The dumping of manure on Jeremy Clarkson’s lawn is another example of using intimidation is silence the critics. Just like those who vandalise 4×4 cars in Manchester, they are the product of taking an extreme line on Global Warming.
They are the outcome of a process of
1. The emission of greenhouse gases by humans will theoretically raise global temperatures by maybe 0.5 to 1.0 degrees this century. This seems to correlate with the temperature data of the past century, though it is not a complete explanation.
2. Bodies like the UNIPCC then assume that there will be a positive feedback loop. The computer models project with that small rise in temperatures will increase the water vapour in upper atmosphere. As this is over 95% of greenhouse gas, a small increase will lead to large rises in temperature. So the forecast churned out by those models is around 2 to 4 degrees.
3. The climatologists then assume that the data collected is unbiased, is accurate and the recent warming is a unique feature. Therefore the results have a high level of confidence and explanatory power.
4. This is then dressed up with appropriate political spin and certainty. They claim a scientific consensus. whilst denouncing those who reject it as having impure motives, or being deranged, or simply people beyond the pale.
5. The seriousness of the impending climate change enhanced by dire predictions of the consequences for the human race and for other species. Probable benefits of a slight warming and higher CO2 levels are never considered,
6. The UK government (along with others) responds by setting draconian reduction targets.
7. Environmental groups, like the Green Party, look at the most extreme predictions, then say it does not go far enough and want yet more draconian targets.
9. The perpetrators of these acts then decide to take matters further, going beyond their remit. In this case of the 4×4 vandals, slashing car tyres, instead of just letting them down.
The extreme acts are as a consequence of the extreme case portrayed in the media. We need to pause, and consider the evidence. A more balanced view would be that the case is more nuanced, and that any further warming is likely is be small.