“Global Warming Hoax Hoax” is excellent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=N4wxHCYevTY
Thanks for sending.
When the CGI female notes that the media present false “debates” by pitting uninformed opinion against scientitific finding, she goes on to say that opinionated sound bites can be spewed in a matter of seconds whereas scientific findings require lengthy explanation.
"Global Warming Hoax Hoax" reminds me of fine work done by Minnesota scientist, John Abraham, who explains global warming in a point by point refutation of "climate deniers."
Some of the most adroit denial has been propagated by British Lord, Christopher Moncton.
Professor Abraham's explanation of climate science (as it relate to Moncton's relentless mendacity) is meticulously well done but - ironically - hobbled by its very meticulousness.
Complex scientific matters cannot be clarified through sound bites, whereas sound bites are an excellent vehicle for presenting falsehood as Truth.
1.) Lord Christopher Moncton - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley
2.) A comprehensive view of Monckton's global warming denial - http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jun/08/monckton-gift-climate-denial
3.) Minnesota climate scientist, John Abraham - http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham/
(I also recommend NPR’s “Climate Change: Public Skeptical, Scientists Sure” -http://www.npr.org/2011/06/21/137309964/climate-change-public-skeptical-scientists-sure)
Recent work by Jonathan Haidt, Drew Westen and E.O. Wilson focuses the psychological dimension of each person's "political positioning.”
1.) Bill Moyers interviews Jonathan Haidt, author of “The Righteous Mind.”
“How Conservatives and Liberals See the World.”
2.) Interview with Drew Weston, author of “The Political Brain.”
3.) E.O. Wilson: Our primary affiliation is to “the tribe.” http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/04/01/biologist-e-o-wilson-on-why-humans-like-ants-need-a-tribe.html
We have long known that humans "hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest.”
It is now coming clear that our motivation for "hearing what we want to hear" is rooted in axiomatic norms consciously and unconsciously communicated by our social, political and religious "tribes."
In addition to such tribal conditioning from infancy on, humans are also subject to cerebral re-wiring based on "social control" of "individual thought."
In recent years, I have grown keenly aware that conservative Christians are heirs to a medieval mindset subsequently ratified by Protestantism's focus on "individual conscience." Together, these harmonic outlooks established a conservative moral code that was (and is) radically individual.
Furthermore, these self-sealed believers are existentially compelled to disavow any need for "collective” human action, and, as a result, the catastrophes of global warming accumulate.
If conservative Christians were to acknowledge any need for “collective” action, their centuries-old assumption that all morality (and all responsibility) is individual-and-personal would give way to a categorically different assumption that large swathes of morality impose social, political and economic obligations that can only be discharged by collective action.
According to the received wisdom, eternal salvation has “always” depended on each individual's “personal relationship with God.” It is therefore “impossible” for Christian conservatives to conceive any need for collective action without simultaneously acknowledging that collective action obliges abandonment of the only "ground" that guarantees personal “salvation.”
This situation is complicated by a widespread Christian belief in "providential patriarchy."
According to the patriarchal view of Providence, God knows our needs and always answers them individually.
Part of this “bargain” is that God simultaneously insures – by miracle if necessary -- the smooth functioning of all “large-scale, over-arching, non-individual systems” such as environmental stability, dependable water-and-energy supplies, and providential "healing" for everyone who submits to The Patriarchal Order mandated by God.
If anything goes wildly wrong with this divinely-ordered scenario, Christian conservatives are prepared to defer, immediately, to the massive psychological "default" that God has, at long last, chosen to unleash The End Times.
Ironically, this psychological arabesque supplies bedrock justification for personal irresponsibility, and does so in the minds of those Christians most eager to proclaim personal responsibility.
By this weird gymnastic contortion, Christian conservatives obviate all need for the kind of personal responsibility they have always touted as The Foundation of all that is good - whether "the good" is individual, social, political or economic.
In the end, conservative Christians profess The Transcendental Good of Religious Freedom while painting themselves into "ideological corners" from which there is NO escape unless they admit their individual sinfulness as unfaithful servants who no longer trust in God's providence.
Which brings us back to The Middle Ages and The Protestant Reformation when individual conscience (completely divorced from collective conscience) was deemed "the human half" of a two-way bargain in which all overarching "collective needs" were submitted -- with complete faithfulness! -- to the ministration of God’s Providence.
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 4:13 PM
To: Alan Archibald
Subject: The Climate Change "Hoax" Hoax
For several humourous cartoons, search youtube for xtranormal .