Billionaire climate activist wants to educate all of you stupid, unsophisticated hicks

posted at 1:01 pm on August 16, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

For all of you mouth breathing, devolved global warming deniers out there, apparently there is finally hope that you’ll be brought out of the darkness. Mega-wealthy hedge fund manager Tom Steyer (who has long since made his own bundles of Benjamins and now has the leisure to devote all of his time to sticking his nose in other people’s business) is terribly worried about your lack of education on settled science matters and is seeking to set matters to rights. Speaking at a recent climate conference held in Aspen, Colorado (and really… where else would this happen but Colorado?) Steyer explained – or possibly Voxsplained – how much work remains to be done in terms of converting the hoi polloi to his cause. (This comes from behind the pay wall at Politico Pro, so I apologize for the lack of linkage.)

“I think if you were to go around to most of the — what I would think of as super-sophisticated people who think about politics and policy more than five minutes a month — we are doing really well,” Steyer said today at a conference in Aspen, Colorado, hosted by the American Renewable Energy Institute. “And the question in the United States of America is how are we doing with everybody else, which is the 99.5 percent of the people whose lives are very busy and complicated and pressing and they don’t have a lot of time to think about the things that don’t immediately impact themselves and their family.

“And I would say on the former we’re kicking ass and in the latter we have a long way to go,” he added. “If we’re going to make a difference, we can’t just hit the people who are focused on policy in the United States. We have to understand how we can reach a much broader audience and make them understand why this is important to them and their families.”

See, they’ve only been able to win over the super-sophisticated people thus far. (Just being nominally sophisticated doesn’t cut the mustard these days, it seems.) But with a bit of education dumbed down to the level where even a bunch of hicks like you might grasp it, there’s still hope!

The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) had a few choice words for Mr. Steyer which will save me a lot of snark investment here.

“Since when do we live in a country where only the self-professed ‘super-sophisticated people’ get to make decisions for everyone else? Tom Steyer has spent millions bankrolling candidates and organizations whose efforts are leaving hard-working Americans without work, without economic security and without hope for the future. And, today, he demonstrated once again how totally out-of-touch he is with the priorities of the ‘broad audience’ of Americans he so offensively characterized in Aspen today,” said Laura Sheehan, senior vice president for communications at the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE). “Perhaps people aren’t as simple-minded as Mr. Steyer thinks, because they certainly aren’t buying what he and his elitist friends are selling. What Mr. Steyer fails to understand is that the American people are, in fact, thinking about what immediately impacts their lives and families because ‘super-sophisticated people’ like himself and President Obama are not.”

Steyer is also displaying more than a bit of hypocrisy here. He’s still personally invested in those nasty, carbon producing fossil fuels himself, even as he chides others to pull their financial support. And those billions of dollars he’s sitting on didn’t come from investing in wind farms. And yet his entire personal agenda these days is to regulate coal-based electricity out of existence if he can manage it. (If you want to see the real world effects on the regular people Steyer is trying to reach and how his favored regulations are “important to them and their families” you can read about the results in Alabama here.)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Schadenfreude pure at how limp the guy is.

Schadenfreude on August 16, 2014 at 1:04 PM

People who are highly informed about the climate are highly skeptical of the dire warnings being made.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:04 PM

Thy hypocrite made his billions by selling coal junk bonds, tipped off, illegally, by obama.

Then he moved to ‘the clean country/ranch’ and began to preach at the rest of you.

Only in America!

I hope he loses big in Nov.

Such need to be pitchforked, politically.

Pryor, Landrieu, Begich, Hagan and Udall need to go the way of Blanche Lincoln.

Schadenfreude on August 16, 2014 at 1:06 PM

Thy The hypocrite

Schadenfreude on August 16, 2014 at 1:07 PM

Barbra Streisand, who air-conditions her 12,500 sq. feet, incl. the horse stables, wants you to line your clothes up when you launder them.

Schadenfreude on August 16, 2014 at 1:08 PM

D-bag.

dpduq on August 16, 2014 at 1:09 PM

Steyer said today at a conference in Aspen, Colorado, hosted by the American Renewable Energy Institute.

