I once posted a #climate video on youtube: https://youtu.be/pGJzc8zsxxQ And one #warmist took it upon himself to comment on my effort by claiming that the data I used only went back to 1977 which meant the graph was meaningless. Utterly ignoring the fact that the vid clearly showed that at least one table went back to 1946 (iirc, it was the #CO2 table from Mauna Loa). The other (Hadley CRU’s temperature data) probably went back to the 19th century. My response was to ask him: if he depended on lies, why bother at all, what value was his point if he needed to lie to score it?
Of course its value was that it allowed him to win and get a smidge closer to the unescapable political nightmare that he wished upon us all (being a socialist in all likelihood).
Which is the Austrian definition of #value: “what the madman is willing to give for it” (manhandling a Dutch expression into English), or rather: value is in the eye of the consumer.
“Wat de gek ervoor geeft.”
Quite the opposite of Marx’s definition: value is determined by the amount of work that goes into a thing. A push-definition, he had quite a dictatorial mind-set. The Austrian is the more consumer-friendly mind-set: if the customer is willing to trade his labour time (salary paid in compensation for…) for an item, it means he values that item more highly than the money, or other things he could have done with it.
Ludwig van El 