April 22, 2008
"The mother-of-all-environmental scares"
From Happy Earth Day, by Steven F. Hayward...
More than 30 years ago political scientist Anthony Downs discerned what he called the “issue-attention cycle,” a five-stage process by which the public and especially the news media grow alarmed over an issue, agitate for action, generate piles of scary headlines, and then begin to draw back as we come to recognize that the problem has been exaggerated or misconceived, and the price tag for action comes in. While Downs thought that the issue-attention cycle for the environment would last longer than most issues, it appears the mother-of-all-environmental scares -- global warming -- is following his model and is going to begin to fade like other environmental alarms of the past such as the population bomb and the “we’re running out of everything” scares.
The current media and political blitz on Capitol Hill for government controls on energy production are the product of the panic felt by environmentalists who realize that opinion polls show the public is climbing off global warming bandwagon...
I think a lot of the panic is coming from the unconscious, because even if the globalistas ignore the facts that contradict global warming theory, they had to be expecting a lot more bad news than there has been. Global mean temps have not increased since 1998! That's gotta be making certain people nervous.
And Argo. Argo was going to clinch the case for global warming. People were expecting that. Now you hear almost nothing about it.
What's bothersome to me is that the demise of each scare-issue doesn't cause ordinary people to start thinking for themselves. Minds just gradually adjust to the new CW, without people noticing that there's something really wrong. The "population bomb" fades away, and people stop worrying, but they retain a vague idea that there are too many people, and some of them really ought to be eliminated to "save the planet." That the predictions of mass-starvation never came true.... that's not dwelt upon.
Posted by John Weidner at April 22, 2008 10:36 AMGlobal warming became a big issue in the summer of 1988. There was a big conference on "Global Warming and the Media" either late in 1988 or early in 1989. (It was at this meeting that the science editor of TIME Magazine announced that the time for objective reportage was over, from then on it would be advocacy journalism.) I talked to someone who attended the conference just after he got back.
I pointed out to him that the claims were wildly overblown, and asked him if he wasn't worried about the backlash when people realized that.
"They have it covered," he replied, amused at me. "There was a whole session on how to manage the news when it turns out to be false."
Posted by: Bob Hawkins at April 22, 2008 04:41 PMGee, why am I not falling down on the floor with astonishment?
Posted by: John Weidner at April 22, 2008 06:02 PMIf there is any increase in starvation it will be because of the rush to biofuels devouring grain crops and the resources it takes to raise all crops. The corn/ethanol market does not exist in a vaccuum, and all grain and livestock prices are being perturbed by this ill-considered rush to supposedly green fuels...which doesn't even really affect the imaginary global warming level...which aint even happening...
Aren't humans the silliest creatures?
"If there is any increase in starvation it will be because of the rush to biofuels"
Why didn't they apply the Precautionary Principle?
Energy Policy Act of 2005, which mandated that we use an incredible amount of the food we produce to create biofuels — for 4 billion gallons of ethanol in 2006, gradually increasing to 7.5 billion gallons by 2012.
This act was passed by Republican Congress and Senate and signed by President Bush.
