Here’s what gets me about global warming:
1. The earth’s climate has changed many times in history. During the last ice age, Chicago was buried under a mile of ice. Clearly we have had global warming since then, which was part of a natural cycle. It had nothing to do with man, since Cro-magnon Man did not have coal fired power plants.
2. We don’t fully understand the natural cycles involved with climate. And we don’t fully understand how much man may have contributed to this. But we do know that climate has changed many times prior to the Industrial Revolution.
3. Even if we want to say, for sake of argument, that man is significantly impacting the climate, what exactly should be done about this? Doesn’t there have to be a cost/benefit review of any proposed actions? How does cap and trade help, for example? The same amount of “evil” CO2 is allowed to be emitted. It just that now somebody is paying for the permission to emit same.
4. Even if enlightened liberals take control of governments in western countries and adopt policies to cut back emissions, what exactly do they propose to do about China and India emitting such high levels of pollutants as those countries industrialize? We have no control over policies adopted by other countries.
re your item #3 on Cap and Trade:
Cap and Trade is a device to ensure MORE carbon in the atmostphere, not less (I am a global warming skeptic, at least regarding an anthropogenic basis of any magnitude). Persons, companies, countries, etc. who have the right to put a certain level of carbon into the air but who have NO intention of doing so are encourage to sell that right to those who clearly WILL do so. An honest environmentalist would support simply limiting the amount of carbon each entity can put into the atmosphere, and make that amount non-alienable (i.e., you can’t sell the right).
[[1. The earth’s climate has changed many times in history.]]
Our great lakes were formed by global climate change-
[[2. We don’t fully understand the natural cycles involved with climate. And we don’t fully understand how much man may have contributed to this.]]
Sure we do- at least as to how much man has contributed- we contribute a scant 0.004% to the total atmospheric CO2- nature supplies the other 99.996%- perhaps we shoudl be chatrging nature a carbon tax- If our pesident is goign to insist on lying to the american people by claiming man is causing global warming, and he wants to charge humans, then the tax shoudl NOT exceed 0.004% of a dollar per year per person-
[[3. Even if we want to say, for sake of argument, that man is significantly impacting the climate, what exactly should be done about this?]]
We don’t even have to go there- man is not significantly impacting global warming- no more than he did when the mile htick glaciers over chicago receeded back durign thel ittle ice age- nature took care of the lciamte back then, it will do so agin-
[[Doesn’t there have to be a cost/benefit review of any proposed actions?]]
Not when you’re a democrat- all you have to do is declare an emercy, you don’t even have to prove it, you just have to pay off a few ‘scientists’ and that’s all that’s needed- kkkuomo is doign the saem damn thing in NY by declarign an emergency cocnerning guns- no vote needed- just ram through the unconstitutional law-
[[The same amount of “evil” CO2 is allowed to be emitted.]]
to that scientists say ‘so what?” CO2 does NOT cause global warming- CO2 rises AFTER global warmign happens- as the earth is warmed, CO2 trapped in ice and the cold oceans rises into atmosphere raisign hte overall amount- As the cliamte changes to colder again, more precipitation happens, and CO2 falls back to earth gettign trapped again- Sceintists know this- yet most will NOT admit htis because they are beign paid to perpetrate a LIE