That’s all I need to know. That’s as far as I read and as far as I’m going to. Renewable energy doesn’t exist, it’s a total impossibility unless you repeal some physics laws. A liberal pipedream.

Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:12 PM

ITT: Democrat crony capitalist billionaire seeks to expand his bank account and control over other citizens, and we’re supposed to act shocked.

Jedditelol on August 16, 2014 at 1:14 PM

We really don’t need Steyer’s help in understanding the threat caused by climate change. It’s really easy to understand because the basics really aren’t very sophisticated at all (increasingly warmer global average temperatures, increasingly unstable climate systems).

But when a very wealthy person starts taking it upon himself to “educate” everyone else, and to act like all the answers are in his back pocket, then that’s a flag that something’s up (and it’s not altruism).

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

Hey! I take personal offense in being called a “Rube” and “Hick”.

Reuben Hick on August 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

A Climate Crusader’s Comeuppance
Billionaire Tom Steyer’s vow to make politicians toe the green line isn’t working out so well.

Schadenfreude on August 16, 2014 at 1:17 PM

Hey! I take personal offense in being called a “Rube” and “Hick”.

Reuben Hick on August 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

:)

Schadenfreude on August 16, 2014 at 1:18 PM

Hey Steyer – if you pay for the echo chamber, expect the applause – but don’t pretend it is out of conviction.

BKennedy on August 16, 2014 at 1:19 PM

Steyer has at least 4000 times more money than I – but he probably lacks an undergraduate degree in geology. Any student of geology in particular and history in general acknowledges climate change. Always has – always will – change.

But I refuse to bow before the priests and prophets of man-made (particularly CO2) climate madness. In 50 or 500 or 5000 years when the mile-thick glaciation returns, regardless of carbon dioxide emissions by humans, these money-hungry charlatans will finally be both dead and ignored.

Infidelius on August 16, 2014 at 1:20 PM

It’s really easy to understand because the basics really aren’t very sophisticated at all (increasingly warmer global average temperatures, increasingly unstable climate systems).

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

The basic premise is easy to understand. The particulars still aren’t unknown. The modelers based far too many inputs on assumptions without credible research regarding those assumptions. They basically just guessed. Sorry, but many of us require more than guesses.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Hey! I take personal offense in being called a “Rube” and “Hick”.

Reuben Hick on August 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

I can understand why you might resemble such a remark.

RINO in Name Only on August 16, 2014 at 1:21 PM

We really don’t need Steyer’s help in understanding the threat caused by climate change. It’s really easy to understand because the basics really aren’t very sophisticated at all (increasingly warmer global average temperatures, increasingly unstable climate systems).

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

Oh please … get lost.

darwin on August 16, 2014 at 1:26 PM

Billionaire Tom Steyer

Without the B in front of his name, he’d be just some guy with an opinion… which is all he is… some guy with an opinion, an opinion infected with an agenda.

Never heard of him. Don’t care to again. But probably will. Because, with the B in front of his name, he can buy all the attention he wants craves.

IndieDogg on August 16, 2014 at 1:26 PM

THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED!

I know, because everyone in Seattle says so.

Tard on August 16, 2014 at 1:28 PM

The basic premise is easy to understand. The particulars still aren’t unknown. The modelers based far too many inputs on assumptions without credible research regarding those assumptions. They basically just guessed. Sorry, but many of us require more than guesses.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:20 PM

Nothing the climate fanatics predicted over the past forty years has come true yet “oakland” continues to believe every word they say.

darwin on August 16, 2014 at 1:28 PM

I wonder if he would care if knew he was nothing more than a stooge for a political agenda that he seems wholly unable to recognize.

He thinks it’s about saving the planet or some other stupid thing.

No: it’s about turning people like him and the “super sophisticated” into zombie foot soldiers for an anti-American world view that is the real counter culture.

And it’s passed along like all the other stories we heard when we were children…people like Steyer and the “super sophisticated” never grew up, however. Adults with no minds of their own.

