| Squilliam said: Its funny that based on everything I have seen the only bad results seem to come from global cooling. Whenever in history the temperatures have risen, the world seems to thrive! Whether or not the climate is changing is one thing, proving that warmer temperatures are bad is another. The only 'bad' I have seen come from stories that an 'estimated x # of people' will die due to the effects of warming but these are generally poor people and sticking them on a life of public welfare from the rich nations to the poor nations would probably be cheaper than a massive switch away from carbon emissions. So I guess whether its welfare from emissions trading or welfare from warming alleviation, its probably a better solution to just call it welfare and get over it. |
Your correct. Global warming really isn't a bad thing, as the opposite is global cooling, which is a very bad thing. What would we be saying if the opposite were happening, and we were entering a phase of global cooling? Would we have alarmists then if (lets say) the temperature drops 3C globally in the next 10 years?
Personally, I don't feel comfortable with one entity (the government) controlling the climate. We need a system of checks and balances - people working to conserve and innovate, businesess investing in better research and producing what we need for survival, and government ensuring fair competition. If we hand it all over to the government (mandating conservation and restricting innovations in key markets, reducing business' role in solving the issue, and government ensuring unfair competition through specific regulations) I don't predict the best thing will happen for the earth, nor the humanity that lives here.
Back from the dead, I'm afraid.
