Waarom de klimaatpropaganda niet heeft gewerkt

Geen categorie27 apr 2011, 16:30
Gisteren schonk ik aandacht aan het Nisbet-rapport, waarin werd geconstateerd dat de klimaathysterie op zijn retour is. Ondanks de grootscheepse propagandacampagne is het de klimaatalarmisten in de VS (net) niet gelukt om voldoende politiek steun te mobiliseren voor een kostbaar, doch nutteloos systeem van 'Cap & Trade'. Maar vanuit klimaatsceptische optiek blijft er nog genoeg al even kostbaar en nutteloos klimaatbeleid over om diep bedroefd over te zijn. Dat geldt overigens nog meer voor de EU, waar cognitieve dissonantie in beleidskringen tot dusver een rationeel klimaatbeleid heeft geblokkeerd.
Wat is een rationeel klimaatbeleid? Het antwoord is eenvoudig. In dit geval is het enige rationele beleid überhaupt géén beleid.
Voor klimaatactivisten is er thans een periode van introspectie aangebroken naar de vraag wat er fout ging. Zoals zo vaak het geval is, lijkt hierbij in eerste instantie te worden gedacht aan 'miscommunicatie' als belangrijke oorzaak van het falen. Het ontwerpen van nieuw communicatiestrategieën is inmiddels in volle gang, waarbij zelfs de filantropische tak van Google (waarvan het bestaan mij tot dusver onbekend was) haar diensten heeft aangeboden.
Maar dat zal allemaal niets helpen. En gelukkig maar, want er is weliswaar een klimaat – geen klimaat'ontkenner' zal dat ontkennen – maar helemaal geen klimaat'probleem' – behalve dan dat het altijd wel ergens te warm is of te koud, dan wel te nat of te droog.
Onder de titel, 'Global Warming Hysteria: Alarmists’ Postmortem Begins', schrijft Wesley J. Smith:

There is an interesting article in The New Republic about why the Greens failed politically across the board in the last two years. From “Blame Game: Has the Green Movement Been a Miserable Flop?” What the hell went wrong? For months now, environmentalists have been asking themselves that question, and it’s easy to see why. After Barack Obama vaulted into the White House in 2008, it really did look like the United States was, at long last, going to do something about global warming. Scientists were united on the causes and perils of climate change. Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth had stoked public concern. Green groups in D.C. had rallied around a consensus solution – a cap-and-trade program for carbon emissions – and had garnered support from a few major companies like BP and Duke Energy. Both Obama and his opponent, John McCain, were on board. And, so, environmental advocates prepared a frontal assault on Congress. May as well order the victory confetti, right? Instead, the climate push was a total flop.

Vervolgens schenkt hij aandacht aan het Nisbet-Rapport:

On Tuesday, Matthew Nisbet, a communications professor at American University, released a hefty 84-page report trying to figure out why climate activism flopped so miserably in the past few years. Nisbet’s report is already causing controversy: Among other things, he argues that, contrary to popular belief, greens weren’t badly outspent by industry groups and that media coverage of climate science wasn’t really a problem. And he raises questions about whether greens have been backing the wrong policy measures all along. Is he right? Have environmentalists been fundamentally misguided all this while? Or were they just unlucky? No, they brought it on themselves. I have been trying to explain the problem in post after post. Here are my 10 answers to the question, “Why the belly flop?” in no particular order (and this isn’t an all inclusive list) [Noot HL: Ik heb hem een beetje aangepast en ingekort]:

1.Anti humanism (deep misanthropy).

2. Increased radicalism.

3. Al Gore.

4. Panic mongering

5. Contradictory Pandering to the Weather of the Moment: All severe weather events became “what we would expect from global warming.” Snow? Global warming! No Snow? Global warming! Drought? Global Warming! Flood? Ditto.

6. Climategate and the UN IPCC's Uncredible Report.

7. Unscientific Stacked Decks: Heterodox thinking in science was damned, with skeptics accused of being like Holocaust Deniers.

8. Cold winters: People felt the chill and no amount of arguing could convince them it was all about the heat.

9.Alternative Media: The more the MSM tried to push the global warming meme, the more alternative sites such as Climate Depot and Watts Up With That sprouted. The information they presented was credible enough to convince many that the “consensus” was as much political as scientific.

10.Word Games: First it was “global warming.” Then, it was “climate change.” Then, “climate weirding.” When you are reduced to word engineering, rightly or wrongly, people begin to smell a rat.

En de kers op de taart:

11. Green Became the New Red: Environmentalism became a front for Left Wing economic collectivism and political authoritarianism. People came to perceive that the movement would reduce human freedom and promote socialist policies.

I don’t think anyone opposes transforming our energy creation to methods that are more environmentally friendly. But that is a generational project. People are not going to support lowering their living standards in the many years it will take to make that transformation. If Greens want to succeed, they should listen to Lomborg more and Al Gore and the IPCC less.

Lees verder hier.
Het lijkt mij niet waarschijnlijk dat milieu/klimaatradikalinski's deze anlyse zullen onderschrijven. Dat is ook maar beter zo. Des te sneller zullen zij zichzelf marginaliseren. Een zegen voor de mensheid!
Ga verder met lezen
Dit vind je misschien ook leuk
Laat mensen jouw mening weten