mrstickball said:
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. |
Im especially uncomfortable with your public entity (government) being in charge of anything important! But Global cooling seems to be the killer rather than Global warming. IIRC the world entered a phase of great prosperity during the MWP (medieval warm period) and that prosperity dwindlied once that period ended.
But I agree that essentially once the entity gets big enough and surround it with little competition you find that it can do more harm than good. Whether that entity is a government or a corporation, it doesn't matter as they can both be equally corrupt internally and they can both equally act against the best interests of the people. Case in point: Microsoft is pretty retarded, Sony is brain dead and GM is comatose and the U.S government makes them all look about 100% smarter than they actually are.
Tease.