Simply doing the bidding of a virulently anti-American counter culture, owned by no one, but picked up from time to time by a Chomsky or a Soros or Media Matters…

And the really pathetic thing about people like Steyer, Hollywood, and Aspen sophisticates is they think they are cutting edge, in the know, leaders in a time of crisis…and they are nothing more than Larry Moe and Curly…except less self-aware

EastofEden on August 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM

The basic premise is easy to understand. The particulars still aren’t unknown. The modelers based far too many inputs on assumptions without credible research regarding those assumptions. They basically just guessed. Sorry, but many of us require more than guesses.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:20 PM

The damned science is settled you denier you! The drastic decrease in the Antarctic Ice should be more than enough to convince you. I just wish we could burn all you stoopid unedumacated deniers at the stake with a solar powered incenerator.

Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:31 PM

Oh please … get lost.

darwin on August 16, 2014 at 1:26 PM

What makes you think he’s not?

Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:31 PM

I am behind anyone who want to educate people if they start by educating Jazz about the dangers of fascism and the militarize police.

coolrepublica on August 16, 2014 at 1:33 PM

That should be: Coal-billionaire Tom Steyer.

slickwillie2001 on August 16, 2014 at 1:34 PM

BigSven can be Bought

Billionare Tom Steyer’s mouth poo ain’t gonna cut it though

$20 Million is BigSven’s price, in the BANK

If you want BigSven to stay bought that’ll cost you extra

BigSven on August 16, 2014 at 1:34 PM

What makes you think he’s not?

Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:31 PM

Good point.

darwin on August 16, 2014 at 1:36 PM

I am behind anyone who want to educate people if they start by educating Jazz about the dangers of fascism and the militarize police.

coolrepublica on August 16, 2014 at 1:33 PM

I am behind anyone willing to educate coolrepublica on the English language.

Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:38 PM

When one of our betters says there’s much work left to do, we know that the beatings will continue.

Kissmygrits on August 16, 2014 at 1:41 PM

I cannot remember the last 90 degree day in central Ohio.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 1:48 PM

When one of our betters says there’s much work left to do, we know that the beatings will continue.

Kissmygrits on August 16, 2014 at 1:41 PM

Nothing to add, except that I really liked that comment.

Jazz Shaw on August 16, 2014 at 1:49 PM

I am behind anyone who want to educate people if they start by educating Jazz about the dangers of fascism and the militarize police.

coolrepublica on August 16, 2014 at 1:33 PM

I behind anyone educating you: ON ANYTHING.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 1:49 PM

I am behind anyone who want to educate people if they start by educating Jazz about the dangers of fascism and the militarize police.

coolrepublica on August 16, 2014 at 1:33 PM

I am behind anyone willing to educate coolrepublica on the English language.

Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:38 PM

There’s a lesson here about ESL courses and the concept of diminishing returns.

slickwillie2001 on August 16, 2014 at 1:50 PM

Perhaps a “super-sophisticated person” can explain, if this is all “settled science”, why do these “scientists” keep faking their data?

Rebar on August 16, 2014 at 1:50 PM

Sorry, but many of us require more than guesses.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:20 PM

More than guesses:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/cei/graph

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global/globe/land_ocean/ytd/5/1880-2014

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwdvoC9AeWjUeEV1cnZ6QURVaEE/edit

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Two summers in a row at least with just beautiful mild weather….oh and where are those nasty Hurricanes?

CW on August 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM

I am behind anyone willing to educate coolrepublica on the English language.

Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:38 PM

If that billionaire guy is willing to pay for my English tutor I would sign up in ny minute. Now I wonder what he can do for Jazz.

coolrepublica on August 16, 2014 at 1:53 PM

Perhaps a “super-sophisticated person” can explain, if this is all “settled science”, why do these “scientists” keep faking their data?

Rebar on August 16, 2014 at 1:50 PM

Only super smart and swarmy progressives understand the complex relationship bewteen fake data and trllions of dollars worth of grants and taxes.

darwin on August 16, 2014 at 1:53 PM

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM

The most boring koolaid drinker in America is back!

Good to see you. You’ve waited with baited breath for a climate thread so you could share your immense knowledge(considering you know nothing about anything else). AND you copy someone else’s work?

Keep carrying the water, boy. They’ll pat you on the head.

Feel better/

CW on August 16, 2014 at 1:54 PM

t’s really easy to understand because the basics really aren’t very sophisticated at all (increasingly warmer global average temperatures, increasingly unstable climate systems).

