The End of Doom

Ronald Bailey at the House of Lords on The End of Doom

The Global Warming Policy Foundation interviews me about the book too.

|

BaileyHouseofLords
Julian Morris

As I made my way toward the Paris climate change conference, Benny Peiser, the director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London, very kindly invited to me last week to make a presentation about my new book, The End of Doom: Environmental Renewal in the Twenty-first Century. Lord Bernard Donoughue generously arranged for the discussion to be held in a committee room at the House of Lords.

Before the session, Peiser interviewed me for GWPF TV about my book and closely questioned me about my analysis of the science related to man-made global warming. We also discussed what sort of agreement might be reached at the Paris conference. I think it's fair to say that I think man-made global warming is more likely to cause significant problems for humanity as this century unfolds than do the folks at the GWPF. As I explain in my video interview, I think that the balance of the evidence supports my view, but the evidence is not beyond a reasonable doubt. I will be very happy to be proven wrong. Additionally, one must always keep in mind that what government is planning to do about global warming is likely to be worse than global warming.

In any case in include the video of my interview below.

Disclosure: I am very grateful to the GWPF for putting me up in a hotel room and buying me a delicious Chinese dinner.

NEXT: It's Time to Go After Those People!

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Tell me you at least got a decent glass of Port at the HoL?

    1. Port and a good cigar,heaven

  2. As I explain in my video interview, I think that the balance of the evidence supports my view, but the evidence is not beyond a reasonable doubt. I will be very happy to be proven wrong.

    SO YOU DRANK THE KOOL-AID!! I can’t take you seriously if you believe this crap!!!1

    1. “The science is not settled? That’s crazy talk.”

  3. Additionally, one must always keep in mind that what government is planning to do about global warming is likely to be worse than global warming.

    Likely? More like definitely. The only thing government is good at is making things worse.

    1. You misspelled ‘looting’.

      1. They’re not even that good at looting. Government is incompetent even before it is evil.

  4. If you’re talking about the *end* of doom, you probably shouldn’t wear that all-black get up.

    1. If Bailey wants to dress like a lesbian minister, that’s his business.

      1. Harsh, dude. Harsh.

    2. In all seriousness, can you talk about the “end of doom” and also maintain that man-made climate warming will cause significant problems” within 100 years? I mean, I’m not a climatologist. but am I fairly observant and do have a pretty decent long-term memory, and to date not only have none of the dire predictions come true, but model after model fails to match or even get near those predictions. Now, I definitely believe that the Earth’s climate has, does, and will change as a natural process, and I’m even willing to concede that human behavior might have had (or at least can have) an impact on those changes, but that’s about as far as I go. I call bullshit on the “catastrophic” bit, and I’m frankly not convinced of even Ron’s more modest “significant problems” angle.

      1. Significant problems don’t necessarily mean doom. As you say, climate does and will change naturally whether or not people have a huge impact, and people will have to deal with it. Sea level rise does seem to be something that is happening. It doesn’t matter why. People will have to deal with it. And economic growth is the best way to deal with it. People with money can adapt or move.

    3. If fully half your wardrobe is black and you choose your shirt, slacks, jacket, and tie at random, you will wind up wearing an all-black ensemble about twice a month.

      That’s just math, not that you climate-deniers would know anything about that.

  5. I always wanted to be in Lords.

    1. She went to Redondo High.

      I had a friend that went there. Used to pick her up in his hot rod and take her home everyday. He was really shy at the time, though. And he didn’t want to scare her off by making a move too soon.

      He who hesitates is lost.

      1. The House of Lords. I want a title and serfs.

    2. I’d think I’d rather be admitted to membership at Lords cricket ground.

  6. “Additionally, one must always keep in mind that what government is planning to do about global warming is likely to be worse than global warming.”

    Hear, hear!

    1. Those volcano gods aren’t going to propitiate *themselves,* you know.

      Now, if only we knew where to locate a virgin in Paris…

      1. The MENA immigrant community places a high value on virginity before marriage.

        1. That is known as a *joke.* You see, you take a stereotype – preferably exaggerated – and use it to make humor.

  7. [They] closely questioned me about my analysis of the science related to man-made global warming.

    Excuse me – science? After two decades of failed predictions and platitudes by doomsayers and Marxians, you still think there’s any science behind this?

    I think it’s fair to say that I think man-made global warming is more likely to cause significant problems for humanity as this century unfolds than do the folks at the GWPF

    It’s good to know what you think. I think your guesses are just as accurate as all of those climate models that predicted we would be living in Vulcan by this year and that we would be fighting for our women using lirpas.

    1. That’s why I always take Ron’s column. with a grain of salt.There is no ‘science’ that proves GW though.But,he needs to get to go to all the cool gatherings.

    2. As Ehrlich helpfully pointed out in his NYT interview, those were projections, not predictions. That makes it better because maths.

