If one looks at clothes fashions and women’s fashion in particular, it is very easy to see that from as far back as records permit us to view them, women’s clothes have been changing rapidly so that it is usually possible to distinguish a photo not to the decade or even the year but sometimes to within a few months.
And the small glimpses we have of history also show that throughout the ages women have been “fashionable”. So this clearly isn’t something that arrived in modern times, but instead it appears to be an instinctive human behaviour particularly of women.
A while back, I was pondering the reason for this, and began to hypothesise that the reason women regularly change fashion is that one generation tries to distinguish itself in some way from the previous generation. To put it very crudely, they try to advertise themselves as “fresh meat” on the sex/marriage market. And thus I hypothesised in order to show that they are “fresh”, women instinctively seek out ways to appear “fresh”. And they do this by finding new styles of clothing.
Global Warming
And then looking today at the latest information showing interest in Global warming has plummeted with it featuring last in all groups “Democrats shelve climate change as an election talking point” I was pondering why this occurred. For example: had we sceptic managed to convince the alarmists of the science? obviously not from my recent conversations. So what?
Then it hit me. Perhaps the sole reason that global warming alarmism is decreasing is … fashion. That each generation tries to find new ways to be new a fresh, and that after 20 years of being the last generations way of showing their distinctness from the previous ones, that the new generation just wants something new AND DIFFERENT FROM THE LAST GENERATION over which to show its concerns.
In other words, it’s not the science, it’s not the politics, it’s just that global warming is so “last generation” as an issue.
And thus … by implication … the only reason that global warming came to prominence may also be fashion. The previous generation having gone nuts about global cooling, what better way to show that they are a new generation with new ideas than to go nuts about entirely the opposite of the last general.
The concept that we’ve been fighting a mere fashion for the last 20 years, or that we won because scepticism literally became “fashionable” rather than the eloquence of our arguments etc. is profoundly depressing. I can’t think of anything more humiliating than to have won this debate because we literally became fashionable.
Is it a coincidence that ocean plastics have become the latest generational concern !
Roy, yes, that is the latest panic.
Yes, fashion plays a part. Cutting CO2 started out like voting for the first time or shaving or using a ride on lawn mower. After the 20th time it all gets a lot like a chore. As I mentioned in the last post, nobody thought about being the ones who had to cut CO2. They thought that there would be a machine or something that would make it all go away and the public would carry on as usual.
https://ny6mediashare.ensemblevideo.com/hapi/v1/contents/permalinks/q7D2Wkp5/view
Watch the video from 43 mins. It’ll give you a laugh. I’d heard that he had used the quotes but I couldn’t believe he was still using them. Surely someone would have explained we were taking the P. Hat Tip Geoff Chambers.
Thank you for providing my biggest laugh of the day! I think you are spot on re. fashion. As they say about outdated scientific theories- they don’t get disproved, the proponents just die off. Your hurt tone was just so …funny! BTW I was also fascinated and impressed by your coverage of the Highland Clearances- keep up the good work!
I feel like a WWI soldier having been sitting in the mud for years, getting a messenger: “the war’s off”. I ask “why”. The response is “it’s no longer fashionable”.
What it means is not only was all the effort from those on both sides of the debate a total waste of time pandering to a few “fashion leaders”. But when again these fashion leaders decide to again pick some nut case environmental cause to decide is “fashionable”, we will go through this whole debacle again (or at least the next generation cause I’m not getting involved).
I’ve never laughed so much at my own comment.
Thanks.
The real conspiracy (i.e. what Lewandowsky tries to fabricate) is the conspiracy that isn’t there.
Lewandowsky is such an idiot.
Dear Sceptic
If you regard global warming as a a political scam to attack capitalism, it may seem to be giving diminishing returns, despite all the current propaganda on the BBC. The replacement scam could be air pollution killing 40000 (think of a number) of people prematurely each year. If you can ban diesel engines you will kill capitalism and a lot more than 40000 people.
Roger
Well, there’s always NASA.