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:15 PM

I have to agree with oakland; the premise of AGW is as easy to understand as the science behind the zombie apocalypse, to wit:

1)increasingly warmer global average temperatures, increasingly unstable climate systems
2) humans are infected with zombie virus
3) those who die from this infection are turned into brainless, rotting monsters with poor physical coordination.
4) Only The Hero can save the good looking chick and/or the country from this horrible plague.
5) Zombies produce little or no carbon so AGW is vanquished.

See? Easy for even HA commentors to grasp.

Dolce Far Niente on August 16, 2014 at 1:54 PM

More than guesses:

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM

None of those links support any model inputs. Do you even know what a model input is? It’s what they use to predict catastrophe. We don’t have catastrophe right now.

And weather events are more recorded now. That’s why there might appear to be an uptick in that graph.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:57 PM

I’ll translate Mr. Steyer’s remarks for you:

“I’ve got my bazillion dollars and I don’t give a rat’s ass about you.”

clippermiami on August 16, 2014 at 1:58 PM

Oakland you bore people to death. Do you realize that? My goodness, you’re a one trick pony. And your one trick is pathetic . Fool.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 1:58 PM

None of those links support any model inputs. Do you even know what a model input is? It’s what they use to predict catastrophe. We don’t have catastrophe right now.

And weather events are more recorded now. That’s why there might appear to be an uptick in that graph.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:57 PM

He and Aqua Teen do the clown tour together. No time for school.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 1:59 PM

Oh please … get lost.
darwin on August 16, 2014 at 1:26 PM
What makes you think he’s not?
Oldnuke on August 16, 2014 at 1:31 PM

I think it’s a safe assumption that he’s got some other half-criminal scheme to chrony-capitalize on a return to some future “necessary” and “dirty” energy phase he may even be helping to plang – dependent, of course on infantile, Stupid-Wood elites: That will also just kinda sorta go hand in hand with what he knows will be a likely future need to reconstitute his “dirty” coal interests. And, as an aside, what does it take to make a gallon of ethanol? I think that aside from water/corn[food] waste, that magic formula includes a gallon of diesel. Knee jerk corruption following the money. A stinking, lilliputian soros clone.

RL on August 16, 2014 at 1:59 PM

time-series/global/globe/land_ocean

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Please provide the raw data. What? You can’t?

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 2:00 PM

Sorry, “plang” = “plan”

RL on August 16, 2014 at 2:01 PM

Another Clown(Oakland) selling their ‘tricks’.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 2:05 PM

Wow, isn’t it great that they let us live in their super intelligent world?

DDay on August 16, 2014 at 2:06 PM

“I think if you were to go around to most of the — what I would think of as super-sophisticated people who think about politics and policy more than five minutes a month — we are doing really well,” Steyer said

First of all, the debate should be about the actual science involved, not the “politics”. The science shows that the AGW advocates’ computer models keep showing increasing temperature trends that cannot be reproduced in the real world , no matter how many temperature sensors are placed conveniently close to asphalt parking lots, smokestacks, commercial building AC exhaust vents, and gas barbecues.

Second, I think Steyer will find that it’s not the “people who think about politics and policy less that five minutes a month” who aren’t on his side. He just described the low-information voters who support his Messiah, The One.

Finally, sixty-odd years ago there was another guy who thought all he needed on his side were the “smart, sophisticated people”, and he could flip off the hicks, rubes, and etc., and be elected President of the United States.

His name was Adlai Stevenson II. And he lost twice, to a Midwest hick named Dwight David Eisenhower.

clear ether

eon

eon on August 16, 2014 at 2:13 PM

Do you even know what a model input is? It’s what they use to predict catastrophe.

Yes, I do “inputs” on models all the time in my work.

That’s why there might appear to be an uptick in that graph.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 1:57 PM

now THAT sounds like “guesses”

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 2:14 PM

“guesses”

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 2:14 PM

Well not if you trick it.

Idiot.

Honk, honk.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 2:18 PM

Oakland, you’re a clown.

You’ll by anything. You’re as bad as the people who keep thinking tomorrow’s the end of the world. What a weird obsession. Just strange. Get a hobby you freak.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 2:20 PM

Ya’know Tommy,

Dear leader said: “At some point you’ve made enough money” !

