Categorical Thinking and The Climate Debate | Watts Up With That?

We often hear this disconnect in the climate debate: sceptic Joe says “human impacts are small and likely not harmful”; alarmist Arthur says “humans are affecting the climate, therefore we must act now”. It is not possible to get the alarmist to answer the claim of the skeptic that the impacts are likely to be small. I believe the disconnect results because the alarmist is using categorical thinking. In this mode, if something is bad, it is bad. Water is either clean or not clean. Forest is either wilderness or it is defiled. This conversation cannot progress because the world views of the sceptic and the alarmist are incompatible. The words they use do not mean the same thing. If the sceptic admits we are having a small impact on climate, the alarmist says “aha! You see? We are doomed!” This is not a conversation.

- Bishop Hill blog - The benefits of shale

This is the perennial problem with politicians seeing the only benefit of an economic activity as the bottom line profits. These are, of course, only one rather minor benefit. The big benefits are the lower gas prices enjoyed by consumers, the wages that flow to the employees, the cheques sent suppliers of drilling equipment and to hotels and restaurants and snackbars near the wells and so on. Perhaps even the tax revenues that get sucked up by the state.

It's amazing that one has to explain this to someone charged with representing the public in Westminster.

- Bishop Hill blog - Start of a long struggle

I really am a glutton for punishment. My latest fray in the world of FOI is a request for correspondence relating to the formulation of the Stern Review. I've asked for related correspondence from Stern himself, Gordon Brown, and Brown's special advisers.

If I recall correctly, the Treasury are pretty notorious for flouting transparency legislation, and this looks as if it is going to be no exception.

Classic John Cook Junk Science | Real Science

Cook is attempting to confuse his readers with an incredibly facile and incorrect set of arguments. Snow falls in the winter, winter snow cover is increasing, and the last five years have been the snowiest five year period on record.