The social 'cost' of carbon is a better life(WHAT? Blasphemer!)

americanthinker.com ^ | 12/22/2016 | Viv Forbes

[rktman]

Nothing better illustrates the stupidity and evil intent of green philosophy than their promotion of a mythical guestimate called the "social cost of carbon" (SCC).

They use this bureaucratic weapon to demonize the fabulous fossil fuels that deliver food, heat, light, and power to the modern world.

Let's consider life before coal, oil, and gas were harnessed.

There was no steel, and there were no cars, tractors, trucks, trains, planes, or electric power. It was a world of sulkies, sailing boats, and sun-dried food. Hunters used bows and spears. Farmers used oxen and wooden ploughs and threshed grain with wooden flails. Half of all crops grown went to feed draft animals. Forests surrounding towns were felled for firewood, charcoal, shingles, houses, ships, wagons, and bridges. Whalers scoured the oceans to produce whale oil for lamps, and dung was collected for fuel. For most people, life was about hunger and toil.

Fossil fuels changed all this and also brought many other social benefits.

[rktman]

Back to your mud huts and yurts peons. WE'LL tell you what's good for you. LOL! Ahhhh. Love the smell of dung fires from the veranda of my hogan in the morning. Let's go kill us a mammoth.

[Personal Responsibility]

“...Hunters used bows and spears...”

Not to nitpick, but guns were invented several centuries before we discovered fossil fuels.

[rktman]

You got some whale oil you could spare?

[Ellendra]

There was no steel,

Ummmm....

[Ellendra]

Not to nitpick, but guns were invented several centuries before we discovered fossil fuels.

And steel was made using charcoal. I know some people who still use it for that.

[Personal Responsibility]

"There was no steel,

Ummmm...."

I didn't say this. Maybe you replied to the wrong person?

[super7man]

A bit of hyperbole in this article, but I think two of mankind's greatest inventions are the internal combustion engine and the power grid.

Both require fossil fuels (for the most part).

[American in Israel]

Well if we don’t burn more fossil fuels to raise the Co2 levels back to normal we are all gonna freeze and starve as the p Kane cools and the plants die back.

Alaska s for Global warming

[IYAS9YAS]

Not to nitpick, but guns were invented several centuries before we discovered fossil fuels.

Coal has been mined in China for over 6,000 years.

[rktman]

If it ain’t the rooskies, it’s them chinamen.

[Ellendra]

I did, sorry about that. It was supposed to be a reply to the article itself.

[IYAS9YAS]

If it ain’t the rooskies, it’s them chinamen.

Aliens. It had to be. We were just sitting around eatin' bugs and flingin' dung, and they came down and showed us how to make fire. It was downhill from there. Now we have accountants. Before fire, no accountants... Life was good then. Sure, old age was 28, but come on, dying early or dealing with taxes... I know I'd rather be eatin' raw mammoth than dealing with taxes.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I've had discussions about this (I too am a CO₂ enthusiast.)

Just looking for an opinion here: what would you consider a "back to normal" or even "optimal" concentration of CO₂? And why?

Myself, I am torn between 800 and 1500 ppm.

For a Green Planet!

[minnesota_bound]

Donald Trump should ask for a accurate weather report from all 50 states for the next day. Down to the degree. The global warming fraud crowd says the Earth will warm up by in a century by a degree or so - their predication’s are always in the distant future aren’t they?

If inaccurate and you know it always is then Trump can say no more money to the global warming fraudsters as they cannot predict tomorrow temps let alone the distant future.