In your case it just exploded most of your so superior and way more intelligent than us peon brain cells. Go pound sand.

Texyank on August 16, 2014 at 2:21 PM

Give me a million dollars and I’ll listen as long as you like. Otherwise, shut up. *click*

bour3 on August 16, 2014 at 2:22 PM

When all of the super smart sophisticated people start treating AGW like they claim it is, then I’ll take it seriously. Until then it is just a scam to kill the middle class in the USA.

jukin3 on August 16, 2014 at 2:25 PM

When all of the super smart sophisticated people start treating AGW like they claim it is, then I’ll take it seriously. Until then it is just a scam to kill the middle class in the USA.

jukin3 on August 16, 2014 at 2:25 PM

You know when. Never. Just like Oakland.He does shit.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 2:29 PM

I don’t think super-sophisticated means what he thinks it means. Of course, it could be me, I am married to the missus for 30 years, I pay my taxes, I work for a living, am saving for retirement and think the US is the greatest country in the world. What do I know? If that is a rube: guilty as charged. (Psst Mr. Steyer, I think they are on to you).

warmairfan on August 16, 2014 at 2:31 PM

Must be a living hell to be them.

Schadenfreude on August 16, 2014 at 2:32 PM

The pic surprised me. He’s wearing a suit. I figured he’d have those pajama-boy PJ’s.

trigon on August 16, 2014 at 2:33 PM

I am behind anyone who want to educate people if they start by educating Jazz about the dangers of fascism and the militarize police.

coolrepublica on August 16, 2014 at 1:33 PM

Can you please translate your post into English? No one here speaks Austrian.

Del Dolemonte on August 16, 2014 at 2:38 PM

Word Origin and History for so-phis-ti-cat-ed Expand

sophisticated

pp. adj. from sophistication; c.1600, “mixed with a foreign substance, impure; no longer simple or natural.”

thelastminstrel on August 16, 2014 at 2:43 PM

“This is from the Duke of Clarences’ personal groves. The purest, triple-refined Lime juice.”
The doctor tapped the keg, poured a jigger of juice and tasted it.
Running to the scuttle he spat the mouthful out and said;
“I fear it has become Sophisticated.”

thelastminstrel on August 16, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Yes, I do “inputs” on models all the time in my work.

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 2:14 PM

Then why did you post 3 links – none of which had anything to do with input assumptions?

The modelers guess. Would you say that they don’t?

now THAT sounds like “guesses”

Still waiting for that raw data.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 2:48 PM

When I read crap like this I am reminded of Orwell’s observation
“If there was hope, it must lie in the proles…”

Wood Dragon on August 16, 2014 at 2:50 PM

(This comes from behind the pay wall at Politico Pro, so I apologize for the lack of linkage.)

Ain’t it alway the way with the warmist and their clergy. Hiding the decline. Hiding the data. Hiding the barking orders as they hand them down to the mutts.

papertiger on August 16, 2014 at 2:53 PM

If you have ever been to Aspen, then you know that it takes a tank of gas or jet fuel to get there. You also know that everything there, from food, booze and caviar to gas and wood for the fireplaces, was trucked in on carbon spewing diesel trucks.

Additionally, workers cannot afford to live in Aspen or the neighboring Snowmass, so they live in towns like Carbondale and drive the 60 mile round trip to their jobs.

WestTexasBirdDog on August 16, 2014 at 3:05 PM

And yet his entire personal agenda these days is to regulate coal-based electricity out of existence if he can manage it.

Let me guess. He’s heavily invested in oil.

unclesmrgol on August 16, 2014 at 3:16 PM

Mr. Steyer obviously knows nothing about The Little Alto-Thermal era about 1,000 A.D., clearly documented in the archaeological and geological records. Norsemen were burying their dead in the ground of the now thermo-frosted Greenland soil. The graves become shallower and shallower as the climate became colder and the island was abandoned by the Norsemen. About the same time, grapes were grown in Britain. I suggest Mr. Steyer take an Intro to Archaeology or Into to Geology course. He might learn something, but I doubt he’s capable of learning anything to which he does not agree.

polarglen on August 16, 2014 at 3:16 PM

…kicking ass.

Man, I just love it when the super sophisticated speak my language. Maybe he should rap it next time.

