10 April 2007

Al Gore, and the Dancing Gigolos of the Apocalypse

It used to be that the apocalypse was only popular with evangelical Christians. But for the last few decades, environmentalists have become the foremost apocalyptics in the modern west. CAGW--catastrophic anthropogenic global warming--is custom made for the earnest modern apocalyptic true believer. And there is no better promoter of CAGW than Al Gore, seminary drop-out and political has-been.
Like the Book of Revelation, Gore's vision is an apocalyptic one. Scenes of smoggy skylines, gridlocked traffic and smokestacks are interspersed with crashing glaciers, storm-ravaged cities and Third World refugees fleeing on foot. Computer models predict the submerging of continents and the deaths of millions. Every problem on the planet, including overpopulation, war and infectious diseases, is attributed to global warming. If ever there were a vision of the End Times, this would be it. But instead of God's wrath raining down on the planet, it's human beings that are doing the damage. One might call it apocalyptic environmentalism.

Faith-Based Science?

At the heart of this new religion is planet Earth, photographs of which Gore holds up as if they were objects of worship. In fact, audiences are told in the trailer that they "owe it to the planet to see this movie," which is certainly a novel marketing approach. Then to add just a twist of relationship psychobabble, the question is raised, "Did the planet betray us or did we betray the planet?" Gore provides the answer later, stating matter-of-factly that "our civilization is destroying the planet." So why not just kill ourselves off now and get it over with?
Source

But Al Gore is not the only dancing gigolo of the apocalypse. He is joined by Islamists of both Sunni and Shia sects.
The study of Muslim apocalyptic is absolutely essential to the understanding of modern Islam. Anyone who wishes to understand the huge influence which these groups have on the direction of Muslims will not be able to ignore them. Although the groups are frequently anonymous and unknown until they burst onto the world stage with some action, they cannot be accused of being secretive about their motives orbeliefs. Leaflets, pamphlets, and books are available at every bookstand, and are frequently handed out in mosques. Much research remains to be done to ascertain what is the exact connection between the literature and the action, especially suicide attacks which require a strong ideological imperative.
Source

Both Osama bin Laden and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clearly qualify as apocalyptics on a very similar scale as Al Gore.

All else being equal, not many people would prefer to destroy the world. Even faceless corporations, meddling governments, reckless scientists, and other agents of doom, require a world in which to achieve their goals of profit, order, tenure, or other villainies. If our extinction proceeds slowly enough to allow a moment of horrified realization, the doers of the deed will likely be quite taken aback on realizing that they have actually destroyed the world. Therefore I suggest that if the Earth is destroyed, it will probably be by mistake.
Eliezer Yudkowsky of the Singularity Institute.

And Yudkowsky is probably right about most apocalyptics--although probably not the Islamist dancing gigolos. As for Al Gore and his CAGW crusade, one can only observe the apparent excitement displayed at every hurricane or other "sign and portent" of the coming apocalypse, to understand that these people are truly getting into the spirit of their end-of-the-world act.

Modern narcissistic and psychologically neotenous youth in the US are custom made for apocalyptic crusades. Having been left with limited knowledge, skills, and competence by a governmental educational system in decay, they are searching for a meaning and purpose where they can utilise their limited skill set. Political activism is one such purpose, and apocalyptic activism is particularly attractive.

The same type of lack of preparation for the real world is prevalent among the young and burgeoning populations of most muslim countries. Combining a huge surplus of incompetent but passionate youth, with an apocalyptic vision that involves destroying the great enemy of Allah and imperialistic oppressor of Islam, gives many of these youth a purpose that they cannot resist.

Complicating this circus of dancing apocalyptic gigolos, is the very real set of existential risks of the modern world. And see here for a more thorough treatment.

While Al Gore burns large quantities of jet fuel traveling the globe with his apocalyptic message--for fun, profit, and general adoration--bin Laden and Ahmadinejad are in the dancing apocalyptic gigolo routine until the bitter end. Both men actually believe in what they are fomenting, and see the apocalypse as being for the better good of Allah's children.

Science fiction books, films, and television, have long used the apocalyptic theme as a source of ideas. Many of my favourite books and films utilise this very theme. There is no question of whether the apocalypse works. It works very well to grab the attention and stimulate the emotions. But humans do not function well when kept hyper-stimulated continuously.

