Posted on June 19, 2019
Spot The Loony
Trump has a chin-wag with Prince Charles
During his recent visit to England, President Trump met with Prince Charles to talk about “climate change.” Well, it’s not all that clear that Trump had that in mind, but if you’re going to have a conversation with the prince, it will inevitably be on that topic. Attempting to discuss anything else would be like trying to dissuade Cliff Clavin from telling you about his vacation to Florida.
Reports of the meeting got it half right, in that they portrayed one of the two participants as a cartoonish, egomaniacal blowhard who is intellectually incurious, and prone to spreading baseless, alarmist propaganda. Where they got it wrong is that they applied that description to the wrong man.
Henny Youngman used to joke that his doctor had given him six months to live, but when Youngman said he couldn’t pay his bill, the doctor gave him another six months. Prince Charles has been practicing that kind of ecological medicine for at least 20 years now. In 1999, he warned that manmade global warming would cause whole nations to sink underwater within a decade. When that time was up, he revised his prediction to 100 months from that point. That deadline has expired also, and still the prince calls “climate change” a “wolf at the door.”
How could Charles’ predictions be so wrong? For the same reason that all eco-alarmists’ predictions are wrong: they start from completely ludicrous premises. In the case of global warming, the main premise is that carbon dioxide – as in, the stuff that breath is made of – as in, the stuff on which all plant life subsists – is a pollutant. In addition to that are liberals’ assumptions that they are somehow or another at one with nature, and that therefore they know exactly what the earth’s temperature and its atmospheric CO2 levels ought to be.
The hypothesis of manmade global warming (Let’s not flatter it be calling it a theory) is essentially an obsessive compulsive disorder on a global scale. Never mind that everyone knows the mean temperature of the earth has never been constant, but has gone through rising and falling cycles without any help or hindrance from mankind. Never mind that atmospheric CO2 levels are both minuscule and wildly variable, such that the earth has had no problem compensating for its fluctuations over time. No, to those who presume to speak for science, our ecosystem is so precariously balanced that even the slightest deviation will make the whole world go kerplooey.
Not content to warn of our geological demise, the self-appointed voices of science find excuses to blame the fictitious phenomenon for every real and imagined negative development in the world. Charles even attributes the war in Syria to manmade global warming. He starts with the totally inaccurate characterization of it as a “conflict over scarce resources,” combined with his peculiar assumption that a drought in the desert must not have occurred naturally. No, he believes the reason for this Mad Max scenario is that the lack of rainfall in the Arabian Desert is caused by an increase in CO2 emissions, meaning that the real villains in the Syrian conflict are – Wait for it? – our cars! That’s how loony Prince Charles is. Why, if looniness were earwax, he wouldn’t even have enough storage space.
The goofiest thing Trump is known to have said during their exchange is that “the United States right now has among the cleanest climates there are.” Referring to an American climate sounds silly, because “climate” by definition is a regional set of characteristics. The Everglades, the Ozarks and the Mojave Desert do not share a climate. If Trump is talking loony, though, Charles is outdoing him many times over, whenever he refers to the “global climate,” or simply “The Climate,” as if the entire world were geologically, topographically and meteorologically homogeneous.
We know the vaunted “scientific consensus” is a sham, among other reasons because its members make no effort to use scientifically precise terminology. “Global warming,” for example, is a wholly more accurate term for the phenomenon they believe in than “climate change.” Trump is right to question the activists’ rejection of the former term in favor of the latter. If manmade CO2 really is causing global warming, and everyone but a few contrarian cranks agrees that it’s happening, then what is the motivation behind its rebranding? If our news media had any journalistic integrity, they’d be hounding the prince for an answer, instead of lazily scolding the president for asking the question.
The Shinbone: The Frontier of the Free Press