For a while I have been talking about belief derived reality. That is the reality we hold as an amalgam of what we notice and what we believe to be true. We all fit here to some degree. Political, social, family, religious and cultural beliefs, with little evidence, make up our reality. It validates because we notice the elements when we see them in our external world and we ignore or reject those presentations that conflict with our own.
The nuance that arises because of the way we construct our reality as opposed to the way others construct theirs is why we must develop the virtue of tolerance. Everyone is entitled to their own reality and thus to their own opinion. Facts are important but we each accept alternate interpretations and weightings of them.
There is another more insidious version. Let us call that belief driven reality. Here there is no tolerance. The beliefs are treated as fact and there is no room for other beliefs, interpretations or weighting of importance.
One of the interesting examples of Belief Driven Reality will report in Sweden in September and in Denmark in late October. The agency reporting is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and they will present how they see climate change progressing.
It will be interesting because the observed external data from 1990 to the present does not match their predictions. While I generally agree that people are entitled to their own opinion I am not as confident that people are entitled to their own facts. The IPCC would like us to believe their facts which support their beliefs. They are generally intolerant of other beliefs and even of other facts.
The believers, including President Obama and our own David Suzuki, will tell us that 97% of the people in the know believe global warming and the effect that CO2 has on that condition. My belief system is different. I believe in fact supported scientific opinion. In my world, scientific fact is not determined by a show of hands. Even 97% of the hands.
In a fact repellant bureaucracy like the IPCC, people need to believe that the others are stupid or distracted. Preferably both. In a world where critical thinking is not in vogue, they can have many followers. Eventually though, common sense will prevail. We can expect that soon as America approaches energy self-sufficiency and with that, the end of the political will to suppress carbon emissions.
In marketing we tell people that if your product relies on your customers being stupid, you will not last long. That the IPCC lasts is a function of political will not of value and the political will is clearly ending.
The carbon driven global climate change model is a theory that fails to tell us much about reality but it does tell us a great deal about the people who created it and how they think. The essence is political not scientific, certainly not economically rational. I doubt I will be inviting any of them over dinner and good conversation. The manmade global warming hoax has cost hundreds of billions, possibly trillions of dollars. Fully wasted.
As the Turkish Proverb says, “When you find yourself on the wrong road, turn back.” Sound advice.
Don Shaughnessy is a retired partner in an international accounting firm and is presently with The Protectors Group, a large personal insurance, employee benefits and investment agency in Peterborough Ontario.
firstname.lastname@example.org | Twitter @DonShaughnessy | Follow by email at moneyFYI
You’re preaching to the choir on that issue, and the concept of “fact repellent beaurocracy definitely strikes a cord of recognition. Your optimism that market forces will prevail is refreshing; however we must recall the observation of Dilbert’s Scott Adams, “never underestimate the stupidity of the general public.”
Because it’s rare to see public opinion intersect with reality, I expect the carbon-based climate change model to end shortly after it ceases to be a source of tax revenue. That may take a while.