Wall Street expert says buy stock in Campbell's Soup: The myths and logic of climate skeptics.
posted by: Dave R. 22 days ago
I just saw a short video featuring James Altucher, a weekly columnist for the Financial Times and long time Wall Street fund manager, who is bullish on Campbell's Soup and winter coats, and bearish on climate change.
Altucher is obviously a very bright guy, but he echoed a couple of the more prominent myths and erroneous arguments of climate skeptics:
"Peak temperatures world wide were hit in 1998, and the world has been cooling ever since."
This bit of urban myth is based on the data shown in this chart. As you can see, naysayers jumped on a single high data point, ignoring basic statistical analysis and common sense. As the AP reported in busting this myth:
"The last 10 years are the warmest 10-year period of the modern record," said NOAA climate monitoring chief Deke Arndt. "Even if you analyze the trend during that 10 years, the trend is actually positive, which means warming." The AP sent expert statisticians NOAA's year-to-year ground temperature changes over 130 years and the 30 years of satellite-measured temperatures preferred by skeptics....Statisticians who analyzed the data found a distinct decades-long upward trend in the numbers, but could not find a significant drop in the past 10 years in either data set.
This idea has been perpetuated by both the BBC, and inadvertanly by Freakonomics author Steven Levitt, who has been backpedaling faster than you can say "buy my book."
"Nobody really knows whether the globe is heating or cooling or how much is man made and how much is just the Earth's natural cycle."
This "we can't be sure" tactic has been used before - by folks resisting DDT bans, cigarette warning labels, sulfur dixoide limits to reduce acid rain, and CFC controls to keep our ozone layer from being destroyed. The scientific evidence is pretty overwhelming, and near consensus. Does that mean that everyone agrees? Of course not.
A minority report released to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee listed 700 scientists who disagree. But a survey study of several thousand leading scientists conducted by the University of Illinois found that 97% of climatologists who are active in research believe that human activity has been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. (As a side note, petroleum geologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47% believing in human involvement.) The study concluded that "the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes."
Here are a few more recent comments from skeptics:
"I live right outside of Orlando and it is the coldest it has been since I have lived in Florida. It was 65 the other day."
Yes, but it was unusally hot in my neighborhood last week.
"The Antarctic ice sheet is actually growing."
Maybe (this is still being studied)...but increased snowfall caused by warming is the likely explanation, and overall sea ice and glacier trends are alarmingly negative, particularly in the arctic. Here is a chart from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, which tracks sea ice and glaciers.
It's a hoax. Al Gore is making millions of dollars on this issue.
As a cleantech venture capitalist, Al certainly has plenty of skin in the game. Billions of dollars are being invested in finding low carbon solutions, and there will be plenty of money made. By the same logic, however,the claims of well funded and motivated naysayers, including the US chamber of commerce and Big Oil should be rejected as well. So I guess nobody is right. Yes Al and the usual suspects might be making bank, but it doesn't mean climate change is a hoax.
Oh by the way, using Altucher's methods and logic, I observed that Campbell's Soup stock has been on a downward trend since 1998...which I guess proves that the planet must be warming.
Altucher is obviously a very bright guy, but he echoed a couple of the more prominent myths and erroneous arguments of climate skeptics:
"Peak temperatures world wide were hit in 1998, and the world has been cooling ever since."
This bit of urban myth is based on the data shown in this chart. As you can see, naysayers jumped on a single high data point, ignoring basic statistical analysis and common sense. As the AP reported in busting this myth:
"The last 10 years are the warmest 10-year period of the modern record," said NOAA climate monitoring chief Deke Arndt. "Even if you analyze the trend during that 10 years, the trend is actually positive, which means warming." The AP sent expert statisticians NOAA's year-to-year ground temperature changes over 130 years and the 30 years of satellite-measured temperatures preferred by skeptics....Statisticians who analyzed the data found a distinct decades-long upward trend in the numbers, but could not find a significant drop in the past 10 years in either data set.