That is what Karen Hurley tried to get across to fellow environmentalists, with little success. That is what Bjorn Lomborg tried to get across to others who were concerned with the many environmental problems of the world. For that he was soundly demonised by those less competent.

Many muslims have tried to get their fellow religionists to chill out a bit. For their attempt at moderating the mouth-frothing masses, they have been rewarded with death threats, stonings, beheadings, and other signs of typical gratitude that a true believer displays, when he is told to think more broadly.

A true apocalypse is unlikely, except perhaps by collision of the Earth with a large asteroid or comet. But limited nuclear war becomes more likely with each passing day that the current regime in Iran remains in power. A large scale pandemic with mortality approaching 50% could sweep through many of the overcrowded cities of the third world. It is not impossible that the US, Russia, China, and the muslim world could become involved in protracted warfare, resulting in a massive economic collapse and the deaths of hundreds of millions.

Many things can go wrong in a world that is both massively interdependent and marbled with apocalyptic hatred and fear at the same time.

True believers in conspiratorial apocalyptic visions are very dangerous. Yet they become more common as society fails to provide its younger generations with competence and purpose. We can only bypass the incompetence of society for a limited number, if the dancing apocalyptic gigolos finally succeed in creating the disruption and destruction that they appear to be aiming for.

If you depend upon the news media to understand the world, you will probably arrive late and unprepared for the catastrophes that do, in fact, come to pass. Try to be more alert, would you?

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

12 Comments:

Blogger chuckatmain said...

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/printer_032207I.shtml

Tuesday, 10 April, 2007  
Blogger al fin said...

This one is even better.

Tuesday, 10 April, 2007  
Blogger Kevembuangga said...

Yeah! Al Gore IS a politician, surprise, suprise...
OTOH Stephen McIntyre running climateaudit.org does not have any advanced degree.
Though he is a Friend of Science :
In an August 12, 2006, article The Globe and Mail revealed that the group had received significant funding via anonymous, indirect donations from the oil industry

ROTFLMAO

Wednesday, 11 April, 2007  
Blogger al fin said...

Isn't it interesting how Al Gore is too afraid to debate anyone on CAGW? Not Bjorn Lomborg, of course. Lomborg is intelligent and knowledgeable. Not even the much maligned writer/director/producer Michael Crichton. Of course, Crichton is intelligent and knowledgeable as well, unlike Gore.

Since Al Gore dropped out or flunked out of virtually every school he attended, he does not have an advanced degree himself--much less a science or engineering degree of any type.

I agree that there is much to laugh at about Gore, but probably not what you are thinking of.

Wednesday, 11 April, 2007  
Blogger Kevembuangga said...

I agree that there is much to laugh at about Gore, but probably not what you are thinking of.

Neither what you are thinking of!
I am mostly laughing of your naïveté about politics.
The "Friends of Science" are about to lose their funding...

Thursday, 12 April, 2007  
Blogger al fin said...

Speaking in general, it is often difficult to penetrate the orthodoxy of true believers. CAGW is a fine example of such an orthodoxy--where faith substitutes for evidence.

I am content merely to provide food for thought, for those who are interested in looking beyond the hackneyed headlines, and endlessly repeated statements of faith and orthodoxy in the media.

CAGW is a political religion masquerading as science. As such it rests on a very shaky foundation. Such a balancing act is impossible to sustain indefinitely.

Thursday, 12 April, 2007  
Blogger Kevembuangga said...

You are right about "true believers" who are fooled by false memories, however in this case it is rather a matter of denial "where faith substitutes for evidence" the other way around.
Denial is ALSO an irrational response to threatening circumstances.

The CAGW "fad" is only a recent phenomenon, not long ago it was the opposite, you cannot rely on the opinion of the lay public in either direction.
The opinion of a minority of pseudo-scientists funded by "special interests" isn't of any value either (heard of "Intelligent Design" by any chance?).

