15 February, 2005

The Global Warming War

A sad kind of dog-humping-my-leg persistence seems to be characteristic of some on the loony left. Long after I've made my views clear, and explicitly told them to stop, some Michael Moore wannabes continue to e-mail me articles like this. Which is part of the inspiration for this blog. I'm going to let it keep coming. Maybe I'll even encourage it. Some of this stuff is just too nutty not to fisk and share. This is easy and fun. Lets take it right from the top:

"If enough people become convinced that global warming has the potential to be as deadly as an asteroid barrage, it might change humanity's priorities."
Uh, yes. And if enough people become convinced that the tooth fairy came last night and that "Bush Lied", it would change peoples' priorities as well - even if neither one happened. At least with the former, it makes my kids happy for a few minutes. From his tone, I'm not sure Mr. Kramer ever had that pleasure.
"On Wednesday, Feb. 16, the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change goes into effect to begin a global rescue mission. It's a historic first step. Yet the U.S., the top greenhouse gas producer hasn't signed on, and developing countries, including China and India, are exempt."
Did it dawn on Mr. Kramer that the 'historic' nature of the protocol and the fact that China and India are exempt might - just maybe - be related to the U.S.'s not signing on? Chairman Mao was pretty 'historic' too.
"Even if every country in the world met Kyoto's goals it wouldn't save our children from the catastrophes a consensus of scientists predict. "Meeting the Climate Challenge," a report from the International Climate Change Task Force, warns we're approaching a point of no return."
Lets see, 'scientific consensus'... that has a great legacy, doesn't it? There were those important 'consensus' committees chaired by Einstein, and Galileo, and Newton. How could those men ever have achieved anything without committee meetings and stale coffee and international deliberations that conferred such legitimacy on their insights. And it would be just horrible if we reached another point of no return, because back in the early '70's we were facing many points of no return, as chronicled by Paul Ehrlich and others. We were facing an ice age! That's why my skis have been sitting in the basement.
If we don't act decisively, average global temperatures could over decades rise almost 4 degrees Fahrenheit above 1750s levels. They're already up over 1 degree. We'd face agricultural failures, diseases, droughts and floods. Some experts forecast a 10-degree jump, much higher sea levels and possible abrupt, runaway changes to ocean currents.
Ooh, lets act "decisively"! Lets put a great big brick on the world economy so we can prevent things that have been happening since the dawn of time. Also note the shift from consensus to 'some experts'. Which is it? Here in suburbia we can feel good, while our biggest geopolitical competitors are exempt. Yeah, that makes sense. Sort of like having Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Zimbabwe on the UN panel on human rights. It's all about consensus, right?
That was just the first three paragraphs. I need to go make coffee and do some real work. I'm sure they'll be more left-wing fun in the e-mail tomorrow.