Notice how there is never an end, to what we can dream up, and want to say, about how we feel, about any complex matter? Researching thought processes is like describing what makes something funny. We have objectified nothing if in the end, all our rationalizations cannot be used to enable someone to program a computer to make a decision. Our inability to objectify a problem simply acknowledges the subjectivity we bring to decision-making.
The weights that are given to various facts, beliefs and assumptions will vary from person-to-person and group-to-group. The complexity of the matter increases as we add the social and psychological dynamics of foundational principles like, accountability, personal responsibility and individual liberty until finally, we realize it is impossible to arrive at sensible solutions except with a market-based approach.
The verdict of decision-makers are most trustworthy when people vote with their own dollars. Voting with what you own essentially is voting your own life’s blood because as that is what is invested to earn those dollars. The problem we face in the West today is too many people are voting with the life’s blood of others. We are turning the productive into victims of ritual blood-letting and that is beginning to buckle society at the knees.
We have become victims of instantiate thinking –i.e., a reductionist logic where we accept as our understanding of the whole of something, nothing more that the creation of the mind of someone else, based only on a few snapshots. For example, with respect global warming alarmists we are looking through the blinking eyes of government scientists who in turn have turned the multiple interacting instantiations of an infinitely grander reality ruled by natural causes – comprised of global atmospheric, oceanic and celestial dynamics – into arrays of numbers to make still images that are simple enough to be easily understood and yet have little if any usefulness outside a digital world.
What if Michael Mann – the incestuous mother and father of the ‘hockey stick’ graph (that Al Gore waived in our faces to scare us out of flying around the globe in a private jet… like him) – had really yearned for an accurate mathematical representation of the complex world in which we live? If so, he would not have hidden from public view the source code that he used to produce his ‘hockey stick’ view of the world (that the IPCC also waived in our faces to scare us out of flying around the globe like they do). Mann should have graciously accepted the fact that he had but a bare glimpse of a series of moments upon which something of substance was to be built-up and held out as reality. Mann would then have made his program source code available for others to build-upon.
This is the world in which we live: INEXPENSIVE HYDROCARBON-BASED ENERGY IS CENTRAL TO ECONOMIC GROWTH AND TO ENABLING THE POOR TO RISE UP FROM POVERTY
The “triggering” determination at issue here is at the core of EPA’s current program to restrict hydrocarbon based energy and make it more expensive and less available. The Endangerment Finding and subsequent triggering determination came about when Congress failed to pass President Obama’s proposed “cap and trade” legislation during his first term. As described by the President during his 2008 campaign, that legislation was specifically intended to reduce carbon emissions by forcing a massive increase in the price of energy: “Under my plan . . . electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Erica Martinson, Uttered in 2008, Still Haunting Obama in 2012, Politico (Apr. 5, 2012, 11: 37 PM), http://www.Politico.com/news/stories/0412/74892.html. Adding C02 to the stationary source PSD permitting program seeks to accomplish the same result through forcing the massive closure of coal based power plants (a process already well underway) and hindering and delaying the construction and operation of power sources that use the cheapest forms of energy, which are hydrocarbon based energy. And EPA seeks to achieve that result without new legislation, and instead as a supposed interpretation of over 35-year-old legislation never previously thought to cover this subject matter.
Everyone knows global warming is a Left versus right political issue but, it also pits those who care about what happens today — comprised of those who actually must work for a living– with those who make a living simply pretending to care about tomorrow:
Who among us,
other than those who eschew complexity,
will look at the forces that effect Earth’s climate,
– the sun, the moon, the planets and all the stars –
and see only a fingerprint of humanity?