Kraken on August 16, 2014 at 3:31 PM

Kraken on August 16, 2014 at 3:37 PM

polarglen on August 16, 2014 at 3:16 PM

At one time you could walk from Britain to Denmark. You might have to ford some rivers though, in Doggerland.

Akzed on August 16, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Mr. Steyer obviously knows nothing about The Little Alto-Thermal era about 1,000 A.D., clearly documented in the archaeological and geological records. Norsemen were burying their dead in the ground of the now thermo-frosted Greenland soil. The graves become shallower and shallower as the climate became colder and the island was abandoned by the Norsemen. About the same time, grapes were grown in Britain. I suggest Mr. Steyer take an Intro to Archaeology or Into to Geology course. He might learn something, but I doubt he’s capable of learning anything to which he does not agree.

polarglen on August 16, 2014 at 3:16 PM

What’s obviously happening here is that Coal-Billionaire Steyer has been overcome by guilt at making his fortune in the dirty Coal industry due to association with far-left enviro-progressives. His latest schtick is his own personal mental penance for doing so.

Too bad he has to drag others into it. If he feels guilty he should just spend his own money on left-wing environmental causes until it’s all gone.

slickwillie2001 on August 16, 2014 at 3:50 PM

Bite me steyer…..

crosshugger on August 16, 2014 at 3:50 PM

Hey, let’s see that video again of BIG MIKE BROWN grabing that clerk by the throat and shoving him aside while walking out with his Tiparillos……

Realdemocrat1 on August 16, 2014 at 3:59 PM

How many left-wing gazillionaires promote any part of that ideology that is not the genesis and enabler of the vast gushing faucet of taxpayers cash giveaways?

I seem to see many of them standing underneath with their hands cupped.

Or Steyer could just be really stupid, that’s also a real possibility.

Dolce Far Niente on August 16, 2014 at 4:02 PM

Send the Liberal Jew to Ferguson and straighten those folks out…..

Realdemocrat1 on August 16, 2014 at 4:08 PM

Billionaire climate activist wants to educate all of you stupid, unsophisticated hicks

Man, they’re still beating this dead horse?

What’s that you say…trillion dollar dead horse?

Oh, never mind.

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 16, 2014 at 4:18 PM

Still waiting for that raw data.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 2:48 PM

Weidly, Oakland did not address that the first time then like magic at the Circus …he’s gone.

CW on August 16, 2014 at 4:24 PM

And, of course, while he expects everyone to pay his or her fair share of taxes, he has a small army of accountants to make sure he doesn’t miss a loophole.

formwiz on August 16, 2014 at 4:41 PM

Not only are they driving up our electric bills and jeopardizing the electrical grid’s safety & capabilities, they’re also driving up the cost of most all of our consumer goods.

Thanks Obama.

Oxymoron on August 16, 2014 at 4:42 PM

The three biggest scams currently going are:

Global Warming

Gluten free diets

Organic anything

Exninja on August 16, 2014 at 4:53 PM

Then why did you post 3 links – none of which had anything to do with input assumptions?

The modelers guess. Would you say that they don’t?

to show actual data – global average temperature which, by the way, falls within the range predicted by a number of models (and thankfully, not high in those ranges)

The modelers guess. Would you say that they don’t?

Of course they do. ALL scientists “guess”. Science is all about guessing. There are no absolute answers, no final settled theories, no end to the questions. All the technology that you enjoy, the medicines that you depend on, the economic models that investors use, etc., is all just guesswork. There is no other way. And I see nothing wrong with guessing.

Did you look in depth at the data presented in those links?

