GREENS AS A MESSIANIC SECT

A reader writes:

I get the feeling that as the Limits to Growth forecasts have proven to be wrong, ...and even later 'follow up' reports from the Club of Rome were generally more optimistic, ...that the global warming models of the IPCC were "taken over" to provide new justification for the same agenda by the faithful.

There are of course parallels with millennialist sects which make confident predictions of the end of the world, and when it fails to happen, shift the date out, after a new revelation. Like the millennialists, there is also some "wishful thinking" in their end of the world predictions. They are really quite keen to see the sinful old world go. When greenhouse sea-level concerns first made a splash, there were predictions of the inundating of coastal cities, melting ice caps etc.

Although they still argue that sea levels are going up, most of the scientific greenhouse people have, in recent years, substantially lowered the expected increase. When the newer figures came out, many greens seemed a bit disappointed, as if sinful industrial man 'deserved' ecological punishment. Similarly if you mention to greens, the advances in carbon sequestration or the Tom Gold hypothesis that petroleum may be abiotic and thus may be much more abundant than previously thought, ...their first reaction is almost of disappointment. They so much wanted to impose sackcloth and ashes on everyone. Energy conservation or recycling to many of them is not so much a policy option that may or may not make sense, so much as punishment and penance. "Save energy, save a soul".

As Lewis Carroll, wrote in Alice in Wonderland "No! No! Sentence first - verdict afterwards!" Just as energy use is 'bad', trees are 'good'. Evidence is not required. So we hear the mantra that tree planting, old growth forests and paper recycling are "good for greenhouse".

I like trees and forests too, but only young rapidly growing plants actually absorb atmospheric CO2 and even then only temporarily. See here. If you wanted to use trees (why not bamboo?) to fight greenhouse, you would plant new trees, chop down old ones, turn them into paper, ban recycled paper and require that all paper waste be buried in poorly designed landfills (or kept in attics) to prevent biodegradation. Arizona garbage archaeologists (!) have shown that newspapers buried that way are good enough to read decades later. See here

****************************