Mike Hulme's Tenacious Grip on Physical Reality. An examination.

After reading Hulme's "Am I a denier, a human extinction denier?" he invites us to read: "‘We Always Get the Weather We Deserve’: The Tenacious Grip of Moral Accountability."   So I did.  It was an even deeper exploration into his Mindscape rather than climate science.  Needless to say, this essay also deserves a serious examination.

I'm looking for a job, researcher and writer, 
dedicated to confronting the deliberate calculated lies 
of the climate science contrarian community!
PO Box 56
Durango, Colorado 81326
citizenschallenge - at - gmail com

@ mikehulme.org  |  25/01/2018

TEXT REPRINTED UNDER PROTECTION OF FAIR USE COPYRIGHT LAWS. 

My intention is a review of ‘libertarian' deception in action. 

________________________________________________________________

Abstract: 

Different cosmologies, religious thought, political ideologies, social practices and scientific paradigms of knowledge all contribute to the rich cultural matrix in which theories of climatic change and causation have emerged, flourished and declined. 

____________

Sure, but lets be clear, this is about our inner perceptions and not about understanding our climate system.

Prof. Mike Hulme gets lost in his Mindscape. An examination.

Yesterday I read an ATTP post about Mike Hulme’s controversial May 27th article, "Am I a denier, a human extinction denier?" I did a double take.  

Weren't they just saying, “No Manmade Global Warming” - then it was “No Catastrophic Warming” - now we’re up to, “No Human Extinction” - anyone else notice a disturbing pattern here?  It made me curious so I read it and found myself recalling the Missing Key, the magisteria of Physical Reality vs the magisteria of our Human Mindscape.  

I don’t know Hulme.  I do know his article did nothing to recommend him.  It was a contrived piece of…, of…, I don’t know, manipulative nothing.  A waste of time if constructive learning was one’s goal. 

However, it offers a great case study in getting lost within one’s own Mindscape and forgetting all about the Physical Reality ‘out there’.  That’s why I decided to dissect Hulme's article and add it to my collection.

In truth, I don’t know if Hulme considers himself a libertarian or not, I do know his words parrot libertarian arguments and logic so I’m comfortable assuming he is until told otherwise.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Am I a denier, a human extinction denier?

@ mikehulme.org  |  27/05/2019

REPRINTED UNDER PROTECTION OF FAIR USE COPYRIGHT LAWS. 

My intention is a review of ‘libertarian' deception in action. 

¶1  There has been a lot of talk recently about climate change and extinction.

¶2  It is undoubtedly the case that species go extinct.  And sometimes large numbers of species disappear together in mass events caused by the same physical stresses.  It is also true that at some point in the future the human species will go extinct, or at the least evolve into a new species partly of our own making.  

CAGW. Ask a simple question, get a revealing answer. Dodging the issue.

{edited 11:15 pm}

citizenschallenge asks, "Just what does it take to qualify as a 'catastrophe'?"

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
It seems to me that an intelligent, rational, constructive dialogue requires understanding what each other mean; and that each side takes the time to explain what they mean when using certain terms.  

For instance, CAGW (catastrophic anthropogenic global warming) has become a term of derision among the climate science denying crowd, yet it's never defined.  

Their attitude baffles me.  These people profess that they don't deny the science behind how greenhouse gases make our planet habitable, implying they recognize that increasing our planet's greenhouse gas insulation will warm the planet.  Yet in the next sentence, you'll hear them ridicule the notion that a warming world will inflict increasing levels of catastrophe upon our society.

Makes me wonder just what do they mean with "catastrophe" anyways  -  what level of destruction are we talking about?

I mean, haven't these free marketeers learned the fundamentals of compounding interest?  Or do they conveniently suspend those mathematical realities when it comes to thinking about the geophysics of our planet... you know, that stuff that provides our life support system?

That's why I ask that opening question now and then, usually to silence, but this afternoon I got a bite.  

It turned out to be such a good example of a typical Republican/libertarian PR machine response that it deserves to be added to this collection.

Though I still can't enunciate exactly how this ties into "Seepage" there is a connection that I'm sure sharper minds can puzzle out once they decide to think about it.  What I can do is offer some observations on how these denialista's weave their intimidation while destroying constructive dialogue.

joseph p. 1:32 PM - 6/8/15 
Short version of an Answer: When the alleged cure to a still only alleged disease, is already known to be much worse than the alleged disease, and applying the "cure" just keeps on creating more of its own very real disease catastrophes. And then you yourself +citizenschallengeYT can even vie to become the "King of Catastrophes"!