South African Live Earth organizer viewing climate change through blinders
If anyone doubts that Global Warming has become the world's penultimate bogeyman, they need look no further than the excuses offered by the organizers of Johannesberg, South Africa's Live Earth concert.
"We're expecting 10,000 here tonight," said John Langford. "It's a bit chilly, and we've had a strange winter. Is it climate change?"
Langord also noted that it recently snowed in Johannesberg for the first time in 25 years.
Aside from the absurdity of blaming the poor turn-out on climate change (the concert is supposed to be in support of climate change-fighting efforts -- people turning out is support for belief in climate change; apparently people not showing up is the same), Langford reveals an intriguing undercurrent underlying the climate change lobby.
Simply put, climate change has taken on all the characterstics of a virtual reality ideology.
Originally posited by Norman Mailer, a virtual reality ideology has a number of characteristics. First off, it's a closed system. There are a very limited number of possibilities that an individual adhering to a virtual reality belief system are able to explore. According to Mailer, there are few legimiate answers, but even fewer legitimate questions within such a system. The intellectual options of anyone ahdering to a virtual reality ideology are severely limited.
According to Mailer, however, the most important element of a virtual reality belief system is that, no matter what question is asked, there is one answer underlying the entire system, and that is the one that the individual had before the question was ever asked. In this case, the answer is always climate change, even if it isn't necessarily global warming.
Thus, no matter what is being considered, the answer that many proponents of the climate change virtual reality will offer is climate change.
This is very interesting considering that the top concern of most climate change lobbyists is global warming. Yet so many will also point to increased cold weather as evidence of "climate change" (merely a broader term for the global warming phenomenon), and evidence that human activitiy is the overwhelming cause.
Yet, also consider that the climate change lobby relies heavily on the scientifically-demonstrable greenhouse effect to support their claims. Yet, the greenhouse effect can only be used to explain global warming, not global cooling.
Despite this logical difficulty, individuals such as Langford resort to climate change alarmism when trying to explain a weather pattern that, since it has happened only twice in the last 25 years, is still extremely rare.
And all of this despite the fact that poor publicity is more likely the explaination for the failure of his little concert.