Sunday, February 10, 2013

Lest Someone Build a Bridge Out of Her

My basic rule is that even if the planet is warming (and it hasn't for the last 16 years, but that could be a quirk in a long-term trend) and even if people are responsible for that increase (we are certainly putting CO2 in the air, but is that really the input that accounts for climate?), that doesn't mean that green claims for disaster ("the end is nigh!") and green claims for how to stop global warming (expand government control to stop economic growth and take away freedom) are wise policies that would solve the problem.

Take a breath, exhale some planet destroying CO2, and consider the reality:

"The slow nature of climate progression results in de facto adaptation, as can be seen with sea level changes on the East Coast," they wrote. In other words, whatever changes may occur happen so slowly that adapting to them is easy – and doesn't cost a dime in carbon taxes or renewable energy subsidies.

Likewise, a large body of evidence demonstrates crop and livestock production will adapt to climate change. Moreover, the Cato study found increasing carbon dioxide, which the government is determined to reduce in the atmosphere, is likely increasing crop yields and will continue to do so.

But the president says the government must do something.

And people who don't want to panic and do something no matter how poorly thought out the latest favorite green policies turn out are the science "deniers."

But there is safety in spouting a belief in global warming. Heck, you can wonder aloud (and on camera) if approaching asteroids are the result of global warming without any impact on your news career (tip to Instapundit):

CNN anchor Deb Feyerick asked Saturday afternoon if an approaching asteroid, which will pass by Earth on February 15, “is an example of, perhaps, global warming?”

There is video, too. I'll treasure that on-air moment forever. How did she become so wise in the ways of science, anyway?

Feyerick is safe from her fellow "science" promoters should the witch hunt to punish "deniers" take place. She may sound like an anti-science ignoramus, but she believes the right thing. You'd think that witch hunts couldn't take place in this day and age, but you'd be wrong:

A woman accused of witchcraft has been burned alive in front of hundreds of witnesses in Papua New Guinea town in one of the highest profile sorcery-rated murders in this South Pacific island nation, police said Friday.

Things go wrong, and it is easy to blame witches--and then identify the witches.

But this is the 21st century. We have ways of determining who is a witch that don't rely on primitive burning sprees:

Police Commissioner Tom Kulunga described the murder as "shocking and devilish."

"We are in the 21st century and this is totally unacceptable," Commissioner Kulunga said in a statement Thursday.

He suggested courts be established to deal with sorcery allegations, as an alternative to villagers dispensing justice.

Yes. Witch Court.

I'm sure our global warming true believers who think man-made original carbon is the cause of our burning up in a Hell on Earth won't be so devilish as to simply hunt global warming deniers. Trial first, hanging second. Never the other way around. That's how the civilized dispense justice.

Now go and emit no more.

UPDATE: Bill Nye is lucky that Feyerick was flamboyantly demonstrating the brain power of a mossy rock for most people to note that he had no idea what he was saying when he tried to explain weather (tip to Instapundit). Needless to say, Feyerick didn't catch any of Nye's errors.