The evidence-suppressing academics at East Anglia University aren’t the only global-warming true believers who seem to be in a bit of a fog these days. Over at the Nation, two separate pieces both seem to acknowledge that the public is increasingly resistant to the deluge of environmental alarmism they’ve been peddling.
In a feature in their Dec. 21 print issue that is currently available on their website, Christopher Hayes bemoans the fact that global-warming hysteria isn’t selling as well as it used to. Hayes cites a Washington Post/ABC poll that shows a marked decline in support for the basic premise of global warming and an even more precipitate drop in the total of those who accept the theory that a rise in temperatures is the result of human activity.
How does Hayes explain this refusal of so many Americans to accept the dogma that is repeated endlessly in the media and throughout the culture almost without challenge? Of course, he ignores recent scandals such as the East Anglia affair, as well as the fact that, contrary to predictions, the planet hasn’t gotten any warmer in the past decade, something even the New York Times has acknowledged.
Instead, Hayes mostly blames it on the economic crisis and partisan hatred for Barack Obama. But that’s not all. He also blames the global-warming activists themselves for not being sufficiently scary. That’s right. Despite all the apocalyptic threats that have been put forward on behalf of this thesis based on theoretical models, Hayes believes that we haven’t had enough environmental hysteria. He believes the warming alarmists must stop talking about “green jobs” and the economic opportunities they claim will spring from the disastrous cap-and-trade policies they advocate. Instead, he wants them to just scream “the planet is melting.” I guess that’s supposed to reinforce the Left’s self-image as the advocates of reason and science.
But elsewhere on the Nation website, you can get a slightly different take on the same issue. In a video interview with Nation editorial-board member Tony Kushner, the famous playwright has his own riff on the question. Kushner modestly brushes off the praise of the magazine staffer plying the questions by saying that the mention of “the impact of human lives on the environment” in his 1991 play Angels in America in which “character Hannah Pitt fretted about the hole in the ozone layer” didn’t make him a prophet. He was just writing about what was “in the news” then as now, he claims. Though he puts down all skepticism about the theory to “greed” on the part of evil industrialists, he goes on to say that he thinks that the lack of progress toward passing economy-crippling measures aimed to stop global warming is due to the fact that people are aware of the impending catastrophe but are too numbed by its enormity to act. Kushner even thinks that, contrary to the evidence leaking out from East Anglia, the global-warming crowd has understated the danger so as not to create mass panic.
For those who want a small taste of Kushner’s idea of environmental reform, consider the passage where he fondly remembers the halt in commercial-airline flights after the 9/11 attacks, which he claims created a “staggering decrease in the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere!”
So what’s the answer here? Are we too scared by the specter of being cooked like a hot dog at Nathan’s in less than a decade, as Kushner thinks, or, as Hayes theorizes, have we not been frightened enough? Either way, it’s clear that the real fear on the Left is that more of the public isn’t buying their scare stories anymore.
The hiring of protesters and the staging of the wheelchair incident, if substantiated, would be a big story. The Phayul piece you link about the alleged payoff to clueless protesters has, in my judgment, a very unreliable feel. If a campaign of this magnitude has occurred, it will have left uncontrovertible traces. For example, *some* overseas Chinese will have been approached with the offer & declined it & be willing to talk about it on the record. Here’s an opportunity for an investigative reporter!
But pending such proof, I’m inclined to treat these charges with caution. It seems like wishful thinking to suggest that the pro-Beijing protesters have to be paid. The virulence and sincerity of Chinese nationalism is one of the most troubling aspects of the reality we face.
“Shut up you French,”
I have to admit, I’ve thought this many times myself.
Gray Hat, you’re right that nationalism is running high. I agree that pro-China protestors do not have to be paid. Yet some were in fact paid from all that we can see. There have been instances of pro-Beijing protestors in the U.S. being paid in the past.
There has been intense speculation in the China watching community about the wheelchair incident due to, among other factors, unusual and otherwise inexplicable changes in the behavior of the Chinese guards protecting the torch.
Carrefour has apparently apologized. How sad.
Sounds eerily familiar. Kind of like the way Western governments pay citizens to stage protests against China. Oh the irony. Oh the viscous cycle…
China? Put your money where your mouth is – rid one’s house of all Chinese goods.
Now that would lead us to Minimalism. But we would be less hypocrits.
In order to let more Chinese know truth, Suggestion to CNN: Show the following slogan on screen: “Allow CCTV to interview and show in E.U and U.S. Allow CNN & BBC to interview and show in China. OK?”
Do anybody here know that CIA funded the coup in the 50s that eventually led to Dalai’s exile?
Do anybody here know that all 46 Chinese student leaders in the ’89 Tianmen Square had been approached by CIA and provided a U.S passport?
Brian Li, I think everyone knows of CIA involvement in Tibet in the 1950s.
I would be most interested in hearing about the passport offer in 1989. For example, when was it made? Were the passports actually issued?
Thanks.
Answer paul a’barge’s question:The Chinese just want the rest of the world to know the truth they support the Olympic and protest Tibetan independence by their patriotic flame not the pay.
They are not stupid and wont punish themself through this exaggerated method as the most employee of Carrefour in China are Chinese!They only want to remind the rest of the world that the Olmpic only is sports game not political games.They are not anti-foreigner but pro-Olympic and you will see the relationship between Chinese and French be still firm.In Chinese eyes the Olympic is the good tradition of the West and it is pathetic that the Chinese people support but the West protest the Olympic.
In order to know the truth,the westerners may go to visit China themselves rather than sit in front of TV.
this article is a typical stereotype of comments on chinese. if chinese demonstrate, it has to be sponsored by government. why did i take one day off to go to san francisco? i don’t care about olympic and i think china shall cancel this stupid event right away. what i care is the unethical reports by media regarding china. i thought chinese news reports suck, but media in west are no better. in the end, the frustration can best be described as the following:
No matter what China does, these students say, it cannot win in the arena of world opinion. “When we have a billion people, you said we were destroying the planet./ When we tried limiting our numbers, you said it is human rights abuse,” reads a poem posted on the Internet by “a silent, silent Chinese” and cited by some students as an accurate expression of their feelings. “When we were poor, you thought we were dogs./ When we loan you cash, you blame us for your debts./ When we build our industries, you called us polluters./ When we sell you goods, you blame us for global warming.”
please refer to new york times for the report:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/education/29student.html?_r=1&em&ex=1209614400&en=c70b587b17baf321&ei=5087&oref=slogin
west expect these students coming out to study here or there and then being brainwashed and eventually after they go back, china will be westernized — or shall i say? democratized. they did not realize that china future depends on its own people and whether they will adopt the system from west is up to their wisdom. in my opinion, if they do, china will forever go into oblivion. china has to charter its own course.
19 years after tiananmen, i still tried to find the answer why that happened. now reading new york times report, i am very proud of these new generation: they are smart, practical, and diligent. they know china is not perfect and realized that it would take their own effort to move it further. and they don’t assemble any those stereotype as “spoiled generation” because of one child policy. the way they stood up shows their courage and confidence, and most important of all, their independence.
if one fails to see this, and keep viewing china and chinese in traditional stereotype, no matter how open china is and will be, one will just keep that forever.