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 5:03 PM

Still waiting for that raw data.

corkie on August 16, 2014 at 2:48 PM

have you asked for it? complete data sets are available if you request them

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Secular progressives are a greater threat to this country than terrorists or any other country.

cajunpatriot on August 16, 2014 at 5:29 PM

have you asked for it? complete data sets are available if you request them

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 5:05 PM

The data sets you refer to are computer models. There are no facts to substantiate global warming religion any more than any other religion.

cajunpatriot on August 16, 2014 at 5:31 PM

As other posters above have alluded, until I see these private jet-setting, McManison-dwelling gaiahyperthermaphobes, as a matter of eve-of-destruction urgency, reduce their own carbon footprints to the size in which they want to fit the rest of us… I fail to see what they see is the problem.

de rigueur on August 16, 2014 at 5:36 PM

If Steyer would give me a couple million of his dollars, then I would believe in AGW. But until then, I consider him either an idiot or a liar.

sadatoni on August 16, 2014 at 6:57 PM

The data sets you refer to are computer models. There are no facts to substantiate global warming religion any more than any other religion.

cajunpatriot on August 16, 2014 at 5:31 PM

there are data sets and there are models that can be compared with those sets; I am referring to data sets

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 7:01 PM

Go decorate a lamp post, Daddy Oilbucks.

S. D. on August 16, 2014 at 8:40 PM

These ‘super-sophisticated people’ can’t think for themselves, so I have to ask … who is doing their thinking for them ?

J_Crater on August 16, 2014 at 10:10 PM

Hey, Steyer is just trying to jiggle the odds in favor of his latest investment!!

– whatever that is. Remember he made his money on coal and has big coal investments in Indonesia (I think, not about the investments, about the location)

KenInIL on August 16, 2014 at 10:21 PM

Did you look in depth at the data presented in those links?

oakland on August 16, 2014 at 5:03 PM

I’m a statistician in my work. I’m not a climatologist, but statistical tools are the same whether they’re used in psychology or chemistry.

I’ve looked at and used the dataset, and it’s fraudulent. The dataset is first made of composite temperatures derived from factor analysis of tree rings and other data. Once the data gets into 1800 the actual temperatures. This is incorrect, you are using data collected one way and making statistical calculations with data collected another way. It’s like using an apple as a measurement stick to measure oranges. The scientific way to do comparisons is to use all tree ring data up to the present day.

Second, the hockey stick. It was created by using extant theory to adjust for impurities in the data collection. Trouble is the adjustment is biased. A Monte Carlo simulation was run with the hockey stick adjustment. A Monte Carlo dataset is purely random data that’s used sometimes to test biased methods. From this totally random data, a hockey stick plot was produced.

Finally, the modeling. There’s no confirmation of the models. In empirical research one way of checking is to show you can predict the present by using data from the past. The models have failed. You may be able to produce it once in a while (I haven’t heard of such) but that’s not science, it can be simply random chance.

Finally, the data. I’ve run it and found no statistical significance in temperature changes. Yes, I’m not climatologist, but once again, the statistical tools are the same no matter who runs the numbers.

Science is the pursuit of the truth. Until convinced otherwise, climate science is half science and half politics. As long as it’s half politics, the pursuit of the truth is only half-@ssed.

itsspideyman on August 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM

This super-duper-sophisticated “hedge fund manager” speaks like an 8th-grade dropout. His grammar reminds me of some panhandlers I’ve been accosted by outside the liquor stores of L.A.

jbspry on August 16, 2014 at 11:36 PM

It occurs to me that steyer is a hypocrite asshole. The climate changes, that’s what it does.

Whitey Ford on August 16, 2014 at 11:39 PM

First off, science has nothing to do with a consensus. Politics does, as does religion, both of which are connected to AGW by the way. Whenever one scientist made a breakthrough, whether it was Einstein, or Newton or Galileo, he by definition disagreed with the consensus. Did that make him automatically wrong?

Exactly how many scientists believed in continental drift in 1960? 1 percent? 2 percent? There was an overwhelming consensus that continents stayed put for at least 30 years after the theory of drift was purposed.

In the 1930′s the Nazis published a book titled “100 Scientists Against Einstein” to which Albert responded “It only takes one scientist to prove me wrong.”

People simply do not vote in science. Anyone who says they do is not a scientist or even scientifically literate.

Fred 2 on August 17, 2014 at 1:59 AM

Finally, the data. I’ve run it and found no statistical significance in temperature changes. Yes, I’m not climatologist, but once again, the statistical tools are the same no matter who runs the numbers.

itsspideyman on August 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM

Agreed.

I’d also add, from experience, that it’s very difficult to measure temperature accurately, even with modern thermocouple/digital thermometers. If you get within half a degree of the actual temperature, you’re doing quite well.

