NYTimes sets new record for nutty climate alarmism

This is what communist China looks like, not capitalism.

A while back I did a CFACT piece on the problem that teachers who know nothing about science are actively teaching climate alarmism. The piece was based on an ever-alarmist New York Times article praising this problem as a good thing when it is just the opposite.

Now the NYT has outdone itself, with what has got to be the nuttiest alarmist opinion piece that I have ever seen. The title sort of says it all — “The Climate Crisis? It’s Capitalism, Stupid.”

There is no climate crisis and capitalism is vastly superior to its alternatives, so there you go; no need to read further. But it is worth looking at how these wild alarmist tales are spun and who spins them because a lot of people read this junk. And in this case, the tale spinner is a teacher, at a prominent American state university school no less: The Arizona State honors college.

The author is Benjamin Fong and his field is best described as psychoanalytic anti-capitalism. I am not making this up. His ASU bio says this: “Benjamin Y. Fong received his Ph.D. in Religion from Columbia University, where he was also an Affiliate Scholar at the Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research.”

To get a feel for his psycho-thinking, read this Fong essay and try not to laugh. His claim is that pleasure is a form of subjection that is imposed upon us.

So how does Dr. Fong explain the climate crisis? In the usual way really, with a combination of bad science combined with false confidence in baseless conjectures, artful omissions, and left-wing politics. Thankfully he is brief.

He begins with a sciencey statement, which is a common opening move in the game of climate alarmism. The statement is that human CO2 emissions today are 10 times greater than they were at the time of one of the great mass extinctions, called the End-Permian. This cataclysmic event occurred a whopping 250 million years ago, for reasons that we do not understand.

How this is relevant is never explained, because the point is to make a vague scary suggestion. He simply slides into the idea that we are now facing a similar fate (for which there is no scientific basis).

Even worse, the statement is absurd. What is not mentioned is that natural CO2 emissions today are something like 20 times greater than our emissions. So if our tiny emissions are a problem then nature’s vast emissions are a far bigger problem, but thankfully neither is true.

The reality is that this vast flow of CO2 is the mainstream of what is called the carbon cycle, which makes life on Earth possible. Atmospheric CO2 is the global food supply. In fact, today’s levels of CO2 are very low compared to some past geologic eras when life did very well. That CO2 levels are rising along with human population is good news, as it helps to feed us. But alarmists like Fong routinely write as though our CO2 emissions were some sort of unique pollution. The very opposite is true.

So this End-Permian stuff is just carefully chosen scary hogwash. Fong then goes on to invoke the conjecture of a precise 7.2-degree warming by 2100. This is just computer model stuff, which is all there is to climate alarmism.

He then switches gears, telling us that the real problem is capitalism, especially the profit motive. There is no science here, just what is called the fallacy of argument by assertion. Anti-capitalists seem not to notice that communist countries try to do the same basic things as capitalist countries, they just don’t do it as well because of the lack of individual freedoms.

For that matter, one would think that someone named Fong would know that Communist China is by far the world’s leader in CO2 emissions because it is burning vast amounts of coal. But then it is digging its way out of poverty by becoming more capitalist and joining the global economy.

The real reason that the world is not rushing to decarbonize is that it’s a stupid idea. Capitalism has nothing to do with it. Happily, democracy does. The last things we need are dictatorships out to save the world from a fantasy.

When students are taught junk like this by professors they admire, you cannot be surprised that they then become alarmist activists. But there is a formula to this stuff which, once mastered, makes refutation relatively easy.

How to do this refutation is what students should be learning. CFACT’s Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow has an important role to play here. They deserve our support.

Teaching climate alarmism in non-science classes is indoctrination, not education.

Read more at CFACT

Trackback from your site.

Comments (10)

  • Avatar

    Spurwing Plover

    |

    the New York Pravda(Times)has out done itself in being a far leftists liberal rag the Old Grey Hag is not worth wasting out money on and they waste their Freedom of the Press by lying 24/7 so we wont be wasting our moola in bothering to subcribe to this liberal rag and All the Lies That’s Fit to Print

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Sonnyhill

    |

    The first CFACT piece “link” in this article is worth your time. I’ll bet that anyone teaching climate alarmism in earnest doesn’t understand climate. They’re romantics, not technically inclined. They probably admire Bill Nye.
    A retired school teacher is my neighbor. She said that we need to do something about climate change. There are two half-ton pick up trucks in her driveway. Her Christmas lights are on the day after Halloween. For thirty years, people trusted her with their children.
    No surprise that a hypnotist like Fong would find willing participants.

    Reply

    • Avatar

      Sonnyhill

      |

      He’s a really regular guy. Every denier comment makes him rakooi .

