Climate Change Ka-Ching!

I have my thoughts on GreenGreta and will get to them shortly. But first....a couple of climate videos.





****

I now take the position that climate change is mass hysteria. It's worth noting that it's one thing to care for the environment and want to be conscious about how we impact it and quite another to take the position that earth is in trouble and humans are destroying it therefore we need to enact draconian laws that will impact humans negatively thinking and believing because the 'science is settled' it will have a positive effect on the environment. This is problematic because what if the premises are all wrong? What if it's not 'settled'?

Will they care about the unintended consequences that may occur? Not very compassion, say, if our privileged Western standards determine a set of policies that result in the mass starvation of people in developing countries, no?

It's an anti-humanist position to take and it's no secret one of the tenets of climate change followers keep is the need to 'destroy capitalism'. As one sign at a protest showed, 'System Change!'

Which is precisely, among other things including how date is being manipulated, what skeptics (aka deniers to proponents of climate change)are warning against.

I think they lost the plot when they began to irresponsibly use children as pawns in their propaganda with Greta being most popular at the moment as well as looking to silence counter views.

At this point, you can believe that we should be responsible in our actions and interactions with the environment - which to me, the West does a better job than any other civilization - and this is laudable. However, we should be extremely cautious at the laws and policies we're looking to implement on this crusade. From where I sit, they will less help the environment and more line up the pockets of people in a position to profit off the racket.

We shouldn't be rushing into things. Electric cars are an example. The government is forcing auto makers into target dates to meet certain quotas despite the market and engineering behind EV's isn't anywhere near where it needs to be. They do this because it's believe the know-how is there but there was no will so it needed to be forced.

This is foolish. If car builders weren't doing it it's because there's a logical reason - from economic feasibility to market to demand to plain old viable logistics - for it. But it's conspiratorially believed corporations don't want to 'do right' and gosh-golly we're gonna make them do it!

For example, ironically, the technology of internal combustion continues to evolve and get more efficient but the actual production of an EV is not very friendly to the environment. Some will contend yes but we'll be removed from our dependence on oil and gas in the long run but this very much has to be seen. The idea fossil fuels is pure dirt is actually misleading as Patrick Moore contends in the video linked.

Besides, it's not like climate prognosticators have a great track record, right?

We're not as scientifically literate as we may think and as I delve more and more into this, I'm starting to fear that how we respond is going to be, ironically, more catastrophic than the climate itself.