Studies: CO2 output must cease altogether – Washington Post-

Everybody hold your breath.  Warmists conclude that a radical approach is the only way to force nature to our whims.

This sort of thing is the pinnacle of arrogance.  First, it assumes that Earths climate at the moment is perfect.  Second, it assumes that humans (who never make mistakes) should devote endless resources to the task of keeping climate change (a natural process that has gone on for centuries) in check.  And perhaps most arrogant of all, it assumes that the government is not only the right tool to do the job, but if only those obstructionists would get out of the way – it couldn’t fail!

Just look at a quote from this MSNBC article:

The Senate is poised to vote in June on legislation that would reduce U.S. emissions by 70 percent by 2050;

Studies: CO2 output must cease altogether – Washington Post-

Of the pool of major-party presidential nominees, Senator McCain favors a scheme to drop CO2 emissions by 60%, while Senators Clinton and Obama both favor an 80% cut (see, the major parties are completely different!).  Maybe they’re banking on some “broken window” economic benefits.

Sounds like a sure thing.  Of course we all know the realities of science and government.  They are at their most effective when there is the most vibrant debate.  Don’t pin your hopes on warmists who have concluded “the debate is over“.  Science is debate.  They’ve made their decision, we’re going to ignore the science and go with what is emotionally expedient and popular.

But what of the other side of the coin – the folks who haven’t given up on science?

After three days of what the chairman called “the kind of free-spirited debate that is virtually absent from the global warming alarmist camp”, the 500 delegates issued the Manhattan Declaration, stating that attempts by governments to reduce CO2 emissions would “markedly diminish further prosperity” while having “no appreciable impact” on the Earth’s warming.

Climate dissent grows hotter as chill deepens – Telegraph –

So here we have the warmists claiming that the only way to address the problem effectively will be a total stop to CO2 emissions.  The opposition concludes the same result, but notes that we could get the same result if we don’t destroy the global economies with bureaucratic handwringing.

Warmists assume that because we burnt gigatons of fossil fuels to get where we are today, the third world must do the same.  This isn’t the case however.  We used fossil fuels because they were cheap – and they aren’t anymore. 

The fastest path out of poverty for third world nations will be cheap alternatives to fossil fuels – but for those solutions to become apparent, governments will need to drop their protectionism and subsidies of favored industries and let the free market reflect true costs of energy.  With this information, the people of developing nations – and the modernized western world – can make intelligent decisions about their fuel sources.

For now, my bet is on nuclear.

Leave a Reply