The problem is that all these scientists are so tied up with a socialist political agenda (abstain from industrial production/consumption peasant!) that it is extremely difficult to tell when they are telling the truth, or lying through their teeth. A lot of other scientists say that they aren't sure we are the cause.
You saw the numbers on actual CO2 emmissions. Numbers are very difficult to pin down in these debates, no one likes to talk about relative quantity or establish perspective in their doom prophecy. It is more a matter of weaving morose visions of the future and telling people if you don't do x, this will happen.
0.09 If there is a problem, we are a microscopic component of it.
Quote:
2) Micro-organisms like the one responsible for the Bubonic Plague like it warmer. Saw that on a PBS documentary called "Catastrophe!" And there's molds, fungus, mosquitoes...all kinds of life forms to take advantage of the additional warmth.
|
And plagues of locusts and fire and brimstone.
Quote:
|
I still think it's possible to make more money without producing the greenhouse gases
|
Not with industrial processes it isn't. Our productivity is enabled by artificial work, which is enabled by gigawatts of portable energy. The available energy/person, and therefore the available per capita productivity would be decimated if we lost our energy capability. Our economy would collapse. We would literally be living in the middle ages again.
People can live with climate change - we have throughout our entire history. We cannot maintain our modern civilization without portable energy. In a sense, climate change will cost us less than refraining from fossil fuels - a rational decision.