“A Resistor acknowledges the possibility or even the probability or even the actual existence of short term (200-1000 years) of warming but resists being stampeded into what could be a cure that is more destructive than the problem.” Chuck Worrel, comment to his own thread, Nov 2011.
I invented the term Resistor because I am not so worried about whether the science does or does not ultimately indicate the existence of Global Warming as I am the effects of any proposed cure on my beloved USA and Western Civilization.
I hear a lot about the problem of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) but I hear precious little about the proposed solutions and the bureaucracy that would be required to implement any AGW remediation plan. The fight seems to concentrate on whether or not there is or is not global warming. The argument generally ignores the fact that implementing the solution, if there is AGW, is likely to be more complex and potentially catastrophic than the AGW problem itself.
It is clear that having a single country, even if it is the USA, pursue solutions unilaterally would be ineffective since the problem, as postulated, is global. This fact creates a raft of issues regarding control, process and authority across national and international borders.
Therefore, if AGW becomes proven, I want to know what the effects of AGW are really likely to be before I make a decision regarding whether or not it is worthwhile to pursue a cure. I want factual information to lead me. To this end I have postulated in various places throughout this post, these questions.
Another issue that I want to see considered is; what and for whom are we planning to pursue a cure? Many of the AGW people are the same ones who have argued for population control because of global overcrowding. Actual demographic trends aside, AGW seems to be Gaia's answer to the overpopulation problem. The Planet plans to rid itself of some lice (humans). Why aren't these proponents of population control celebrating and opposing any plan to cure the problem?
Remember, the planet Earth doesn't care about the last 1000 years of climate. Earth does not operate on a human time line. The Earth is 4.5 billion years old and has seen much worse. The Earth does not care about humans any more than it cared about dinosaurs. Human history is a blip in the timeline of Earth, hardly noticeable. The Earth is not in trouble. Warmists and Alarmists believe that humans are in trouble and their idea is that to save humans we must cool the Earth. It remains to be seen whether this idea represents arrogance or stupidity or prescient self interest.
As discussed below, this problem is too perfect and the likely "solution" is too grand by orders of magnitude.
I invented the term Resistor because I am not so worried about whether the science does or does not ultimately indicate the existence of Global Warming as I am the effects of any proposed cure on my beloved USA and Western Civilization.
I hear a lot about the problem of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) but I hear precious little about the proposed solutions and the bureaucracy that would be required to implement any AGW remediation plan. The fight seems to concentrate on whether or not there is or is not global warming. The argument generally ignores the fact that implementing the solution, if there is AGW, is likely to be more complex and potentially catastrophic than the AGW problem itself.
It is clear that having a single country, even if it is the USA, pursue solutions unilaterally would be ineffective since the problem, as postulated, is global. This fact creates a raft of issues regarding control, process and authority across national and international borders.
Therefore, if AGW becomes proven, I want to know what the effects of AGW are really likely to be before I make a decision regarding whether or not it is worthwhile to pursue a cure. I want factual information to lead me. To this end I have postulated in various places throughout this post, these questions.
Another issue that I want to see considered is; what and for whom are we planning to pursue a cure? Many of the AGW people are the same ones who have argued for population control because of global overcrowding. Actual demographic trends aside, AGW seems to be Gaia's answer to the overpopulation problem. The Planet plans to rid itself of some lice (humans). Why aren't these proponents of population control celebrating and opposing any plan to cure the problem?
Remember, the planet Earth doesn't care about the last 1000 years of climate. Earth does not operate on a human time line. The Earth is 4.5 billion years old and has seen much worse. The Earth does not care about humans any more than it cared about dinosaurs. Human history is a blip in the timeline of Earth, hardly noticeable. The Earth is not in trouble. Warmists and Alarmists believe that humans are in trouble and their idea is that to save humans we must cool the Earth. It remains to be seen whether this idea represents arrogance or stupidity or prescient self interest.
As discussed below, this problem is too perfect and the likely "solution" is too grand by orders of magnitude.