This idea has been perpetuated by both the BBC, and inadvertanly by Freakonomics author Steven Levitt, who has been backpedaling faster than you can say "buy my book."
"Nobody really knows whether the globe is heating or cooling or how much is man made and how much is just the Earth's natural cycle."
This "we can't be sure" tactic has been used before - by folks resisting DDT bans, cigarette warning labels, sulfur dixoide limits to reduce acid rain, and CFC controls to keep our ozone layer from being destroyed. The scientific evidence is pretty overwhelming, and near consensus. Does that mean that everyone agrees? Of course not.
A minority report released to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee listed 700 scientists who disagree. But a survey study of several thousand leading scientists conducted by the University of Illinois found that 97% of climatologists who are active in research believe that human activity has been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. (As a side note, petroleum geologists were among the biggest doubters, with only 47% believing in human involvement.) The study concluded that "the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes."
Here are a few more recent comments from skeptics:
"I live right outside of Orlando and it is the coldest it has been since I have lived in Florida. It was 65 the other day."
Yes, but it was unusally hot in my neighborhood last week.
"The Antarctic ice sheet is actually growing."
Maybe (this is still being studied)...but increased snowfall caused by warming is the likely explanation, and overall sea ice and glacier trends are alarmingly negative, particularly in the arctic. Here is a chart from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, which tracks sea ice and glaciers.
It's a hoax. Al Gore is making millions of dollars on this issue.
As a cleantech venture capitalist, Al certainly has plenty of skin in the game. Billions of dollars are being invested in finding low carbon solutions, and there will be plenty of money made. By the same logic, however,the claims of well funded and motivated naysayers, including the US chamber of commerce and Big Oil should be rejected as well. So I guess nobody is right. Yes Al and the usual suspects might be making bank, but it doesn't mean climate change is a hoax.
Oh by the way, using Altucher's methods and logic, I observed that Campbell's Soup stock has been on a downward trend since 1998...which I guess proves that the planet must be warming.
Read more: global warming
comments
In general, I'm highly skeptical of conspiracy theories. However, there's an exception: the climate change disinformation campaign orchestrated by big energy and right-wing ideologues and media snake-oil sellers. It has been very well documented (rather like the mainstream science on climate change.)
Here's a taste:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Climate-Cover-Up-A-Review
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
I see, such foolishness the world has been heating up see cause that's why we will soon be swimming if its cooling down why are the poles melting. Why is the arctic the warmest it's been in two thousand years. If CO2 traps heat why has it continued to climb from 350 to 387ppm's, and the earth is cooling..........ya OK
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Anyone watch Link TV on the Public Access channel in the mornings? Weekends they have excellent documentaries. Today it was about Monsanto chemical and the patents and genetically modified seeds. They are destroying the vast varieties of seed banks we have had. Farmers must pay them to plant nearly any seed since the Monsanto GM seeds are patented. A Canadian farmer developed his own seed stock over the years and had to destroy them because some Monsanto GM seeds were growing on the side of his planted field. No one will be able to plant any food without paying a chemical company, like Monsanto.
Suddenly, Mexico which has numerous stocks of their own cultivated seeds, are now finding Monsanto GM corn growing in their fields. Hmmm, wonder how it got there. Monsanto has engineered their seed to be sterile so farmers cannot save seeds as they have historically done but must pay Monsanto for GM seeds. The genes can cross pollinate which spreads to all sorts of plants, wildflowers, etc., which will bear unfertile seeds. What will happen to this planet? This is madness and must stop. They want to control the planet food source. A Canadian Supreme Court found the farmer had to pay Monsanto even though he never planted their seed in his field, that they are responsible for seeds that blow into their fields. One Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas worked for one of the seed companies who GM's seeds. Write your congress and EPA. Seeds are being patented which should be criminal.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Some Campbell's products have palm oil in them.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Do you people not see what is happening here? All our energy and environmental issues are becoming part of some business policy, and once anything becomes part of a buisness, it is no longer about supporting what is right, but what will get the most profits. In this issue neither Al Gore nor the oil companies should be allowed to dictate what's good for our planet as they are both wrong in their approach.