Then consider that climate models use a lot of proxy data, like tree rings, in place of actual temperature data, and use that to predict fractions of a degree temperature change per decade. Apples and oranges, like you say.

It’s all very sloppy statistics, in an attempt to model and predict the long-term behavior of a nonlinear chaotic system, which is futile even with accurate initial data.

This unsophisticated hick ain’t buyin’ what they’re sellin’.

ZenDraken on August 17, 2014 at 3:28 AM

itsspideyman on August 16, 2014 at 11:11 PM

I’ve looked at and used the dataset, and it’s fraudulent.

Please identify “the dataset” that you “used”. “Fraudulent” data means data that is created through fabrication or misrepresentation. Are you saying that the data that you looked at (“the data”) was so created? If so, then where are the data that are not “fraudulent”?

Once the data gets into 1800 the actual temperatures.

???

The scientific way to do comparisons is to use all tree ring data up to the present day.

Why use “tree ring” data when you have actual temperature measurements? I am thinking that actual temperature measurements are not unique to the 20th and 21st centuries, but rather go back several hundred years, in many cases. What data did they use in the three references that I provided above? I don’t think it was tree ring data.

Second, the hockey stick.

I made no reference to a “hockey stick”. What relevance does that have? I presented graphical representations of combined ocean and atmospheric temperatures for a period of about 125 years. In addition, I provided a representation of the CEI, based on available data. Also provided was a 2013 report of the WMO.

The models have failed.

All models have failed – in every discipline. I am an engineer and use modeling in my work. There is not a single case that I have ever known in which a model has successfully predicted an outcome. This is also true in medicine, in economics, in meteorology (for example, the forecast the other day was off by more than a degree, and it didn’t rain when it was predicted to have rained), and any other discipline you care to mention.

As a statistician, you would appreciate that the only thing that can be predicted by employment of statistical methods is a probability or a confidence range (a range of outcomes that would occur with a given level of confidence). And, to my knowledge, no atmospheric or climate scientist has ever indicated certainty in their predictions, but rather a range of predictions within which they have, say, a 90% level of confidence. Indeed, in reading IPCC reports, a confidence level is indicated and not a certainty.

So, if the climate models have “failed”, they have only done what every other model has ever done. Yet we put our confidence in all those technologies that were developed based on modeling that “fail”.

For example, the forecast the other day “failed” because the temperature didn’t exactly match, and it didn’t rain when it was expected to rain.
Do you ever put your confidence in weather forecasts?

I’ve run it and found no statistical significance in temperature changes.

What data did you “run”? What algorithms did you use to “run” that data? From whom were the data obtained?

When you say “the data”, I am assuming that you are referring to the data that underlies the three reports that I referenced (that was the quote from my comment that you copied and wrote your comment under). BTW, those reports were based on many millions of measurements from around the globe, and involved teams of scientists and mathematicians working for weeks or months to compile what you see there. Are you claiming to have reproduced the work that they did? If so, I am very interested in seeing the results of your work, so please provide a link to it.

oakland on August 17, 2014 at 6:49 AM

I’d also add, from experience, that it’s very difficult to measure temperature accurately, even with modern thermocouple/digital thermometers. If you get within half a degree of the actual temperature, you’re doing quite well

ZenDraken on August 17, 2014

If you can’t get a measurement within a half a degree, you are using ancient technology. Now, instruments exist that can give much better resolution than that (and I have used such instruments).

The way you deal with inaccuracies in measurements is to do many measurements using a number of different instruments and do comparisons. This is known as validation, and is done all the time in scientific work. I’m sure that isn’t lost on the climatologists and weather scientists.

oakland on August 17, 2014 at 6:56 AM

The point about his wealth not having come from investing in wind farms is central here. Nobody opposes clean energy. Who would? If they sold you the same amount of kilowatts per dollar from a wind farm, only a moron would say: “Hell no, I want my pollution.” (Wind farms pollute, too, but let’s leave it aside.) The point is that there’s no technology that can produce wind energy in amounts sufficient to, say, power NYC. This is where “environmentalists” (I may be called a true environmentalist because I actually do research aimed at improving geothermal (and fracking)) have no clue about science and technology.

PBH on August 17, 2014 at 9:26 AM

Comment pages: 1 2