Sunday, September 27, 2009

So What's the "Problem" They Want to "Solve?"

If global warming, or climate change, or climate variability--or whatever the term of art is today after a decade of static global temperatures--is so bad, you'd think that solutions less expensive than destroying our economy to combat what models claim we will face might be considered:

Governments are doing practically nothing to study the removal of carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere, but this technology could be a much cheaper form of climate protection than photovoltaic cells and other approaches getting lavish support, according to an article published today in Science.

But no, the global warmers want us to live like paupers with small carbon footprints (but not the global warming elites who will continue to live in mansions and jet around the globe, while pretending that using single-ply toilet paper and inferior light bulbs, and banning plastic bags is pennance enough) rather than look at ways we might remove carbon dioxide.

Remember, global warming is a religion and not science. Which means that our Western lifestyle and not carbon dioxide is the real "problem" they want to "solve."

UPDATE: Simberg thinks it's socialism rather than religion. Seems like a faith-based thing, either way. I really wonder what the global warmers would do if given the choice of a) continuing our current lifestyles while removing all offending carbon dioxide or b) pauperizing and collectivizing us, and otherwise organizing our communities, but failing to significantly affect carbon dioxide levels. I'm guessing they'd choose the latter.