FOX: Nobelist hopes "a lot of horrid things happen," to "get people concerned about climate change"

2009 July 22
by Kathy Shaidle

Last night, FOX News host Sean Hannity looked at recent remarks made by Nobel Prize winning economist Tom Schelling. In a July 14 interview with The Atlantic Monthly, Schelling said about “global warming”:

“It’s a tough sell. And you probably have to find ways to exaggerate the threat. I sometimes wish that we could have, over the next five or ten years, a  lot of horrid things happen — you know like tornadoes in the midwest and so forth… that would get people very concerned about climate change.”

In the magazine, Schelling went on to say:

If I were to come clean to the American public I would say that, except for a very low probability of a very bad result — which is the disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which would put Washington DC under water — we are probably going to outgrow any vulnerability we have to climate change. … You know, very little of the US economy is susceptible to climate. All of agriculture is less than 3% of our gross product. Forestry may be endangered. Fisheries may be endangered. But recreation might actually benefit!

So if we can double our GDP in the next 70 or 80 years — even if we lose 10% of our GDP from climate change — we’re still ahead so much that the effect of climate change wouldn’t be noticed.

President Obama has embraced the Left’s views on “climate change,” with all its disasterous consequences for the American way of life, so it is doubtful he’ll be following Schelling’s lead and “come clean” about the mythical dangers of “global warming.”

Then again, perhaps that’s just as well. Acting on Schelling’s advice back in 1965 (when Schelling was a friend of Defense Secretary Robert McNamara’s adviser John McNaughton), President Johnson launched Operation Rolling Thunder, a three-week bombing campaign (modeled on Schelling’s concept of “punitive bombing”) against the North Vietnamese that history has declared an abject failure, and which served as a rallying point for the anti-war Left.

Of course, those were the days when the Left could bring itself to vehemently criticize a sitting Democratic President.

As well, the prospect of Washington, DC being “under water” might not strike everyone as an unmitigated disaster.

  • Share/Bookmark

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

3 Responses leave one →
  1. July 22, 2009

    I sometimes wish that we could have, over the next five or ten years, a lot of horrid things happen — you know like tornadoes in the midwest and so forth…

    Does he know that tornadoes in the Midwest are a regular occurrence and that it’s a rare year without at least a few? There’s nothing odd about tornadoes in the Midwest. Heck, there’s nothing odd about tornadoes in places other than the Midwest — Florida has them all the time.

    Our Nobel Prize-winning Betters!

    the disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which would put Washington DC under water

    He says that like it’s a bad thing. I live a lot closer to DC now. It’s been kind of cool here in Virginia (lows at night in the upper 50s-low 60s). Maybe I should go outside and rev my car…

  2. Dimsdale permalink
    July 22, 2009

    The more I watch the left, the more I find that Michael Crichton’s book “State of Fear” is right on the mark. Good reading and plenty of references and facts for your perusal.

    Once again, thanks to liberal socialists, truth is stranger than fiction.

  3. Chris Edwards permalink
    July 22, 2009

    Wow, even leaving out the small matter of warming being a lie the end game looks pretty good, how does this compare to the food shortages we are starting to see now?

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS