James Lovelock: Humans are too stupid to prevent climate change

Oh you wound me with your personal attacks, mister symbology of cutting off the "left".

and you know really analogies used to disparage people by disparaging those with mental health issues is pretty non-acceptable around here, and indeed I noted it in another thread, here is hoping the mods get a handle on this type of bigotry around here.

so I will go with the baiting.....given thepersonal attack i received over it, have you yet reread the rabble agreement you signed?

If you believe that Lovelock even partly gets it, FM, the planets must indeed be in alignment.  :)

My problem with Lovelock has always been that he comes so close to the big picture but then is prevented from actually seeing it due to class, privilege, and his own bias against those "beneath" him. Nothing speaks to Lovelock's myopia than his failure to detect the hole in the ozone layer. Having had the brilliance to deveop the device to detect CFCs in the atmosphere, he never looked for the consequnces of CFCs because he didn't believe there would be any. 

Lovelock wrote:

One of the main obstructions to meaningful action is "modern democracy", he added. "Even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while."

Yeah, because what we need is less democracy in a world where those suffering the worst consequences of environmental degradation have no authentic representation. And authoritarianism will enable whom exactly?

remind wrote:

Frustrated Mess wrote:

Again Lovelock partly gets it. If corporations fund the denialists and corporations also fund politicians, arguably democracy has been defacto suspended quite some time ago and ceding to the corporate/political power without even the window dressing of elections accomplishes all of nothing.

This is exactly the case, moreover they are also funding the "big" believers and have been since they started accepting funding from Pew Charities and others of their ilk .....including direct corporate donations.

 

James Lovelock, trained physician at war's end (tropical diseases,his specialty) found himself employed by NASA to design the equipment that would analyze Martian atmosphere. His inventive brilliance earned him enough to give him an independent scientific life, and he used it to develop the now accepted Gaia theory of Earth's thermal balance. Fortunately, he had teamed up with Lynn Margulis whose brilliance in biology gave his theory the evidence needed. Both challenged mainstream science, and both overturned convention (and as FM points out, Lovelock is mortal...  :D)

All Lovelock has been saying for three decades now, is that Homo sapiens, a species among millions of others, should understand what it has been doing to Earth's atmosphere since the beginning of the industrial revolution.   He's not a politician, he's just telling it like it is. He has never been dependent on corporate handouts - they go to the technicians who devise new packaging for the engineered foods being developed to counter the effects of the climate change that Lovelock has so accurately predicted.

If the Great Unread realized the enormity of catastrophic changes in life on Earth that is threatened by the increasing accumulation of greenhouse gases absorbing the sun's energy, corporate and political life would/could be swiftly brought to heel in an adjusted political economy that was based on survival, not accumulated greed. But as we see happening in the convulsive failure and weakening of economies, concern for Earth can quickly reduce to concern for individual survival in the Darwinian social world of capitalism. We must have growth, then we will contemplate the new light bulbs necessary to save the species.

To condemn Lovelock for not realizing the full potential of his device for measuring atmospheric CFC content (he put it together in his lab at home at a material cost of about $300) while the world's biologists are made to fall into line by the power of his reasoning, is nitpicking writ very large. Why not just repudiate science itself as the frightened folk chasing about for answers from Allah or Jesus are doing, relax and let a pre-Enlightenment worldview wash over us, along with the world's rising oceans, and wind up a people wailing as they wait for the salvation of a second coming?

George Victor wrote:

remind wrote:

Frustrated Mess wrote:

Again Lovelock partly gets it. If corporations fund the denialists and corporations also fund politicians, arguably democracy has been defacto suspended quite some time ago and ceding to the corporate/political power without even the window dressing of elections accomplishes all of nothing.

This is exactly the case, moreover they are also funding the "big" believers and have been since they started accepting funding from Pew Charities and others of their ilk .....including direct corporate donations.

 

If the Great Unread realized the enormity of catastrophic changes in life on Earth that is threatened by the increasing accumulation of greenhouse gases absorbing the sun's energy, corporate and political life would/could be swiftly brought to heel in an adjusted political economy that was based on survival, not accumulated greed. But as we see happening in the convulsive failure and weakening of economies, concern for Earth can quickly reduce to concern for individual survival in the Darwinian social world of capitalism. We must have growth, then we will contemplate the new light bulbs necessary to save the species.

As Fidel has stated the world (an aggregate of all the scales of formal politics) runs more like a mafia than a democracy. People are already coerced and forced into making certain life choices regarding consumption and living; they lack certain agency over their destiny and, most of all, the ability to make choices that are favourable to their well-being and that of the earth.

