Recently on the 21st of May 2011 (9 days ago as I type this) the world was scheduled to end. This was not the first time the end of the world was nigh and it wont be the last.
I’m not going to name names (it’s easy enough for you to find the names in the article I have linked to) however the story consists of a man who predicted the end of the world and one of his followers who spent his entire life savings ($US 140,000) putting up posters around New York city.
Predictions like this are almost guaranteed to bring ridicule upon the person who makes them.
Here’s why.
The end of the world, if it happens, is a big event. If it happens, everyone will know about it. If you predict the end of the world, and it doesn’t happen (and it hasn’t happened yet) then everyone knows your prediction was wrong.
There’s also the issue of taking credit for when you make a correct prediction. If the world ends, there isn’t going to be anyone there left to say ‘I told you so’ to (much less yourself).
It’s for these 2 reasons that a prediction of the end of the world is a losing bet (even if you end up being right).
Those who predicted the end of the world should have taken a leaf out of the book of those who predicted global warming.
Those who predict a judgment day (as in the above example) and those who predict the destruction of the earths climate are both predicting the same thing. That the world will be destroyed.
However they have both gone about it in completely different ways.
Those who believe in global warming have been talking about the total destruction of the environment for over 30 years now. Not once have they been correct. However they have not received the ridicule they deserve.
Here is how they have been getting away with it.
1) They made predictions that people would forget if they were wrong
Proponents of global warming are big fans of phrases like “if in 10 years we do not drastically change our behavior it will be too late.”
The implication is that if we do not take the action they desire, we will suffer unbearable consequences are some distant and vague date.
They are capitalizing on the fact that most people will have forgotten their prediction within a matter of months. In 10 years time, when the world has not been destroyed or the climate unbearable, they say basically the same thing (“if in 10 years we do not change…etc”).
This allows a constant stream of fear mongering to be placed upon an uneducated and illogical society.
2) They made their prediction flexible
If global warming was to be real, each year would be hotter than the next, until eventually it became unbearable for live on this earth to survive.
That didn’t happen.
Eventually, we found out that the earth was actually cooling. In Australia, the month of May 2011 was the coldest may on record.
That is simply impossible if you believe in global warming. Which is why the term global warming has been conveniently discarded. We now call this phenomenon ‘climate change’.
This incredibly vague term allows any change in the weather (and changes in the weather have been happening for millions of years) to be seen as evidence of their position.
Instead of avoiding the world becoming too hot, we are avoiding the next ice age. This is incredibly convenient for those promoting the idea of climate change as it allows fear mongering all year round (as opposed to only 6 months of a year when it was hot).
3) Make predictions you can capitalize on if you’re right
At the beginning of the millennium, Australia underwent one of the worst droughts in recorded history. It lasted for 7 years. It was during this time that those who believed in global warming were the loudest.
The same happens when any natural disaster occurs. It’s apparently a proof of ‘global warming’ or ‘climate change’.
Climate change proponents have structured their prediction in such a way that they can hide away when their prediction isn’t coming true, but as soon as something in support of their prediction presents itself, they spring out of nowhere and shout ‘I TOLD YOU SO.’
It’s like the superstitious idiot at the roulette table who always puts money on number 7, all the while holding on to some lucky charm. Eventually, when the ball lands on number 7 (about once in every 37 times) he jumps up and down shouting ‘I KNEW IT, I TOLD YOU SO’.
Fact is there have been natural disasters long before history was recorded, and long before the industrial age. Same with droughts and ice ages. However now when they happen it’s ‘man made’.
Totally ridiculous.
Ladies and gentlemen, that was the art of making predictions. You should structure your predictions on the 3 principles I have outlined above.
You can tell I am not a fan of the idea of climate change or those who are proponents of it. That is because it is a concept that is used by certain groups to scare and shame people into furthering those groups self interests.
Scientists do it to secure increases in funding (anything that prevents the world from ending must be money well spent).
Politicians will do it so that they can tax people further (they are attempting to introduce a carbon tax here in Australia).
Environmentalists will do it because they like the smell of their own farts and they want to remind themselves how important and useful they are (they don’t want to get a real job that actually produces something for society).
Really not a fan.
Regards
-Simon