"If you dispute, say, the necessity of spending billions on windmills or on killing the coal industry, you are not merely wrong on climate change, you are “anti-science.”"
Nah; just sociopathic. If you say CO2 isn't increasing temperatures, you are anti-science.
"Put aside the fact that there is no such thing as settled science."
Gravity is pretty settled. Revolving around the sun; settled. Moon revolving around Earth; settled. CO2 increases temperatures; settled. Exactly how much for a doubling of levels? Not settled, but well above 1.5 degrees C, cuz we beat that in Feb.
"If climate change is the threat they claim, I’d rather spend billions on geoengineering to fix it than trillions on impoverishing economic policies that at best slightly delay it."
Because it is the threat it is, not the one you would like it to not be, you will pay tens of trillions later to repair the damage, instead of billions now to create jobs, stimulate economies, and keep the temperature increase as low as possible.
The global community is badly prepared for a rapid increase in climate change-related natural disasters that by 2050 will put 1.3 billion people at risk, according to the World Bank.
Urging better planning of cities before it was too late, a report published on Monday from a Bank-run body that focuses on disaster mitigation, said assets worth $158tn – double the total annual output of the global economy – would be in jeopardy by 2050 without preventative action.
Message 30585506 |
