Contrarian Climate Change
Some people say they’re contrarian and some people really are contrarian. We just got off an hour long phone call with our friend and Strategic Investment editor Jim Davidson. Our pen literally ran out of ink during the call. Here are some excerpts from today’s chat.
“The earth is not getting warmer. It’s getting colder. The climate Nazis at the UN admitted this week that their claim that the Himalayan glaciers are melting away was false. I may as well have said the Great Salt Lake is going to turn to sugar.”
Jim’s put together a “Little Ice Age Portfolio” as a response to the climate change hysteria. But the investment response is secondary to the seriousness of the issue, he says. “There’s very little evidence that rising carbon dioxide levels lead to rising temperatures. It’s more likely — as temperature records show — that changes in climate are correlated to solar activity and sun cycles. Imagine that.”
“If it were true that reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the earth’s atmosphere reduced the earth’s temperature, it would be a bad idea to do it. In the Dark Ages, another period of lower solar activity, the Nile River froze. On the other hand, Rome prospered because agriculture thrived and you could grow grain in Carthage.”
“In a colder world, Canada would be an iceberg and one of the great grain growing regions of the world would disappear. People believe that because farmers plant a crop, it will be harvested and the modern world can live on a diet of high-fructose corn syrup that malnourishes people and makes them fat. But in another Little Ice age, hundreds of thousands of people would die if the world’s grain growing regions marginally declined. Billions would die if the impact was more severe.”
“The Black Death hit Europe in the Little Ice Age, too. Lower crop yields reduced the quality and quantity of nutrition available. This weakened immune systems and made people more exposed to infectious diseases. Why, if you’re a humanitarian, would you pursue a public policy that pushes a billion people who are already on the edge of starvation into outright famine?”
“If winter comes early or stays late, whole crops will be wiped out. Reducing the output of food — something that would result from a colder Earth — is evil. It’s based on non-existent science in which people forecast things that may happen centuries from now based on their ideological resistance to prosperity. They are trying to force down living standards in the Western world based on their own guilt about prosperity and income inequality.”
“Global warming just another phrase for good weather. If it’s true carbon dioxide emissions warm the planet, we should burn more coal. You can tell the science is dubious because you now have a bizarre feedback loop in which warming makes the world cooler. It’s rubbish.”
“The big risk in the discrediting of the global warming crowd is that it could discredit other, more legitimate concerns about the climate, like the huge amount of harmful chemicals in our water supply. The persistence of dangerous chemicals in our recycled water is something to be really worried about. You don’t want the environment to turn into a sink for man-made chemicals.”
There was much more to report. But we’ll have to leave the rest for another day. Jim is hard at work on the January issue of Strategic. He’s analysing the possibility of a fiscal collapse in the United States, and where investors can seek refuge before it happens.
Until then…
Regards,
Dan Denning
The Daily Reckoning Australia
January 22, 2010





ShareThis


Good article Dan! Could not have said it better myself.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ron Simon and Agora Financial, Whiskey Gunpowder. Whiskey Gunpowder said: Contrarian Climate Change: Some people say they’re contrarian and some people really are contrarian. We just got o… http://bit.ly/5KwGqM [...]
Darling Dan:
I don’t usually point out the obvious, but don’t they teach in Biology any more that trees and other plants live on carbon dioxide the way we do on oxygen? People breath in oxygen and respire CO2. Plants take in CO2 and emit O2. It’s a nice, simple system that works beautifully. If we reduce carbon emissions does it not seem sensible that we will see reduced plant life? And…chuckle…why hasn’t anyone noticed that the phophates that used to be in our laundry detergents (producing brilliant whites and colors) were a form of fertilizer that encouraged plant growth in streams, which, in turn, sheltered fish spawn and lead to more fishies? Just asking…
All these Innuits and Peruvians compaining about cimate change – what do they know???
Heck – it’s cold today. So that proves that things are just fine n dandy…….
Your paragraph:
“If winter comes early or stays late, whole crops will be wiped out. Reducing the output of food — something that would result from a colder Earth — is evil. It’s based on non-existent science in which people forecast things that may happen centuries from now based on their ideological resistance to prosperity. They are trying to force down living standards in the Western world based on their own guilt about prosperity and income inequality.”
Is a bit sloppy on the cut and paste. No one picks up on it? How odd. Cooling earth based on sun spot minimums is anything but non-existent science. I think you meant AGW – is evil and then the rest of the paragraph.
WRW