Tuesday, July 27, 2010 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

AGW makes Mexicans dreaming about wealth

Reuters and dozens of other sources promote the craziness of the day, namely a bunch of statements by a Michael Oppenheimer of New Jersey and his pals, Shuaizhang Feng and Alan B. Krueger. The paper was edited by the late Stephen Schneider a month ago.



Mexico City

He and his friends essentially claim that global warming is going to be the main reason of the Mexican illegal immigration. Between 1.4 and 6.7 million Mexicans will arrive to the U.S. by 2080 because their agriculture will get worse, and so on. Of course, this statement is completely preposterous but the media make it even worse when they exclusively quote the upper "6.7 million" figure in the title.

The number of Mexicans who actually move because of the temperatures may be counted in thousands, not millions. If you check an encyclopedia, the daily temperatures in Mexico City go from 6 to 21 °C in January to 12 to 26 °C in May (the figures are average lows and average highs in the months). In average, there's no excessive heat over there. And the agriculture is not getting worse because of the climate change.

You may check that e.g. Sao Paolo in Brazil, the agricultural powerhouse of Latin America, has temperatures by about 6 °C higher than Mexico City. They're even higher in Rio de Janeiro. Warmth is surely not a problem.

I think that only insane people may have doubts that what drives the overwhelming portion of the immigrants is the economy. The Mexican GDP per capita is 5 times (nominal) or 3 times (PPP) lower than in the U.S. Well, such things make a difference.



A Wolfram Alpha widget to calculate and graph the GDP per capita.

The hypothesis that the desire for a cooler weather plays an important role in the Mexican immigration can be easily falsified by anyone who actually wants to know whether it's true or not. The simplest way to see that it is bogus is to notice that the Mexicans are satisfied as soon as they cross the borders and many of them stay in the Southern states of the U.S. Even though the climate can't change too much a few miles away, the new place is good enough for them.

I've heard amazing testimonies of several people who visited the U.S.-Mexican border along the Rio Grande river. The vast difference in wealth makes it look like two different worlds. The difference has clearly nothing to do with the climate.

It's not hard to see what is the driver behind similar "research": they want to attract some conservative people - people who are genuinely afraid of immigration, especially the illegal immigration (whether or not their fears are justified) - onto the global warming bandwagon by giving the global warming fears some new "anti-immigration flavor". I think that the descendants of J. Robert Oppenheimer should sue Michael Oppenheimer and prevent him from using and contaminating the name of their ancestor and their families - and the good name of physics.

And that's the memo.



Unrelated - affirmative action

I was just intrigued or worried by a threatening letter that a Virginian boss of NAACP, a U.S. group promoting reverse racism, sent to James Webb, a Virginian Democratic senator who has opposed affirmative action - maybe more openly than his former G.O.P. opponent, George Allen.

A week ago, Webb wrote a WSJ op-ed, Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege, in which he was advocating the end of affirmative action programs.

The intimidating tone of the NAACP reply sucks. They want to meet him and they ask him whether there are any more rotten apples around him so that they could go after their necks, too. I think that beyond a certain threshold, such communication of organized groups with the politicians has to be viewed as blackmailing.

Add to del.icio.us Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (5) :


reader danbloom said...

I said all this a year ago in the Juneau Empire, google it, that by 2500 AD, 99 percent of humans will be killed in a massive die off due to climate chaos and people will have to migrate north to live in polar cities. Reuters reported this too. Why not tell you readers here about my polar cities warnings? http://pcillu101.blogspot.com


reader danbloom said...

I said all this a year ago in the Juneau Empire, google it, that by 2500 AD, 99 percent of humans will be killed in a massive die off due to climate chaos and people will have to migrate north to live in polar cities. Reuters reported this too. Why not tell you readers here about my polar cities warnings? http://pcillu101.blogspot.com


reader Lumo said...

Why didn't I promote your climate musings? Because you just did it - and twice.

I don't usually promote people's comments about climate that are outside the mantinels of mental health if there are good reasons to think that *everyone* agrees that their author fails to be mentally healthy.


reader gato e botas said...

I can point a litle problem in your text, São Pauli Is a agricultural power house , that is right, but you ever heard about Mato Grosso ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mato_Grosso )? thare is the soy center of Brazil, one more thing the São Paulo city is a cold city in comparison with the rest of the state http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribeir%C3%A3o_Preto Ribeirão preto the sugar cane capital is much warmer than são paulo city To


reader bbear said...

Not only is Mexico's per capita GDP only about one-fifth that of the U.S. and Canada, but Mexico is itself rich compared with a number of other Latin American countries. Columbia, Peru, and Ecuador, for example, have per capita GDP's only about half as large as Mexico's, and others are poorer still.

It's interesting to think about where this comes from. Leaving aside the early Vikings, whose cultural and political legacy in this respect is zero, both North and South America encountered European civilization together, 500 years ago. Yet today, despite similar initial conditions, we see this enormous historical divergence in development, not only in wealth but in public health, literacy, political institutions, scientific and medical research. By almost every measure of national success, English-speaking America (pacem Quebec) has forged ahead while Spanish-speaking America has languished. Why shouild this be?