John Hinderaker finds a New Wingnut and other Thoughts on making the World a Better Place

We have another climate denier:

"Because of climate’s high complexity, reliable prognoses just aren’t possible. Nature does what it wants, and not what the models present as prophesy. The entire CO2-debate is nonsense. Even if CO2 were doubled, the temperature would rise only 1°C. The remainder of the IPCC’s assumed warming is based purely on speculative amplification mechanisms. Even though CO2 has risen, there has been no warming in 13 years." 

- Klaus-Eckart Puls, a German physicist and meteorologist according to Powerline Blog, stating that that one cannot predict future warming while predicting that future warming will only be at the low end of the predicted range of increased temperature based upon a doubling of CO2 and also repeating the 1998 myth.

Finding a so-called credible expert that believes that  Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Hoax is really, really hard.  The wingeratti star Scientist Lindzen is often quoted by wingers on global warming blog posts, but I believe that he does not deny that CO2 leads to at least some warming. And that is what this guy appears to also believe, too.  Sure there are people like Joe Barton who is hardcore into the global warming as hoax mythology, but Smoky Joe does not qualify as an expert on anything.  This guy probably doesn't either. But then again it is hard to find a good denier when you need one.

One thing I find humorous (and sad, too) is that the American Psychological Association and other Social Science outfits are starting to study wingnuts and global warming denial:

Among those who doubt global warming, a Stanford University poll last year found that their skepticism had grown even stronger: Those who are extremely or very certain that global warming is not happening rose from 35 percent in 2010 to 53 percent in 2011. But those skeptics are a minority among Americans over all. The same poll found that 83 percent of adult Americans believe that the world's temperature has been going up. An even larger proportion of scientists actively working in climate change have similar views: 97 percent of them believe human-caused global warming is under way, although there is plenty of disagreement about the details..... 

Academic pollsters, sociologists, historians, and anthropologists have been sorting through public attitudes about global warming for some time, but even though human behavior is central to the debate, the voices of social scientists are often lost in the din.

"In the end, all of the changes come down to what makes us behave the way we do and think the way we do," says Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. "We need to understand us, not just the natural world."

Here, Here!

And that is where at least some stimulus funding should have been thrown.  There are large numbers of folks who need our help, i.e., wingnuts.  And here is a simple way to do it that I had not thought of yet.  Ecopyschology counseling could be added as a direct benefit under Medicare! It'd be like a wellness benefit.

Under this approach, as folks like Hinderaker turn 65 and quickly sign up for the kickass program known as Medicare, they'd start receiving periodic ecopyschology counseling about understanding the environment in addition to other wellness benefits.  While not as effective as a FEMA run anti-Obama dissident camp, ecopychology is certainly less invasive. I think you should not move these folks to a home if there are other options.

I can't see any downsides here.  You'd start the effort by funneling money to broke grad students to get certified in Ecopyschology. These newly certified eager beavers would then start providing the counseling sessions through medicare.

These grad students would spend the money immediately (because they are broke) circulating the cash back through the economy. The stimulated economy would lead to more jobs and economic growth.  More economic growth means more economic security which means less uncertainty and anger.  Less anger means greater health, which means better productivity, which leads to more growth. And since the electorate would be more educated (thanks to ecopyschology), the increased economic growth would like be in green jobs.  Again, there appear to be no downsides here.