      1. All: May I suggest that you buy and read The End of Doom to find out just how deeply I have quaffed the Kool-Aid? I even explain why. However, I do not discuss the cocktail parties

        1. You SugarFree’d the link, Ron.

        2. If you hang out in the comments of Ron or Walker’s columns on a regular basis, at some point you have to buy their books, usually after bitching about how the Kindle price is higher than the dead-tree edition (which is no longer true for EoD, I’m happy to report). Otherwise it’s like walking past the Salvation Army Santa day after day, impervious to the suffering of the poor and the broken, without reaching into your drawstring pouch to pony up a few silver half dollars.

        3. Quaff some cocktails while you are there. I shall buy your book sirrah, as soon as I build a bunker. – prepper for the End of Doom

      2. It’s always projection with those types. /Epi

    3. And yet he’s willing to believe sodium intake isn’t an issue based on literally a handful of studies, some of which are grossly flawed, e.g. 24hr urinalysis showing excretion of 7-8 grams of salt. But predictions which have now failed at 97% CI are still ‘likely.’

      1. But predictions which have now failed at 97% CI are still ‘likely.’

        If that was what he was saying, you might have a point.

  8. The problem with energy is not that solar and wind are not effective and we need a better alternative or better version of them. It is a storage problem. Once a breakthrough comes is battery and fuel cell tech occurs, solar and wind become viable and cost effective, the need for large power grids and power plants go away, and competition comes in to reduce cost. Elon Musk sees this with his home battery system.

    But until this happens, wind and solar or other similar technologies will never compete with fossil fuels.

    1. Fuel cells are not batteries. And have fun with that 2kW powerwall. Make sure you don’t toast and dry your hair at the same time.

      1. I prefer to store all of my excess energy needs kinetically.

      2. Fuel cells are not batteries.

        I don’t think he said they were. Hydrogen is a pretty good way to store energy, I think.

        And have fun with that 2kW powerwall.

        That’s why “Once a breakthrough comes is battery and fuel cell tech occurs…” is key there. The subsidies are terrible and wasteful, but that doesn’t mean that wind and solar can’t or shouldn’t some day provide a good part of some people’s electricity needs.

        1. There’s also storing energy in the fabric of space-time. Really, we’re awfully arrogant for a species that can’t do shit yet.

  9. We need the Dyson Grid. Enough energy for everyone, everywhere, forever.

  10. This is actually a really good interview (might be worth looking into more Peiser interviews), though I have to pour some cold water on Ron’s hopes that the absence of rapid temperature increases in the next ten years might make the policy drum-beating go away.

    As RB points out re: his realization twenty years ago, the cc movement is more ideology than science, and ideology has a tendency to stick, particularly when it serves the preexisting goals of the political class. Drumming up fear with catastrophic predictions won’t vanish no matter what for the same reason Christianity didn’t vanish when Copernicus hit the scene: huge swaths of the population are too invested in the movement, personally and socially, and politicians of every party have a vested interest in using popular misconceptions to further their own ends. Look at the gun control stuff being pushed so hard today in the face of empirical evidence that would gut a rational movement instantly and organized, dead-ender opposition from millions of Americans. People aren’t rational, and this stuff isn’t going away no matter what.

    Seriously now, Ehrlich has been pushing back his predictions decade by decade since the 70s, fully half his life. He’s ancient now, and still he’s being showered with money and accolades like an environmental messiah. To expect an ideological movement to fade from policy significance just because it was wrong is placing way too much faith in reason as a driver of the political process.

    1. …Christianity didn’t vanish when Copernicus hit the scene: huge swaths of the population are too invested in the movement, personally and socially, and politicians of every party have a vested interest in using popular misconceptions to further their own ends.

      Why would Christianity vanish with Copernicus? The teachings of Christianity have no dependence on planetary theory. Those who punished Galileo and posthumously chastised Copernicus were garden variety statists. And statists do what statists do. Blaming Christianity is a bit lame. It was from Christianity, after all, that western peoples got the notion of personal responsibility and individual rights. Prior to Christianity people thought about family and tribe, only. Christianity is not the culprit here–statism and power mongering are.

      1. The biblical cosmology is the ancient Sumerian one: the earth a flat disk with a dome above it to keep the water out. God is a kingly creator living in the sky who opens windows to allow rain in periodically, thus Noah’s flood. When the earth became the center of the universe many years after Genesis was written, that was already a compromise in biblical doctrine, as the original Hebrew cosmology was one where the earth is the universe more or less.

        When man first went into space, astronauts joked about how there were no gods up there. They weren’t just being snide. Most ancients believed in men in the sky for the same reason that most moderns do.

        The point being that people don’t give up ideologies that are key to their personal and social identities just because they’re wildly unlikely to be true. Environmentalism has fallen into that category for a generation or two now with its own species of true believer wreaking havok.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.