      Reply

  • Avatar

    rakooi

    |

    Once again ClimatechangedDispatched a rational discussion and picked up a style like Daily Caller and Breitbart
    ….find an outlier expressing some way out ideas
    ….and BEAT THEM UP
    as a means
    …..to BEAT UP LEGITIMATE CONCERNS about Global Climate Changes and Warming.
    ***
    SKEPTICS / DENIERS Predictions
    are REMARKABLY WRONG, again!

    “….Jon Austin October 9, 2015
    …One of the world’s leading climate change experts claims to have
    discovered mathematical anomalies
    which effectively ‘ DISPROVE ’ global warming.
    .
    Dr David Evans, a former climate modeller for the Government’s Australian Greenhouse Office,
    says global warming predictions have been vastly exaggerated in error.
    The academic,
    from Perth, Australia, who has passed six degrees in applied mathematics,
    has analysed complex mathematical assumptions widely used to predict climate change
    and
    HE is predicting world temperature will stagnate until 2017 before cooling,
    with a ‘mini ice age’ by 2030.

    Dr. Evans is not a climatologist but rather a PHD in Electrical Engineering,
    with a Math undergraduate degree.
    He has no training in climatology.
    He has DONE no research in climatology.

    ((THIS PRECISE Prediction was made in the 70’s by
    SKEPTIC Scientists & DENIERS .
    THIS PRECISE Prediction
    was made in the 90’s by
    SKEPTIC / DENIERS Dr.s CHRISTY & SPENCER ))

    Now here it is again.
    ….
    “IN 2015 temperatures are supposed to stagnate and then decline.
    Sooooo,
    2014 was EARTH’S Warmest year in recorded history…
    until
    2015 was EARTH’S Warmest year in recorded history…
    until
    2016 was EARTH’S Warmest year in recorded history…
    and
    2017 is right behind 2016 in record RISING temperatures…

    Reply

    • Avatar

      G

      |

      Telling someone it’s hot outside while ice is forming on their nose is the sign of a desperate con artist. Your dire warnings of “Warmest Year Ever!” just don’t match whatsoever with what people see. if your endless sky-is-falling rants were remotely substantial real people, (not just climate change political activists) would be talking about this constantly.

      Let’s face it, if there is one thing people feel free to discuss, it’s the weather, and none of my neighbors and friends talk about how terribly hot the climate has become. In fact, if anything the people I hear seem to believe the winters here start earlier and last longer than average lately. Hardly the stuff of crisis, and outside of a few predictable leftist nut cakes who regularly send letters to our local newspaper, NOBODY thinks we need to institute leftist political reforms and carbon taxation to solve this non-problem.

      Good luck tilting at that windmill.

      Reply

    • Avatar

      JayPee

      |

      The inability to concisely state an argument is
      the hallmark of a liar.

      Reply

    • Avatar

      David Lewis

      |

      You mentioned a new mini ice age as an example of climate realists wild predictions. I wish it were wild but the risk of such an event is based on solid facts. If the solar cycles follow past patterns they will be the same as what preceded the last mini ice age. We know carbon dioxide has almost no impact on warming and the sun most likely the main driver, albeit, not the only one. It is very reasonable to state we have a risk of a mini ice age. This is not a wild prediction.

      I remember the article and there is a striking difference between this and the predictions of the alarmist. The alarmist most often state that their predictions will happen with certainty. The article on the mini ice age said that if the solar cycle does repeat there is a risk of a mini ice age. That is the difference between a political campaign and science.

      Reply

      • Avatar

        David Lewis

        |

        2014 was EARTH’S Warmest year in recorded history…
        until
        2015 was EARTH’S Warmest year in recorded history…
        until
        2016 was EARTH’S Warmest year in recorded history…
        and
        2017 is right behind 2016 in record RISING temperatures…

        By how many degrees was each year warmer? Next time you post the above please include that. If it is like other alarmist claims, it is based on a few hundredths of a degree.

        As of 2016, the hottest years were 2010 and 2012.

        https://climatechangedispatch.com/torturing-the-data-and-the-facts/

        Then how can 2014, 2015, and 2016 be the hottest years ever. If 2010 and 2012 were hotter, doesn’t that mean there is some cooling since then?

        Reply

  • Avatar

    Spurwing Plover

    |

    Rakooi like al Eco-Wackos want all skeptics silenced becuase we stand in the way of their pay checks and political agendas like Agenda 21

    Reply

  • Avatar

    Spurwing Plover

    |

    I prefer CFACT over GREENPEACE any day

    Reply

Leave a comment