philodelphi wrote:
In a perfect world, I'd agree. But this is not a perfect world, so I respect PD for making their voice heard.
What about you? Will your descendants wonder if/how you made your voice heard? What about mine?
As a Geologist my understanding of time, stability of the planet, and importance of man on it is a bit different. The planet and it's climate is dynamic. It will change no matter what we do. I don't see man as a particularly durable species. Man has been here a very short time. Man will likely be extinct in a geologically short time no matter what. The planet will seek equilibrium no matter what we do.
To me it appears that carbon based climate change is a politically expedient substitute for the true problem which is over population of the human species.
You don't gain political power advocating drastic solutions to over population. But you do by substituting reducing carbon by controlling industries, and behavior.
You don't make money by advocating reducing population. The is especially true in dept heavy economies that depend on growing GDP to service debt, and pay postponed bills. You can get rich by putting a value on carbon, and controlling what is now essentially a new currency. Carbon credits.
Take a moment and think about most of the iconic landscape images we travel to and take with our expensive cameras. Many (if not most) are the result of sculpting that occurred during the last ice age. The most recent warming period that started about 12 thousand years ago melted the ice, and exposed these features for our pleasure. The global climate we now enjoy is sometimes refer to by geologists as "the long summer". Your area of the country was likely covered in ice year round before the current warming period. Why should the planet stabilize because you chose to build a house in a newly temperate place? The whole climate change panic is mostly another case demonstrating the hubris of man.
I am comfortable that the fate of the planet is in the good hands of physics, and thermodynamics. The future generations of man will have to make the best they can of this. In the end it is out of our hands.
philodelphi wrote:
In a perfect world, I'd agree. But this is not a perfect world, so I respect PD for making their voice heard.
What about you? Will your descendants wonder if/how you made your voice heard? What about mine?
As a Geologist my understanding of time, stability of the planet, and importance of man on it is a bit different. The planet and it's climate is dynamic. It will change no matter what we do. I don't see man as a particularly durable species. Man has been here a very short time. Man will likely be extinct in a geologically short time no matter what. The planet will seek equilibrium no matter what we do.
To me it appears that carbon based climate change is a politically expedient substitute for the true problem which is over population of the human species.
You don't gain political power advocating drastic solutions to over population. But you do by substituting reducing carbon by controlling industries, and behavior.
You don't make money by advocating reducing population. The is especially true in dept heavy economies that depend on growing GDP to service debt, and pay postponed bills. You can get rich by putting a value on carbon, and controlling what is now essentially a new currency. Carbon credits.
Take a moment and think about most of the iconic landscape images we travel to and take with our expensive cameras. Many (if not most) are the result of sculpting that occurred during the last ice age. The most recent warming period that started about 12 thousand years ago melted the ice, and exposed these features for our pleasure. The global climate we now enjoy is sometimes refer to by geologists as "the long summer". Your are of the country was likely covered in ice year round before the current warming period. Why should the planet stabilize because you chose to build a house in a newly temperate place? The whole climate change panic is mostly another case demonstrating the hubris of man.
I am comfortable that the fate of the planet is in the good hands of physics, and thermodynamics. The future generations of man will have to make the best they can of this. In the end it is out of our hands.
philodelphi wrote:
In a perfect world, I'd agree. But this is not a perfect world, so I respect PD for making their voice heard.
What about you? Will your descendants wonder if/how you made your voice heard? What about mine?
As a Geologist my understanding of time, stability of the planet, and importance of man on it is a bit different. The planet and it's climate is dynamic. It will change no matter what we do. I don't see man as a particularly durable species. Man has been here a very short time. Man will likely be extinct in a geologically short time no matter what. The planet will seek equilibrium no matter what we do.
To me it appears that carbon based climate change is a politically expedient substitute for the true problem which is over population of the human species.
You don't gain political power advocating drastic solutions to over population. But you do by substituting reducing carbon by controlling industries, and behavior.
You don't make money by advocating reducing population. The is especially true in dept heavy economies that depend on growing GDP to service debt, and pay postponed bills. You can get rich by putting a value on carbon, and controlling what is now essentially a new currency. Carbon credits.
Take a moment and think about most of the iconic landscape images we travel to and take with our expensive cameras. Many (if not most) are the result of sculpting that occurred during the last ice age. The most recent warming period that started about 12 thousand years ago melted the ice, and exposed these features for our pleasure. The global climate we now enjoy is sometimes refer to by geologists as "the long summer". Your are of the country was likely covered in ice year round before the current warming period. Why should the planet stabilize because you chose to build a house in a newly temperate place? The whole climate change panic is mostly another case demonstrating the hubris of man.
I am comfortable that the fate of the planet is in the good hands of physics, and thermodynamics. The future generations of man will have to make the best of this. In the end it is out of our hands.
philodelphi wrote:
In a perfect world, I'd agree. But this is not a perfect world, so I respect PD for making their voice heard.
What about you? Will your descendants wonder if/how you made your voice heard? What about mine?
As a Geologist my understanding of time, stability of the planet, and importance of man on it is a bit different. The planet and it's climate is dynamic. It will change no matter what we do. I don't see man as a particularly durable species. Man has been here a very short time. Man will likely be extinct in a geologically short time no matter what. The planet will seek equilibrium no matter what we do.
To me it appears that carbon based climate change is a politically expedient substitute for the true problem which is over population of the human species.
You don't gain political power advocating drastic solutions to over population. But you do by substituting reducing carbon by controlling industries, and behavior.
You don't make money by advocating reducing population. The is especially true in dept heavy economies that depend on growing GDP to service debt, and pay postponed bills. You can get rich by putting a value on carbon, and controlling what is now essentially a new currency. Carbon credits.
Take a moment and think about most of the iconic landscape images we travel to and take with our expensive cameras. Many (if not most) are the result of sculpting that occurred during the last ice age. The most recent warming period that started about 12 thousand years ago melted the ice, and exposed these features for our pleasure. HMMMM
I am comfortable that the fate of the planet is in the good hands of physics, and thermodynamics. The future generations of man will have to make the best of this. In the end it is out of our hands.
