Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #800 –
I suppose you're right. At various points in this thread, I was trying to get him to understand that current third industrial revolution technology changes transcends dyed in the wool party politics and comes down to long term economic and business sense and the era in which this was just tree hugging hippy liberal stuff is over. In this I must take ownership of my failure.
One more try, since I'm so stubborn. Okay, Oakdale, there was a long period in which work was mostly done by draft animals. Attach a horse or ox or whatever large animal of your choosing to a wheel as an engine of sorts. Then came water wheels, followed by fossil fuels and nuclear. Although early examples of each of these improvements meant a large investment and change in thinking, they were ultimately more efficient and profits increased 
Now renewable sources such as solar are coming into their own with solar plants that keep generating after dark and cost less per kilowatt hour to generate electricity than natural gas (yes, some new models do...) But fossil fuel interests are doing their damnedist to keep from being replaced, hence the propaganda articles and massive political contributions. But there's no more reason to want to hold on to fossils fuels than it would have been continue tying animals to wheels back in the day. In what way does that make sense? Because some political blog told you that a lower percentage of climatologists than 97 agree that climate change is man-made? So what if that number is actually in 80 percent range or whatever or is indeed 97?
Progress will continue with or without the naysayers and those that want to hold onto the past and once again a higher level of human development and GDP will come with it as it has for centuries and this time around we'll have cleaner air and less overall environmental damage to boot. There's little to rationally oppose unless you own stock in Exxon-Mobile, BP and friends.
I know, "So-and-so's paper has holes in it." Again, so what for us? None of us has identified himself as a climatologist, so we don't actually know this and wind up parroting what some blogger said (who most likely isn't one either and is thus unable to reproduce the experiments for himself or go collect ice cores and rock samples and analyze tree rings for signs of warm periods and cool periods, etc) Wow, that's an unpleasant feeling isn't it, being full of shit and repeating what somebody equally or more so is? Harsh? Certainly. True? With as much certainty.
What I do know is business and what the fate of those who cling to old ways of doing is. Chapter 7, all non-exempt assets liquidated.
Topic: Anthropogenic Global Warming (Read 198579 times)
