We’ve had ‘Climategate’ and now we’ve got Christopher Monckton running around denouncing AGW and gathering an enormous amount of support.

The whole deal really is in turmoil.

We are hearing the most polarised information and opinions, ranging from one end of the spectrum to the other, from;

climate change is proceeding much faster than we thought, faster than any of our models had predicted…

to

anthropogenic climate change is just one almighty hoax or conspiracy and there is just no way that us little old humans could possibly have the power to affect the global climate.

We desperately need a multinational royal commission to sort out who is right and who is having us on.

Despite Monckton’s ardent AGW denialism, he does make a bit of sense.

Most importantly perhaps, he says that we should be adapting to AGW (if, he says, it does happen to be real) rather than trying to stop it. And he says that there are a number of other major problems that we should be putting our energies into.

So if we could just see fit to refocus on the big social and energy-policy changes that we need in the lead-up to peak oil and for the development of a sustainable society, then we’d be much better off.

And hey, the sort of things that we need to do to meet these ends are just about the same as if we were to continue head-banging AGW (not including Rudd’s ETS).

A refocus onto things that are much more tangible to the ordinary man in the street than AGW is, could make all the difference.

At the moment, the huge backlash against AGW is also dragging us backwards in addressing these other enormous issues.

Ludwig,
Have you ever pondered cattle tracks across hillsides? they never seem to be the most direct routes....training/habit.
The great unwashed are generally the same they can't see beyond their own self interests. They tend to follow the same routes, habits etc.
On the Flag posts I made and demonstrated the point that most people will defend vigorously a know habit regardless if they understand it or not.

I posit that the same applies to people and AGW ....bugger the logic, science ....i can't see it so I'll believe those who believe the same as me.

Have you ever tried to tell a farmer that he's doing something wrong? even though you have the science oodles of examples what do you get?
Offense, Derision, insult, personal attack the lot.

AGW advocates, population constrainers, greenies , conservationists, even those economists that point to the magic pudding basis of current economics are attacked, because change threatens.
it threatens their known equilibrium/paradigm the one habit has made them comfortable with. It's the reasoning behind why Gods were invented to explain and comfort man with the notion of certainty, control.

It's why we seek explanations and defend them so vociferously even in the face of being wrong.

As a thinker, Ludwig, I am puzzled by your surprise.
Personally I expect it But I keep plugging away untill proven wrong or something changes.
Like the Oscar winning song says

" Once there was this silly old ant,
who thought he'd move a rubber tree plant,
Everyone knows a ant...can't
move a rubber tree plant.

But he has high hopes,
high apple pie in the skyyyy hopes.

Oops there goes another rubber tree plant!
oops there goes another rubber tree plant!

cos he had high hope
high apple pie in the skyyyyy hopes"
So any time your feeling low
just remember that ant,
who thought he'd move a rubber tree plant."

What else can we do?

Examinator
Who's "we"?

Examinator, you wrote;

<< …most people will defend vigorously a know habit regardless if they understand it or not. >>

Yes indeed.

<< I posit that the same applies to people and AGW ....bugger the logic, science ....i can't see it so I'll believe those who believe the same as me. >>

Absolutely. I’ve discovered this in the most glaring and quite pleasant manner over the two weeks that I’ve been on the Agmates forum. Wow, the vigorous denialism there from lots of people, none of whom could not possibly know the veracity of their assertions, is quite something to behold!

<< Have you ever tried to tell a farmer that he's doing something wrong? even though you have the science oodles of examples what do you get?

Offense, Derision, insult, personal attack the lot. >>

From a lot of them, yes. But the same goes for all of our society. I wouldn’t single out farmers.

I am a farmer’s friend. I am a true agriculturalist’s mate! Or at least, a mate of the sensible ones, of which there are many. But at the moment on that forum, only a couple of people can see that.

<< As a thinker, Ludwig, I am puzzled by your surprise. >>

I’m not surprised at the widespread presence of this attitude, but I was surprised at the incredibly one-sided and strongly attack-the-man-not-the-subject style of responses on Agmates. I had no reason to expect it to be significantly different to OLO, but it sure as hell is!!

I feel like an ant. But guess what, I moved a rubber tree plant a couple of days ago, from a big pot that could hardly be budged to a nice spot in the ground in the middle of my front yard!!

So yes, we’ll both keep plugging away, until we go CoMplEteLy mAaAaaD!! { ;~/)

Cheers.

Suddenly, when it was clear that Copenhagen was a political/social/economic engineering event which failed, fears of a looming catastrophe went away.

Now, the IPCC who fed the world with predictions of runaway doom scenario, have backed off as if the catastrophe is no longer looming.

The tipping point has stopped tipping. 'Soft' deadlines now appear as do 'aspirational targets'. Maybe it will be called Global Tepidity now.

Where's our catastrophe gone? No-one seems to care anymore. Why? Because no-one believes them anymore so they've virtually thrown in the towel.

The Bogey Man was never real. There never was any disaster looming, there's plenty of Polar Bears and species are not becoming extinct. The Western world is way less polluted than it ever was. And now everyone knows.

Examinator,
As Ludwig said, what you say applies to all of society. Very few of us can be objective about our beliefs.

I do not debate about religion because religous nuts will not concede anything, but still believe. I think our immigration is too high and I do not accept the ideology of multiculturalism, but put forward any argument for my views and, boy Oh boy, the attack dogs come out. Firstly, one is called racist and Xenophobic and it gets worse from there.

AGW is a religion to many and believers are currently in 'denial' about climategate and any discredit of the IPCC. Even though there seems to be more and more coming to light almost daily. I have seen Graham Young being blasted, here on OLO, for being biased if he allows an article that is written by a AGW sceptic.

You may be right though, that many will change their view if they think the majority of people have changed.

Has anyone else noticed that the PM has gone quiet about 'the great moral issue of our time' and that 'we must act now'.