Replacing corporate execs and unscrupulous politicians with scientists is not going to empower humans and make them responsible for the environment.

remind wrote:

Not sure why you wrote that long missive to me, George, on Lovelock,  interesting though it is I suppose for some not knowing about him.

At any rate, was not speaking of him, when I mentioned what you quoted,  was speaking of other environmental charities, especially those in Canada, who get their funding in a large part from Pew Charities, while others  like Berman get their funding from for profit hydro companies.

Then of course one has to wonder about Green Peace these days, given they just hired Berman.

 

 

Just seemed to me, remind, that when you agreed with FM, our in-house environmental fatalist, on the question of "environmental" agencies, that a postive, albeit naive note should be left out there in the ether.  :D

from the comments:

Oxford Kevin wrote:

As someone who has been convinced that AGW is happening. I have never had much time for Lovelock and this piece doesn't make me warm to him any further.

I don't agree that Democracy is the problem. Actually I think it is a lack of real democracy that is part of the problem. We need a democracy that encourages active involvement of all citizens rather than making cynics of us all by this only just representative democracy that is corrupted by the need for large corporate financing of political parties and the need to return favours. So I am not at all in favour of giving up even the limited democracy we have but instead think we should be fighting for more.

so, we go with Lovelock's assertion that the world is doomed if we don't embrace nuclear power, and his current assertion that democracy is an impediment to saving the planet....and presto! we have nuclear armed eco-dictatorships!  awesome...where do i sign up?

George Victor wrote:

 

To condemn Lovelock for not realizing the full potential of his device for measuring atmospheric CFC content (he put it together in his lab at home at a material cost of about $300) while the world's biologists are made to fall into line by the power of his reasoning, is nitpicking writ very large. Why not just repudiate science itself as the frightened folk chasing about for answers from Allah or Jesus are doing, relax and let a pre-Enlightenment worldview wash over us, along with the world's rising oceans, and wind up a people wailing as they wait for the salvation of a second coming?

George, sometimes you're just full of shit. Lovelock did not look for any harm being caused by CFCs because he did not believe CFCs could cause any harm. A scientist always keeps an open mind. Lovelock's has been closed to any criticism or potential harm of industrial chemistry and his work which included developing products for many of those industries that have been enriched poisoning the earth and, yes, contributing to its warming.

He is critical of and dismissive of Rachel Carson, in particular, and all environmentalists in general. He is dismissive of the great harm caused by Chernobyl and is blind to the victims of that tragedy. He dismisses the critical role of biodiversity in maintaining and contributing to life on the planet. He is an apologist and friend of the nuclear energy.

To say he has never been dependent on industry is absurd. He did not earn his wealth and very comfortable living tinkering in his basement. Don't forget, George, I read Lovelock. He is a man of privilege who has refused to acknowledge his own role and that of his class and his generation for the state we are in. Today I watched him on YouTube saying "we didn't mean to warm the planet". We have known since the 70s that we were warming the planet. We did mean to warm the planet at least since the time we first became aware of it and placed corporate profit ahead of planetary health. And I'd bet if 40 years ago anyone had told Lovelock that the industrial world to which he was so committed was warming the climate just as CFCs was creating a hole in ozone, he would have said "hogwash" and would never have looked because he already knew the answer.

Of course his inventions gave him the independence to carry out the research that was a breakthrough in the until then tight-assed world of biology and the earth sciences...each in their place, mustn't muddy the waters you know. 

I knew after reading his Ages of Gaia in the early 80s that our species was in for a rough ride...that is why I was prompted to be one of the founders of the Green Party of Ontario.  And of course he admits to being of the generation that brought us to this perilous point, but that does not take away from his very rasoned, scientific approach to solutions. You want to carry on your little, moralizing attacks while the biosphere  packs it in and yet offer nothing in exchange.

As a member of the first pollution probe in Ontario, organized and working in the winter of 69-70, I can tell you that the concerns for our impact on the planet back then were for poisoning of the land and water...atmospheric concerns were muted because Lobelock was still formulating the theory by which biology enters the picture of thermal changes from greenhouse gases.  If you were reading something in the 70s it must have come to you by osmosis, since it certainly was not public knowledge. He has said many times that he is sorry that the green movement is alienated from him because of his pro-nuclear stance, but the idea of going down in flames seems to appeal to the opponents of nuclear, despite its clearly positive effect in hundreds of stations in countries that would otherwise burn coal.

The only reason you hear of him is because he offers the most coherent explanation of what is happening and what must be done.  The government of the U.K is already forming policy based on his science. But please, until you actually formulate and propose alternative remedial action, be less inventive in your venemous, anal  carping That's a good chap.

