Saturday, April 04, 2009

World Hiker Clarifies
Position on Climate Change

David has left a new comment on your post "Tenth Coldest March on Record!": I know being a skeptic of science the link below will not change your mind, but I thought it would be a good read. One thing I must ask is what you mean by "the climate always changes". Do you mean long term climate always changes or every day, short-term weather always changes? Oh, by the way, just because you are willing to be conservation minded does not mean everyone else is willing to make the changes needed (that you and I - a left wing "hypocritical" environmentalist) to conserve the environment or stop global climate change before it is too late to conserve what will and is being lost.

Hey David—thanks for commenting. Let me clarify my position on this whole Climate Change thing. I am in between the naysayer Right-wing nuts and the world is coming to an end Left-wing kooks. When I state climate always changes-I mean both on a seasonal and long term basis. That’s my point. I do not believe that man has had as large of an impact on climate that the alarmists claim. I still say that it is part of a bigger climate change that is part of the way the world is heading-ice age-warming period-mini ice age-the beat goes on. With that-I think it is absolutely crazy to implement drastic measures to fight climate change (like fighting the sun from shining) which I believe will only destroy our economy, unnecessarily tax people (which will seriously impact lower income people-latte liberals have plenty of money to tax themselves-the folks don’t) for something that I believe we cannot warrant significant change or influence (or minimally at best and there are sounder wider reaching measures like land preservation that are far more effective than cap and trade) upon. I am all for sound conservation-like land preservation-energy conservation-alternative energy like nuclear which has the smallest impact for the most energy and population control which includes reduced immigration-especially the latter-we cannot add one million people to our population every year and expect energy consumption to go down-it will never happen. But, the left wing alarmists only want to regulate what kind of cars we drive, what we set our thermostats at, try to get us out of our cars, etc.etc, without addressing the real issues to a planet at peril- over population and over consumption. What makes so many of them hypocrites (and they aren’t all hypocrites-many are just misguided) is that often the ones that speak the loudest-and demand the most radical changes in personal behavior usually don’t carry though with it themselves. They want you and me to change but they won’t. Whether it is a certain overweight mayor that expounds upon the virtues of public transportation and riding a bike and shunning your personal vehicle-yet he has a limousine tote him around- a certain president that wants to implement cap and trade which will dramatically increase our electric bills-but he cranks his thermostat up- a certain ex vice president that claims the world is ending but he lives in a huge house and flies all over the world in a private jet-the list goes on-that and all the other well-healed limousine liberals that scream and shout about the world coming to an end-yet they continue to live in giant houses-or two-fly all over the world on vacations-import trendy food (with big carbon foot prints) use tons of energy for all of their electronic gizmos but think they are off the hook because they drive a Prius or bought some stupid green tag (indulgence)- I’m tired of this hypocrisy! None of them address their own over consumptive behavior (it is always yours and mine they want to address) and none of them tackle the real problems of over-population and over-consumption-because they are at the center of those problems by refusing to address them! Now, right-wing climate change deniers-they may not give a crap about the environment- but at least they’re not hypocrites-just selfish fools, The left wing do as I say not as I do types are worst-and I am tired of them trying to regulate my life while they continue to live a life of waste and largess. I’m all for real conservation methods- and I have been living them my entire life. The world is not going to end because of climate change-it is just going to be a different place-and that is not bad or good necessarily-just different—we’ll adapt-the planet will adapt-it always has-so let’s stop wasting time chasing windmills and instead work on real conservation issues- land preservation-reduced energy consumption, and sustainable development and population reduction! I hope I made myself clearer and thanks for having the dialogue.


David said...

Hi Craig,

Thank you for responding. I do believe the dialogue is good but I am part of the camp that believe too much dialogue has taken place and that action is needed based upon peer-reviewed tested science. I also believe, evidence based, that it will not be the implementation of measures to combat climate change that will destroy our economy but that it will be the reverse that will do more damage to the economy, whole ecosystems, humans, and the world as a whole. But before I talk about anything else I will agree with you on one of my pet peeves, hypocrisy.

I do believe, as you do, that too many politicians and advocates of climate change policy do not practice what they preach. Too many times our leaders only want to implement policy if it does not affect them or their constituents negatively or, as you said of a certain vice-president with a great message that pumps out CO2 flying all over the country, do the opposite of what they recommend.

On the other hand, there all a lot of people like me (I would guess, but could be wrong, liberal nut cases) that are very loud about the speaking out on the changes needed and willing and do make the changes in life to help reduce climate change. I do try to do my part but am willing admit I am not perfect with my actions, I do fall off the band wagon at times such as being lazy and driving the one mile to the store, but I do understand what Gandhi means when he said “be the change you want to see in the world”. So for my partner, many friends, and me we are willing to bike, turn down the thermostat, consume less, and accept the changes that will cost us and inconvenience us at times but will only help our planet. At the same time I do struggle with the issue of having children/ overpopulation given the simple biological want vs. the knowledge that each new baby born will become consumers.

Another thing I would like to have clarified, if possible. I assume that you are a person that accepts the applications of empirical science when it benefits you. But why do you, as so many people do from flat-earthers to anti-evolutionist just to name a couple (not a derogatory comparison), reject well tested hypotheses and theories (scientific theories not layman theories)? Even though I am not a climate change expert I do understand a little bit about the climate, such as how CO2 has caused increases in temperature over the course of the past millions of years and the relationship with increases on man-made CO2 (to extraordinary levels) and increases in temperature during the last century. I understand the need for skepticism in science, it is what keeps us refining our knowledge and learning about our world, but at some point when evidence is overwhelming when do we accept the results (with continued inquiry) but take action?

Even though the world is not going to end how much damage to humans and the planet are we willing to accept before we do take action? All the work on “real” conservation issues is directly connected to climate change because we do need to have sustainable development, population reduction, decrease in pollution and CO2 production to help reduce the effects of climate change. But without major climate action soon all of our efforts at “real” conservation will most likely be to no avail.

I know it will probably not happen but I do hope someone will be able to convince you of the urgency of action. I will do my part by being the change I want to see and through advocacy.


Craig said...

Hi David-

Thanks again for your response-

Your second to last paragraph pretty much sums it up where I am willing to head with conservation measures-

"Even though the world is not going to end how much damage to humans and the planet are we willing to accept before we do take action? All the work on “real” conservation issues is directly connected to climate change because we do need to have sustainable development, population reduction, decrease in pollution and CO2 production to help reduce the effects of climate change. But without major climate action soon all of our efforts at “real” conservation will most likely be to no avail."

I would reather invest money, time and effort in "real" conservation issues that will have tangable effects such as protecting forests and wild areas, greenbelting, reducing population, lowering consumption, striving towards sustainabilty than risk money, our sovereignty and way of life on controversial and what I believe to be total sham intiatives like cap and trade, green tags, etc. At least with the "real" conservation issues we will get "real" conservation results-and if perhaps man is responsible for most of the climate changing now occurring-well then, my methods certainly won't acclerate or contribute to it-if anything it will help mitigate or reverse it as a nice side benefit. Seems like a win-win doesn't it? And as far as my skepticism-it is who I am -and it has served me well and protected me from falling victim to scams both on a personal scale and a national scale-blame it on my East Coast upbringing-you gotta a problem wit dat? ;)I don't accept anything at face value and I never jump on bandwagons. Someone has to keep the masses honest!