This come from Kay in Rotterdam, Netherlands
I spend quite a bit of time cruising websites and reading articles on climate change, both Warmist and Skeptic. Yours is one my typical stops. I love those posts with the facepalms.
My belief is that Mankind does have some fault, perhaps as much as 50%, for the warming of the 20th century, though much of that can be attributed to the UHI and land usage, IMO. While I am concerned, I do not buy into the apocalyptic predictions. Nor do I minimize that there is some danger. But, then, climate and weather can always cause issues for life.
Anyhow, I don’t want to make this a long email, as my central questions is, what do you mean when you write things like “Someone Else”, “Other People”, “That Guy”?
Kay, thanks for the kind words and for making my little site a read of yours. And that is a great question. Those of us who write about “climate change”, whether skeptic, warmist, or neutral, often forget that it is sometimes like “inside baseball”, which is
The phrase “inside baseball” refers to a detail-oriented approach to the minutiae of a subject, which in turn requires such a specific knowledge about what is being discussed that the nuances are not understood or appreciated by outsiders.
We perhaps write a bit too much “inside baseball”.
When I write the aforementioned phrases, what I’m referring to is the notion that Warmists want Someone Else, That Guy, Other People, to suffer for the beliefs of the Warmist(s), but the Warmist(s) do not want to suffer themselves. The regulations, rules, laws, penalties, taxes, cost increases, etc, should not apply to the Warmists.
This is a notion that applies to most things Progressive. Consider taxes: they always want That Guy to pay higher taxes, not themselves. Look at Warren Buffett: he said he should pay the same income tax as his secretary. But he won’t write a check. And, I guarantee if you threaten to raise his capital gains tax he’d be “whoa, whoa, whoa, let’s hold off!” Look at Obama: he constantly complains about income inequality and says he should pay a higher tax rate rate, yet he takes advantage of every tax deduction. You could say this about most Progressives. And they always have an excuse as to why they should have to do X, but Someone Else should be forced to do X.
When it comes to Obama and climate change, he wants all sorts of rules, regs, and laws, yet he refuses to mitigate his own carbon footprint. He is by no means a lone example. EPA head Gina Davis, Al Gore, Michael Mann, James Hansen, the high up mucky mucks at the IPCC, you name them, they are hypocrites. But, see, it’s not just about hypocricy, it’s about forcing Other People to be penalized for the Warmist, and Progressive, beliefs while refusing to pay the penalty themselves.
Occupy Wall St and 99%ers whine about Big Corporation yet use the products themselves. Progressives complain about That Guy using racist/sexist/some type of ist language, and want That Guy penalized, but excuse their own same type language.
Warmists whine about fossil fuels. They want divestment and such. They want to shut down projects. And, yet, they refuse to give up their own fossil fueled lifestyles. Heck, they show to anti-fossil fuels rallies in fossil fueled vehicles. They take fossil fueled flights to protest Keystone XL. But, they want you, That Guy, to be restricted.
Warmism, and the parent Progressives, are all about hypocrisy while forcing Someone Else to pay the piper.