Frustrated Mess wrote:

Grrrrrr....

Quote:

To test this hypothesis, in 1971 he took his machine on a research vessel bound for the Antarctic. He discovered the pollutant everywhere, and within a few years the data he collected were being investigated by researchers interested in the destruction of the ozone layer. Strangely, Lovelock initially dismissed the idea that CFCs could be responsible for the ozone damage, and appeared as chief scientific witness during US Senate hearings for Du Pont, the main manufacturer of the offending chemicals. Because he presented an objective view of the science as it was known at the time, Lovelock claims that he could as well have appeared for the other side, if only they had asked him.

The New York Review of Books

Who is asking him about nuclear today?

That's how science works. His view of the question excluded CFCs as a factor because his methodology and initial theorizing caused him to miss it.  But you know, only in the days of Cromwell did folks dig up the mortal remains and condemn them to the rubbish heap.  Lovelock has, of course, said that he was wrong.  And he has invited all of science to prove he and Margulis wrong in their Gaia formulation.  Safe so far.   But, then, you do look for perfection in all things, eh? And will not doubt winkle out further facts proving his perfidy.

Quote:

Lovelock is often described as a 'green' scientist, largely because of the Gaia hypothesis - even though he is a long-standing supporter of nuclear power. He is also regularly described as 'independent' because he is not formally employed by any government, company or organisation. However, 'freelance' would be a more accurate description, as he has worked for big business and the security services since he went 'independent'.

Quote:

In 1973 Lovelock published the results of his work on CFCs in the scientific journal Nature. He concluded about CFCs that "the presence of these compounds constitutes no conceivable hazard".

Quote:

Lovelock also admits in Homage to Gaia that one of the instruments he designed, to monitor the movement of cattle as they grazed, 'led me to participate in the removal of hedgerows - one of the most destructive changes that happened to the English Countryside after the Second World War. I regret to say I played a small part in this act of national ecocide I loved the English country scene passionately, yet I was as thoughtlessly responsible for its destruction as was a greedy shareholder of an agribusiness firm, or a landowner out to maximize the return from his broad hectares."

Quote:

Lovelock denies that Chernobyl has caused massive human health impacts. He maintains a position that there were only 45 deaths ...

A recent report by leading scientists and researchers commissioned by European parliamentary groups, Greenpeace International and medical foundations in Britain, Germany, Ukraine, Scandinavia and other countries suggests that the number of casualties may have bee far higher: "At least 500,000 people - perhaps more - have already died out of the 2 million people who were officially classed as victims of Chernobyl in Ukraine".

Quote:

Contrary to the 2004 media coverage, Lovelock has long been an advocate of nuclear power - he has been on record as a supporter of nuclear power for 20 years ... Contrary to public perception Lovelock has long-standing ties to the nuclear industry and its supporters .. He is a Patron of Supporters of Nuclear Energy, whose Secretary is Sir Bernard Ingham  ... He was also awarded a medal by the nuclear power company British Energy in November 2006, "in recognition of his major contributions to the fields of medicine, biology, instrument science, and geophysiology".

Quote:

Lovelock started working for Shell in 1963, having regular monthly meetings with the Shell boss Lord Rothschild. He states in Homage to Gaia: 'My experiences with Shell left me firmly with the impression that they are neither stupid nor villains. On the contrary I know of no other human agency that plans as far ahead or considers the environment more closely'.

Quote:

'During my years with the Security Services I developed an instinct for discretion. This was invaluable in my work with multinational companies and other government agencies, where I discovered much more about their workings than I needed to know'.

Quote:

Lovelock was also one of the original signatories of the 'Declaration in Support of Protecting Nature With High-yield Farming and Forestry.' Other signatories are Patrick Moore, the ex-Greenpeace founder and now Greenpeace's bete noir, who runs an anti-environmantal PR company called Greenspirit Strategies, Dennis Avery of the Centre for Global Food Issues which is part of to the right-wing Hudson Institute and Eugene Lapointe one of the leaders of the international 'Wise Use Movement' and World Conservation Trust Foundation /IWMC World Conservation Trust and Norman Boulag, a rabidly pro-GM scientist.[23]

Dennis Avery is one of the main people behind many of the attacks on organic food and author of the inspirationally-titled Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic: The Environmental Triumph of High-Yield Farming. Avery sees himself as a missionary, promoting the high-tech farming industries: pesticides, irradiation, factory farming, and the newcomer: biotechnology.[24][25]

Avery is behind misleading claims that organic food is dangerous and is the originator of the 'E. Coli myth' - that people eating organic foods are at a significantly higher risk of food poisoning. He calls organic food a 'gigantic marketing lie'.[25]

Eugene Lapointe runs the organisation the International Wildlife Management Consortium, a coalition of international hunting, shooting, whaling, right-wing and wise use organisations.[26]

Other signatories include Bruce Ames, the controversial cancer scientist on the board of climate-sceptic Fred Singer's SEPP and a Director of the George C Marshall Institute and academic advisor to the Reason Foundation, and Klaus Amman, a vehemently pro-GM scientist.

