Thomas Sowell on Global Warming: No Consensus Among Scientists; Canto: No Crowding-out Effect
Pardon me for peeking over at the National Review again, but the latest from Thomas Sowell is just too funny:
If you take the mainstream media seriously, you might think that every important scientist believes that “global warming” poses a great threat, and that we need to make drastic changes in the way we live, in order to avoid catastrophes to the environment, to various species, and to ourselves … The very attempt to silence all who disagree about global warming ought to raise red flags. Anyone who remembers the 1970s should remember the Club of Rome report that was supposed to be the last word on economic growth grinding to a halt, “overpopulation” and a rapidly approaching era of mass starvation in the 1980s. In reality, the 1980s saw increased economic growth around the world and, far from mass starvation, an increase in obesity and agricultural surpluses in many countries. But much of the media went for the Club of Rome report and hyped the hysteria. Many in the media resent any suggestion that they are either shilling for an ideological agenda or hyping whatever will sell newspapers or get higher ratings on TV. Here is their chance to check out some heavyweight scientists specializing in weather and climate, instead of taking Al Gore’s movie or the pronouncements of government bureaucrats and politicians as the last word.
I’m not quite sure what he’s talking about with respect to his (false) premise that we all believed the predictions of the Club of Rome report. And I certainly have no idea why he claims that we are trying to silence the few heretics who doubt global warming as our government still honors the First Amendment (as long as one is not criticizing George Bush’s Iraq policies). But hey – you find Ph.D.s in economics who try to deny the law of scarcity – including this National Review nitwit:
As for the idea that making the tax-rate cuts permanent will be bad for the economy, the critics rely on an additional piece of information: the budget deficit. Proponents of this doomsday view believe that lower tax rates lead to persistent deficits which in turn “crowd-out” private investment and in the long run result in higher interest rates and lower growth.
Victor Canto decides to invoke the name of William of Ockham was who lived from 1288 to 1348. Maybe Ockham didn’t understand the basics of Solow’s growth theory given that his seminal paper was written in the late 1950’s. But one would think a Ph.D. in 2007 would understand that reducing national savings lowers long-term growth.
But there are heretics in every profession. Memo to Rich Lowry and Jonah Goldberg: if you insist on publishing such incredibly stupid stuff, be careful not to put two things out on the same day that nullify each other so blatantly.