Originally Posted by Aquatic
Awesome, I'm in a sig!
Jub, I'm sorry I lumped you with that idiot MaxPariah. My mistake. A) I jumped off the deep end a bit, cuz that's my style. B) I was half-joking, particularly regarding your liberal quote. It was late at night and I was making jokes with myself. Isn't that what this place, especially Political Outsider is for?
Is your main point against climate change legislation based on scientific uncertainty? I am a subscriber to the precautionary principle, I'll leave it at that. I'm by no means qualified regarding climate science. I perceived a broad attack on environmental protection coming from Max and I felt obligated to answer. I will also consider your point regarding scientists' arrogance. While I try to simply go by the facts, and it is a fact that environmental protection in most cases is very immediately beneficial for people by any objective measure, I will consider your thoughts going forward.
Max, what are your thoughts?
I appreciate your post... true character on display. I'm sorry as well for slamming the door a little hard in my response. I should have been more constructive. I do believe that the climate is changing. I have little doubt about that. I just have issues with believing that it is completely human-caused. There's water vapor. Solar output. Documented pre-industrial swings in climate. I don't think it is a "crisis"- and if it is, it is not one that humans can solve. But that is just what little old me thinks.
As far as environmental regulation: we need it. I swim and kayak in the same water as my liberal, Prius-driving neighbors. I love the Texas Hill Country when I can get out there, and we all have a stake in keeping it nice. I worked with my friends in the local outdoorsmen's association to get a serious fine passed for dumping of any kind in our watershed. And it has helped, especially with glass and styrofoam in the river. I want my grandchildren to enjoy paddling that river decades from now.
The Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act were/are good things. Industry does need to be reigned-in. I guess the problem I have is when enviro-hysteria sets in and it becomes the jumping off point for regulating anything
that the self-appointed braintrust claims is in need of regulation. That amount of power over others is seductive. It is a fertile garden for a control freak empowered by "scientific consensus" that no one dares question.
Should we strip mine the entire planet? No. Should we work in vain to try and make sure it never changes? Not worth it- it has before us, and will long after we're gone. We cannot stop it anyway. We should take care of our planet, do things that are sensible... like recycling, encouraging development of alternative energy, and cleaning up the significant messes we've already made. It just causes a great amount of suspicion with me when I look at the Usual Suspects who have a new schtick with the same old goals... more taxes, and greater government control. No sane person wants a polluted environment. But there is a point at which there is skepticism about if things like Carbon Taxes, banning incandescent light bulbs, remote control thermostats in our homes, unreachable CAFE standards, and international treaty control over our daily lives are really going to do anything to the global temperature. I mean, we're 93 million miles from a really, really big heater that we don't control the thermostat on.