The only way to sort out is not to rely on "feelings" from either Stephen McIntyre, Al Gore, you, me or whoever else hasn't the right credentials.
Assessing the reliability of models IS a precarious matter but this doesn't mean it can be "tweaked" according to hunches and "feelings" :
The Myth of Science-based Predictive Modeling
François M. Hemez1
Engineering Sciences and Applications, ESA-WR
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Abstract:
A key aspect of science-based predictive modeling is the assessment of
prediction credibility. This publication argues that the credibility of a family of models
and their predictions must combine three components: 1) the fidelity of predictions to
test data; 2) the robustness of predictions to variability, uncertainty, and lack-ofknowledge;
and 3) the prediction accuracy of models in cases where measurements
are not available [1]. Unfortunately, these three objectives are antagonistic. A recently
published Theorem that demonstrates the irrevocable trade-offs between fidelity-todata,
robustness-to-uncertainty, and confidence in prediction is summarized. Highfidelity
models cannot be made increasingly robust to uncertainty and lack-ofknowledge.
Similarly, robustness-to-uncertainty can only be improved at the cost of
reducing the confidence in prediction. The concept of confidence in prediction relies
on a metric for total uncertainty, capable of aggregating different representations of
uncertainty (probabilistic or not). The discussion is illustrated with an engineering
application where a family of models is developed to predict the acceleration levels
obtained when impacts of varying levels propagate through layers of crushable hyperfoam
material of varying thicknesses. Convex modeling is invoked to represent a
severe lack-of-knowledge about the constitutive material behavior. The analysis
produces intervals of performance metrics from which the total uncertainty and
confidence levels are estimated. Finally, performance, robustness and confidence are
extrapolated throughout the validation domain to assess the predictive power of the
family of models away from tested configurations.

Thursday, 12 April, 2007  
Blogger al fin said...

Science is uncomfortable with consensus. Religious and political orthodoxy, on the other hand, is all about consensus. That is why muslims want to stone gays and heretics to death. That is why the funding of climatologists who do not "toe the line" is pulled.

Intelligent design has the markings of an orthodoxy, more than science. That is why most scientists cannot respect intelligent design. CAGW has many of the same markings as ID.

A person cannot be a denier when there is nothing there to deny.

While that may appear to be a tautologic begging of the question, it is also a redundant truism.

Thursday, 12 April, 2007  
Blogger Kevembuangga said...

A person cannot be a denier when there is nothing there to deny.

Claptrap!
Plain denial is no argument, so it's a waste of time for both of us.

I had a look at your many blogs, I really wonder what's the purpose of posting this pile of junk and hype?

I am also puzzled by your motto:
Primary interest is seeing that the best of humanity survives long enough to reach the next level.
Not very likely that you survive if only the best will.
Not to speak of the "next level", usual Singularitarian loonyness...

Thursday, 12 April, 2007  
Blogger al fin said...

Most people who surf the net are intelligent enough to understand when most of the posts on a blog were not published with their interests and inclinations in mind. Knowing that much, most intelligent people would move on to blogs and postings that actually were posted with them in mind.

But rest assured that you are welcome to visit and comment anytime you want. And do not be concerned that your comments are causing me the slightest distress or anxiety. On the contrary, I find them very entertaining and humorous.

Thanks for your comments.

Thursday, 12 April, 2007  
Blogger Kevembuangga said...

Most people who surf the net are intelligent enough... etc...

Yes, it is also the case that some can recognize that some posts are against their "interests and inclinations".
I am neither primitivist, luddite or a political activist of any walk but I consider Singularitarians a NUISANCE.
I already clashed with Anissimov and I think with good reason.
Intellectual dishonesty is a sure hallmark of either stupidity or base motivations (or both...)

Most intelligent people would move on to blogs and postings that actually were posted with them in mind.

Not necessarily, but sheeple do that in any case...

Anyway I am not overly worried, I expect Singularitarians to be fucked up by either overwheming complexity and the second law of thermodynamics OR by very unfriendly AI, I mean unfriendly to Singularitarians not necessarily to sane humans.
The Singularity "true believers" (the deluded ones not the machiavelics) are just some among the losers.

Thursday, 12 April, 2007  
Blogger al fin said...

The true believers have good reason to fear the heretics. The heretics are the only ones with open minds in the debate. True believers want to squelch the debate before it has even begun.

Monday, 23 April, 2007  

Post a Comment

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” _George Orwell

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts
``