The Nov. 25 "Local View" commentary, "Brains struggle with slow-motion catastrophe like climate change," was quite amusing. It contended that dopamine levels in the brain at birth "essentially" determine whether a person will be liberal or conservative. It concluded with an invitation to nostalgic, traditional, anti-progress, risk-averse, fearful, low-dopamine conservatives to "have a quiet conversation over coffee ... about the great existential threat" of climate change. I assumed the writer was unfamiliar with Dale Carnegie.
I refuse to believe that high-dopamine liberals are condemned to remain liberals. While they are emotionally driven, vulnerable to deceit, morally unmoored, and prone to groupthink, I believe liberals can develop analytical minds grounded in reality, just as conservatives have. Isn't stereotyping fun?!
I believe that a slow-moving climate catastrophe is scientifically unverifiable. It's impossible to isolate the variables that impact climate. It's impossible to predict how the variables will vary over time. And it's impossible to project whether a combination of unknowns would be net favorable or unfavorable. Scientists can have fun speculating, but they don't know.
No surprise, their climate-forecasting history has been notoriously inaccurate. According to the carbon-footprint king Al Gore, we should all be hard-boiled frogs by now.
Also, funding for climate research will dry up if there's no fear of pending disaster. Scientists are averse to unemployment lines, too.
Liberals, don't just do something; stand there. Climate always changes. It warms, it cools, it warms, it cools. You'll be fine. You need not fear prosperity and abundance. Stay positive. Farmers can now grow corn in northern Alberta. That's a good thing. However, my proprietary climate model indicates it's only temporary.
Conservatives and liberals, let's come together this holiday season for a quiet conversation about the great existential threat of our time, the man-made climate-change ruse. Over coffee.
Wayne C. Anderson