Why is Obama still going to Copenhagen?

Honestly, for a brief moment, I entertained the notion that maybe, just maybe, Obama was going to spend the time and money necessary to go over the Carbonhagen – oops, – Copenhagen in order to surprise us and do something dramatic, like denounce the bastardization of scientific method in order to advance a political agenda.

Think of it. The “whole world” of true believers, who are completely in denial -almost “Orwellian” denial– about how badly their “settled science” has been wounded, gather at Copenhagen -“the most important meeting ever, or at least since WWII. The fix is almost in.

And then Obama steps up, makes sure his teleprompters are in place, tilts his head back a little and declares AGW “an unjust hoax perpetrated upon all the peoples, tempting others to hypocrisy, warping notions of sovereignty and political autonomy, abandoning the poor, enriching those who already have more than they can ever use…fellow citizens of the world, I come not to praise AGW, but to bury it!”

In one fell swoop, the AGW nonsense would end, we could all buy incandescent lightbulbs again, and – best of all- The American President would have single-handedly and bloodlessly set the whole world free from a nascent tyranny. Hooray!

Bush woulda done it, you know.

But then, I read this over at Hot Air, and my daydream collapsed: WH Spokesman Robert Gibbs declaring, dutifully, like a party member in good standing, says “the science is settled; There’s no real scientific basis for the dispute of this.”

If by “settled” you mean that what has been referred to as “science” in the matter of AGW has been something so narrow and shallow and dishonest that even a true believer is appalled, disgusted and unable to sustain belief on it, then yeah…something is settled. And I don’t want to step in it.

As I noted last week:

There is an anvil-heavy irony to all of this. Part of the smart/stupid, left/right narrative was built on the fantastic strawman that the AGW-doubters on the right were “enemies of science,” that first they were not allowing science to use human embryos for experimentation, and now they were daring to doubt the most imperative scientific advice in the history of mankind.

But if the excesses of the weather-sciences are about be discredited to the degree that –as some worry– may “bring all science into dispute”, then that harm comes not from the right, who simply dared to question, but solely from the left, who refused to permit questions, openness, transparency.

But they love science.

You Tube is down. Were it up, I would place a scene from Ghostbusters, here. The scene where Dr. Peter Venkman is accused of treating science “like a hussy…”