The Folly of Green Fearmongering
show comments
  • Andrew Allison

    We don’t know that “these emissions will eventually contribute
    to higher surface temperatures.” We might think it possible, despite the failure of (smoothed average) surface temperature to rise since 1997, or even likely, but we absolutely don’t know what’s going on. Given the enormous increase in emissions, one might equally-well postulate that they are keeping an Ice Age at bay. The AGW theory has been utterly discredited by the empirical data.

  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    The environmentalist movement could start with explaining why a warmer world is a bad thing. During the medieval warm period when temperatures were warmer than they are today, people colonized Greenland and were growing grapes and making wine in Moscow.

    How is enlarged growing seasons and growing areas a bad thing?

    In addition, experiments have shown that the increase in CO2 approximately +100 ppm (285 ppm – 385 ppm) increases plant growth by +15% and makes plants more water tolerant (need less water). Since plants are the base of the food chain, this means 15% more food for animals and mankind.

    How is more food a bad thing?

    The historical record shows that for at least the last 1.5 million years the world has been going through Ice Ages every 100,000 years like clockwork, with the interglacial periods lasting from 11,000 to 14,000 years. The present interglacial period is now a long in the tooth 14,000 years old and we can expect that a new Ice Age is imminent.

    If CO2 really does cause a greenhouse effect (no evidence yet that it does), isn’t that a good thing in the face of an imminent Ice Age?

    In conclusion, the benefits of increased CO2 far outweigh any yet to be observed deleterious effects. And it is in fact the Billions even Trillions of dollars being wasted on failing and failed green boondoggles, that are the worst observable effect of increased CO2.

    • Corlyss

      I love the NIPCC’s response to the IPCC’s hysteria: we’re basing our report findings on OBSERVED phenomena, not computer models which haven’t got it right yet. Several years ago, Freeman Dyson had a funny put down for the models: the models have not yet been able to predict known events and models which cannot pass that test are unworthy of serious consideration. He was speaking of the El Nino/La Nina phenomenon, the existence of which no one disputes, not even the Greens’ paid trolls.

  • Rick Johnson

    The leading cause of climate skepticism isn’t climate alarmism, it’s the failure of the warmerist to produce any credible evidence that human activity is having a deleterious impact on the Earth’s climate.

    Claims that high levels of greenhouse gases will eventually contribute to higher surface temperatures also lack a firm scientific bases.

    Skepticism is on the rise because people have seen through the Greens BS.

    • Bruce

      In addition, everybody has cable TV and watches National Geographic Channel and learns that there are currently deserts where oceans used to be and oceans where deserts used to be and this all happened before man “evolved.” So the hysteria doesn’t add up, given that the world’s climate changes frequently over billions of years.

  • Corlyss

    “But this hasn’t stopped the green movement from banging on about the apocalypse in an attempt to scare the public into supporting its politically unworkable policies.”
    Let’s be candid. The greens don’t give a fig about public opinion as long as they can substantially underwrite the careers of policy-makers. EU and Europe has proven that fact dozens of times over.

  • Loader2000

    Based on every comment I read in the comments section of the NYT article, the argument that the authors made fell of completely deaf ears. I didn’t read a single comment that didn’t have this basic tone: “Just because a bunch of idiots won’t listen to the truth doesn’t mean we have to coddle them….”

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.