Sourcewatch

Lovelock's stance on democracy is science-based?

Not bad for a 90 year old.  Looks like his evaluation of CFCs impact was dependent on the bad scientific information he had to rely on - and perhaps the lying bastards you quote to demean him, FM> Go figure.  Doesn't get any more optimistic in his old age, does he?  But maybe he's wrong (and no, please, no more "evidence" of his failure, FM That's not science, doncha know?)

"Copenhagen was doomed to fail. But I think it was worth their while trying. A lot of people put their hearts into it. But I've never felt entirely happy with that sort of environmental wing-ding. It's obscene to have 10,000 people flying to Bali or whatever to talk about the environment. It just shows how hopeless humans are."

He almost has trouble being consistent in a single answer these days. But he's always available to the media himself, as much as any other British 'green' that he chastises for propagandizing. (having trouble with the quote html so I just italicized).

Sourcewatch, which you would malign while identifying yourself with a fraud who can so easily dismiss the tragedy and victims of Chernobyl, is one of the most respected sources of information on the Internet, George. I have just lost my respect for you. It seems you would rather crawl up the ass of fake than keep your eyes open for false prophets while maintaining friendships even if only virtual.

I've nothing more to say to you.

There you go, all anal and agitated again, FM.  You have nothing to say on the revelation about the effect of bad science at the time of the ozone hole controversy?   Oh, forgot, mustn't meddle with the virtuous in their moral ascendancy. 

Holier than thou, by the way, is saying that others were not concerned with the terrible effects of Chernobyl. You condemn Lovelock for his superior tone, but he is no match for your image of self.  

George Victor wrote:

There you go, all anal and agitated again, FM.  You have nothing to say on the revelation about the effect of bad science at the time of the ozone hole controversy?   Oh, forgot, mustn't meddle with the virtuous in their moral ascendancy. 

Holier than thou, by the way, is saying that others were not concerned with the terrible effects of Chernobyl. You condemn Lovelock for his superior tone, but he is no match for your image of self.  

It was HIS bad science you dope. He invented the device to detect the CFCs. He was the one who recognized CFCs everywhere. He is the one who reported CFCs as being prevalent. He made the bad scientific finding, based on no evidence but his own belief, that CFCs were of "no conceivable hazard".

Jesus! Are you truly this obtuse? Now leave me alone.

Frustrated Mess]</p> <p>[quote=George Victor wrote:

There you go, all anal and agitated again, FM.  You have nothing to say on the revelation about the effect of bad science at the time of the ozone hole controversy?   Oh, forgot, mustn't meddle with the virtuous in their moral ascendancy. 

Holier than thou, by the way, is saying that others were not concerned with the terrible effects of Chernobyl. You condemn Lovelock for his superior tone, but he is no match for your image of self.  

[/quote

It was HIS bad science you dope. He invented the device to detect the CFCs. He was the one who recognized CFCs everywhere. He is the one who reported CFCs as being prevalent. He made the bad scientific finding, based on no evidence but his own belief, that CFCs were of "no conceivable hazard".

Jesus! Are you truly this obtuse? Now leave me alone.

He depended on others who had the means to advise him about activity in the ozone holes themselves. He based his conclusion on their bad science. You have just read, above, that they let him down. But, somehow, your hatred for the old fellow does not allow you to accept his word on it.  You have to follow up the notoriously dependable sources of the IT world. 

Leave you alone?  Please stop following up the Lovelock trail.  Take a vacation.

Sometimes I wonder if the Great Unread isn't a huge fucking mirror in front of GV.  Do you just read Bageant over and over?

RevolutionPlease wrote:

Sometimes I wonder if the Great Unread isn't a huge fucking mirror in front of GV.  Do you just read Bageant over and over?

If you ever encounter a large mirror in the bedroom of your hotel, you'll know you've found one of those.  You could use a vacation as well, RP. Bageant has found himself a nice little watering hole in Mexico where he is having FUN  describing Canadian and U.S. retirees tottering about in the sun, smoking it up, and generally being old-fartish.  Such places let you get rid of the anger and venom.  Restore balance.