Al Gore should not to be believed because his portrayal of global warming is inaccurate. Global warming is not caused by humans releasing CO2 gas in to the atmosphere. This phenomena is caused by the same thing as practically all major temperature changes; the sun. Once every while the sun produces solar flares which have an impact on all the solar system planets, creating global warmings and coolings. And seeing as humans can not control the sun yet, they can not control global warming either.
The oil companies shouldn't be believed because they're enforcing an energy source that is scarse and inefficient, and ends up being relatively expensive for average consumers. The reason they don't decide to renovate, is because other, better, cleaner sources of energy are more attainable, and won't get them as much profit. Energy, just like healthcare and education, should not be attached with a price tag, but be available to everyone so that we may all achieve something in this life, and not only leave this task to those that will just make this planet dirtier and poorer.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
HELLO...It is climate change greatly affected by human activity...not Global Warming...that is just "part" of the story.
Anyone interested in "soup" should google MSG and hyrolyzed vegetable protein, (also MSG) and be boggled at the intentional addictive ingredient being added and so pervasive in our diet...that it may account for 30% of overweight pounds, and a tremendous push toward the diabetic epidemic, and the resulting costs in healthcare, other diseases, lost time, efficiency, etc.
As to above, maybe we should invest on moral committments, on our future, and not reward the companies..as well as ourselves for this ignorant and selfish behaviour, take your pick!
We should be looking at the sudden awareness of our dwindling healthy water supply, and the drug and chemicals that cannot be filtered. Some blame the flushing and human waste theory as being the reason, be it septic or town waste management. Wrong!
The feeding of animals antibiotics and steroids in such numbers that accounts for overwhelming percentages of this alarming and damaging toxicity. We are like kids who take out toys and open closets and make an entire home a mess! Difference being, this is happening on a planetary scale. Do we need to be on the absolutely last second of taking action before this becomes one of the key issues, it is! Thanx cable/network non news! You are mostly cherry picked "gossip columns", and corporate mouthpieces based on economics. WOW! Richardpjackson(.com)
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Why would anyone buy stock in this company--I used to believe in Campbell's soups until I became a label reader... don't buy it anymore!
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
"The system" can never admit to it's flaws and limitations. The masters of industry will drive this society right off a cliff before admitting the road has disappeared.
We can't count on them to enact change. It's up to each of us to unplugged in our own ways, to enact the change we wish to see. It's up to us.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
I think James Altucher, being immersed in market finance and trends like most people involved in this field are biased. Not to say all people in this business are disbelievers in global warming, but they are for the status quo, one that environmentalist see as failing. In general, these types of people follow the path away from the culture of environmental health. Wealth, and prospects of wealth from many sources only enhances the market. To these people, market forces rule.
As a rule conservatives and certain embodiments of conservative religious cultures tend to discount global warming as a myth. This is an total copout perpetrated by traditional capitalists. This is from the aspect that such a theory hurts the oil, coal, and nuclear industries that have held the realm of energy for such a long time, and still do so. We are thrust into a polarization of believers and disbelievers. Even so, this is the type of rhetoric that only reinforces the non-believers of restraint from unfriendly environmental practices, and there are many.
I say, so what if it is a cyclic pattern. If it is, the population of Americans as well as the rest of the industrialized world is doing it's best to pollute, alter the landscape by mountaintop removal, over fish, destroy habitats etc. in the name that this is just a climatic cycle. It's nothing more than a slap in the face to those that know destruction is imminent.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
I hope that the global warming deniers realize that it is a wonderful opportunity for them to make money. Invest in sea-level property, it's getting cheaper. Invest in some ski areas (Canada) and not others (West US). Etc.
Chances are they'll all go broke in a decade.
send green star | flag as inappropriate
why is this inappropriate?
Facebook account:
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
1289009