbines; the deaths of millions of birds and bats; the great recession. How any of this has in any way benefited either our children (who are going to find it far harder to find a job) or future generations is a complete mystery.

The second sentence is a devious combination of the junk factoid and the non sequitur.

That “overwhelming judgement of science” is a reference to the comprehensively discredited Doran survey: the one where the “97 per cent of climate scientists” turned out to consist of just 75 out of 77 climate scientists who could be bothered to reply to two silly and dubious questions.

As for the idea that “science” ever has such a thing as an “overwhelming judgement”: this would be news to Galileo, Newton, Einstein and indeed all the great scientists of history, all of whom made their names by advancing theories which completely overturned the “overwhelming judgement” of their contemporaries.

It’s probably true, up to a point, that “none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms”. But only if you accept that everyone lives in a region susceptible to fires, drought and powerful storms, which not everyone does.

What Obama is presumably trying to slip into that weasel sentence is the notion that “science” is overwhelmingly of the view that raging fires, crippling drought and more powerful storms are increasing as a result of “climate change” (note incidentally how he’s careful not to say whether or not it is man-made, thus enabling him to cover all eventualities). But if this is the case, I’d dearly love to see the evidence that this is a) anthropogenic b) controllable or c)historically unprecedented. Certainly, according to this graph at Watts Up With That?, there is nothing particular weird or alarming about recent weather activity. On an index of “Extreme Weather” in the US since 1910, last year – 2012 – ranks a very modest 54th.

Still, for all that, I applaud the President’s chutzpah and ingenuity. If you want to expand the size of government as much as he obviously does, there’s really no better way than to declare war on reality. Reality is a slippery foe; it has many heads – and no sooner have you cut off one than a thousand more grow in its place; it’s everywhere, at all times, and there’s no escaping it, meaning you have to mobilise unimaginably large resources if you are to have a hope of defeating it. Which, of course, you never will. Obama’s glorious war on reality will be a war without end. Bad luck, America. (But you can’t say I didn’t warn you.…)

6 comments to Obama Declares War on Reality

  • Ian

    Growing corn etc. for biofuel instead of food is a very bad idea, but the rest of the piece is another example of Delingpole’s tenuous to nonexistent grasp on reality.

    For instance the Doran survey didn’t “just” ask the opinion of 77 climatologists. It had responses from over 3,000 scientists in various disciplines. 90% agreed the world’s getting hotter and 82% said it was because of human activity. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090119210532.htm.

    Delingpole’s not being the slightest bit honest or fearless, he churns this nonsense out all the time, cherry-picking what he wants to hear from unreliable sources. People with connections to reality haven’t taken him seriously for a very long time.

  • Stewart Cowan

    Well, Ian, news just in…

    Climate shocker: Carry on as we are until 2050, planet will be FINE

    “New research produced by a Norwegian government project, described as “truly sensational” by independent experts, indicates that humanity’s carbon emissions produce far less global warming than had been thought: so much so that there is no danger of producing warming beyond the IPCC upper safe limit of 2°C for many decades.”

    You see, many years ago, the planet’s elite were looking for a foolproof way to create global governance and they came up with the idea that they would scare the people into giving up their freedoms and national sovereignty in order to “save the planet”. Who wouldn’t want to endorse such a noble aim? Who wouldn’t do what they could and sacrifice everything to save the only possible planet we can live on?

    At first, it was a new ice age then when it started getting warmer, they used global warming as the excuse and then when it stopped getting warmer, they thought, “Dag gummit, we’ll just call it ‘climate change’”.

    You really allow yourself to be open to a variety of frauds, Ian. Just don’t say I haven’t been trying to wake you up to reality for years.

  • Must second you on this one Stewart: the ‘climate change’ agenda is seriously dodgy! (And thanks for the resumption of blogging by the way.)

  • Stewart Cowan

    It’s a struggle. There is a stage in ideological subversion called demoralisation. I think I’ve hit it.

  • No you haven’t, you just need to keep a sense of perspective about the good and the bad. Remember that though it may be a long time coming the final result is good triumphs over evil once and for all. Get a balance in your focus… yes, time has to be spent researching/writing about the bad, but more time should be spent considering that which is good. Remember who is sovereign! Fighting evil is often depressing, dangerous and costly work but the effort is always worth it (since it saves many lives). This blog didn’t come about by accident; I’m afraid to have to say it Stewart, but… you are a writer (and you just can’t help yourself)! Fight the good fight (AND rejoice always). Peace be with you.

  • Stewart Cowan

    Thank you, Richard. I appreciate it very much.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>