Thursday, May 22, 2008


John Stossel has a great article on McCain's global warming ideas and they get to the heart of why a McCain victory is a debatable victory for free market ideology. Money quote. . .
"Instead of idly debating the precise extent of global warming, ... we need to deal with the central facts of rising temperatures, rising waters, and all the endless troubles that global warming will bring. We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great. The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge".

This reminds me of the medieval king sending his best knights into the dark woods to sleigh dragons.

Now a sober view.
Roy W. Spencer, a research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and author of "Climate Confusion," says he's "increasingly convinced" that climate change has far more to do with natural phenomena like El NiƱo and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation than carbon dioxide. "Maybe the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is higher now than it has been in hundreds of thousands of years. So what?" he wrote in a recent article for the National Review.

"Even though there has never been a single scientific paper published that has ruled out natural variability for most of the warming we've seen since 1850, Big Science has managed to convince politicians and much of the public that the science is settled. Apparently, our addition of nine molecules of carbon dioxide to each 100,000 molecules of air over the last 150 years can now be blamed for anything and everything ... Hurricanes, tornadoes, heat waves, floods, glaciers flowing toward the sea ... these used to happen naturally, but no more".

Our unlimited faith in the government somehow supposes that the government is full of experts that know best. What if the government were full of hacks that use crisis as a means to spread their influence and gain power? Making that point is the function of the right wing candidate. Our guy seems to be eating lunch on the first supposition.

No comments:

Post a Comment