Originally Posted by Tauron
Steve Chu was talking about lecturing to the american youth about environment education, which sounds like a damn good plan if you ask me.
Yes, well this is why we didn't ask you. People who think humans are a virus on the planet that are killing it aren't fit to determine how others should live. You don't get have input when the result you are hoping for is genocide.
The american culture has very little education about the need to adopt an environment-friendly lifestyle. Most of us see those things as the province of dumb celebs and hippie treehuggers. I live in a prominent city in Alabama. Even though it is prominent, it seems sometimes that every car is a huge pickup truck spilling black smoke. My neighbor has this in this garage: two pickup trucks, a gas lawnmower, a gas edge trimmer, a gas scooter for his kid, a gas pressure washer, a gas power generator, and an air compressor, LOL! And I don't think he is an extreme example. Get the picture?
I do get the picture. You fail to see that prominent in Alabama wouldn't be a flea's ass in California.
Here is a picture you need to get. California is your claimed promise land and we have industry fleeing due to regulation and the inability to guarantee power for their needs. We are broke with billions of oil sitting off our coast. We are the folks replacing 400 megawatt nuclear power plants with 4 megawatt solar set ups. We are the state where farm land is lying fallow bankrupting the farm owners and unemploying the folks who would help with those crops all due to a minnow.
So your neighbor owns some items you don't approve of but how does that prove he is uneducated in the matter? Is the claim about this merely due to the disagreement? Did you give him a quiz that he failed?
Of course he isn't an extreme example. People who live in single family homes have lawns and tools associated with the care of them. You appear to implicate them without considering how much fuel they actually use and what the alternatives would cost. As an example, how much gas do you honestly think goes through all those power toys in a year? I would bet it isn't even 10 gallons of gas.
The exact type of thinking you have leads to ridiculous results meant to cause discomfort and pain to the human population and a hope that in their misery they will simply fail to reproduce in "hopes" of saving the planet. Be honest about your agenda which is misery, pain and harm all in the name of mythical good intentions. Stop implicating your neighbor and tell enlightened Al Gore to stop jetting around the world while coming home to his monster house and monster house boat. Those actions probably burn more energy in a year than all your neighbors power tools will burn in a lifetime.
The american public NEEDS to be lectured. That much is clear. That doesn't mean you must comply with what they say so there is no need for the OP to throw a hissy fit. And by the way the government lectures the citizens all the time, it is called a speech. Reagan did it all the time during the cold war. The only difference is this is way way more important.
There is a large difference between ignorance and indifference. The American public is not ignorant on these matters. Likewise claiming that the "enlightened" parties should educate them is nonsense because those parties are not example of what they claim. They want to change society while driving from lecture to lecture in SUVs left idling so the interior will be cool when they come out. They take private jets from location to location and burn more fuel in them than most small towns will consume in a year in just one trip.
It is blatant hypocrisy and nothing more than moralizing and sermonizing in the name of stripping freedoms and grabbing power.
Steve Chu was chosen to this post because he offered a unique mix of depth of understanding of the climate problem with political savvyness. In the past, DOE chiefs were chosen based purely on politics. Steve is one of the first who actually understands the problem because he is a trained scientist and a pretty damn good one. Is Steve Chu arrogant? Oh hell yes. If you met him in person you would be hating the guy in less than 5 seconds. But... believe it or not... he is also smart and he is correct.
So where is the proof that being a scientist leads to good public policy? Please find this for me. Being good in a very select area does not guarantee any sort of expertise on policy that must address complex and generalized systems. Quite the opposite! This is called the endorsement fallacy and is no better than claiming the skinny coke addled actress can recommend the best juicer or exercise machine.
Climate change is a clear and present danger that affects the entire world. The OP and trumptman seem to think about this issue in the national security context, it seems. Well, there is also the context of the repercussions of climate change and suggestions of "clean coal" and "new refineries" have been soundly rejected by all those who understand what is at stake. The best thing you can do is to try to get informed by reading the ICCP report and asking questions about concepts still unclear to you until you get a basic grasp of the issue.
The climate change models have not been properly predictive and thus there is no reason to endorse them. There has been no warming for a decade and most delusional climate change advocates are attempting to control humanity based on fear. It is no different than the chieftans of old declaring that some throats must be slit to please the gods and bring about appropriate weather.
I'm not going to pray to Sol nor to Steve Chu and claiming someone who doesn't agree with you is ignorant is the most ignorant claim of all.