Are any of you out there surprised I've been on an anti-anthropogenic global warming campaign lately? As more evidence comes to light that the AGW folks may have been premature going into “We're all gonna DIE!” mode, the faithful cling to the notion that we must take drastic measures to save Earth's climate. But what does that mean? What drastic measures? And how much effect will those drastic measures actually have?
Listening to the AGW adherents over the past few years, I've come to the conclusion that they really don't know what needs to be done, or by whom. (Actually they know exactly who should handle it: the Government.) Oh, they'll talk a great game, but when it comes to actually doing something about it, it's somebody else that should bear the burdens they want to place upon the rest of humanity. Not them. After all they need to be able to keep an eye on the rest of us to make sure we've properly impoverished ourselves and are not exceeding the limits they intend to place upon every other human being on the planet.
But still the question begs, what exactly would the ever not-so-mysterious “They” have us do? And what if the actions we take to 'repair' Earth's climate ends up doing little if anything to affect climate change but prevents us from taking steps to mitigate the effects of it, to adapt ourselves and our societies to the changes expected by the AGW proponents? If the AGW folks are right, and even if by their best estimates the massive reductions in human generated greenhouse gases they want will have little effect over the next 100 years or so, wouldn't the billions or trillions of dollars they want us to spend be better spent preparing for those changes? The AGW faithful will, of course, say that any price is worth it to fix the problem. The problem with that answer is that they are wrong, wrong in so many ways I'm not even going to attempt to list them.
Now ask yourself this question: What if the global warming folks are wrong and the warming we've seen in the past hundred years or so is a normal variation? Or what if they're wrong about the negative effects of global warming and the effect of such warming is positive? (Think the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods, when the global temperatures were warmer than they are now.) Or what if these changes are now reversing themselves and we are instead entering another Little Ice Age? Or worse, entering an extended Ice Age? Would the billions or trillions we spent combating global warming have been wasted on something that was never a threat or was, in fact, something beneficial to us?
Of course the AGW faithful will never let such thoughts enter their minds. It goes against the doctrine of the sainted Al Gore, the inventor of the Internet and the Supreme Climatologist Extraordinaire whose wisdom and knowledge about such things should never be questioned.