Two questions...

There are a couple of questions that are bugging the hell out of me, and have been for some time. Being only a thickie and not able to understand all the physics that get bandied about, although to me a lot of the seemingly high powered and jargon filled papers seem to come from the 'baffle with bullshit' school of thinking. Lots of talk about proxies which aren't, and peer reviews which tell John Q Public next to nothing. Although having had engineering training I'll warrant I know a little more about latent heat and the method of mixtures molecular weights, and materials technology than many AGW 'believers'. You know, boring stuff like real physics, and not the fantasy versions you hear being taught.

First question. Despite multiple failures of varied 'Global Warming' doomsaying prophesies, and with physical proof and empirical evidence (Arctic not melting, lower average global temperatures) now pointing to Carbon Dioxide being less than a bit player in the natural cycles of Earth's climate, why do high level politicians still insist that "we're aaalll dooomed" unless we stop giving off CO2?

Second question. Why did various governments 'bail out' certain banks and effectively nationalise them so readily?

Now I have my own thoughts on both matters, and would like to link both questions to a common thread. My logic may be less than impeccable, as I possibly lack certain pertinent facts. On the other hand, my bullshit detector array has been twitching wildly whenever various politicians and soi disant 'environmentalists' pontificate upon either topic.

The easy answer to both is 'follow the money', but where is that going? Over the past twenty (Possibly forty plus) years by my observation, we have seen a gradual sea change in the power structures of the Western Democracies. A new political elite has arisen and slowly supplanted the old order. This new and very loose grouping, come from a predominantly academic background, and go from University Activist to Party Faithful to Elected Representative because this is their alleyway to power. The respective party machines they are part of are geared up to fight elections more effectively than an independent ever could because they make use of the societal polarisations e.g. Conservative vs Liberal and so on, that we are all used to following.

Because the new elite have no real money such as currency based on finance derived from an agricultural or industrial financial base, they cannot rely on the old 'mutual' system and must therefore create their own. Said financial power base relies on the creation of the putative 'Carbon economy' in which the investment houses can speculate. The new elite need to consolidate their power base with new channels of money, hence the 'need' for a 'carbon trading' which appear little more than a tax masquerading as a commodity. This seems behind all the otherwise groundless scare stories we the public are bombarded with.

The investment banks which gambled with 'sub prime' products (High risk mortgages) over a property bubble are another. The subsequent collapse of several high profile investment banks can be cited as a proof. Bail outs were required because the new elite, whose speculative fortunes these banks manage, would have otherwise faced penury when their dosh was subject to a massive and some would say necessary deflation. The rest of us would have been hurt financially by the contraction of these investment markets, but not nearly so badly as the new elite. But better the little people should go to the wall, rather than them eh? Hence the mortgaging of our own, and our children's futures.

If asked, I would prophesy a further collapse because a certain level of genuine wealth generating economic activity is required to support such large political edifices. I think it was Terry Pratchett who pithily observed that it takes forty people with their feet on the ground to support one with his head in the air (Small Gods).

Now all this imperfect thinking can easily be dismissed as the ravings of a solo whack job conspiracy theorist, but being that particular lone voice I'm not so sure. I was bright enough to see the current mess coming and sell up almost at the top of the market. Had Mrs S and I stayed put in the same jobs and house we'd both be hating every minute, and probably a lot worse off; both in terms of quality of life, and financially. We got out just in time.

Now whilst I do not ascribe to the 'Bilderburg' and 'New World Order' conspiracy theories, I do recognise that the power structure of the Western Democracies is changing and has changed. We are getting a very different breed of politician selected to be on our ballot papers in the late 20th and early 21st centuries because of the highly polarized party system, and the reluctance of voters to change political horses or gamble on an independent. What the electorate need is statesmanship and true leadership, but all we get is empty rhetoric and cleverly scripted sound bites from well oiled party machines, those highly specialised fund raising and vote catching juggernauts. In some respects, voting can be rather like going to a fancy restaurant and only being presented with a set and highly limited menu. Democracy? Mmmmm, sort of.

Not that my observations and opinions are worth the hard disk they sit on of course.

Current reading:
'Meltdown' by Thomas E Woods
'The Wizard of Menlo Park' a biography of Thomas Alva Edison by Randall Stross

On a more useful note, my casting technique is improving. I did the most perfect lobbing cast of my entire life this afternoon. Pity it stripped all the line off my reel leaving me without lure or line. Bummer.