Anthropogenic Global Warming

[GotchayeX]

I don't think that that's entirely fair.

It's not just about the probability of AGW being a real phenomenon. It's also about the probability of a given policy actually doing anything about it. You can't just say that there's some finite chance of everyone dying, so we need all of humanity to put everything they have into stopping it right away.

My understanding is that all of the same doomsaying would be just as applicable under Kyoto, which set goals that proved entirely unattainable. Of course, any sustained effort in the developed world is going to quickly amount to nothing, since it's just about impossible (politically and in actuality) to effectively tax imports reliant on 'illicit' emissions from other countries.

It may well be the case that the single best thing we can do to prevent global warming is to do nothing to hamper economic growth and scientific advancement.

The whole debate has always struck me as being pointlessly Malthusian. One side predicts that terrible things will result from unfettered human progress. One side misguidedly maintains that there's no indication that we're headed for ruin. Neither can predict what new tools and techniques modern science will come up with in the meantime.

We've heard this "we're all doomed" talk many times before, so you'll excuse me if I don't pay close attention.