Bad is Good
The motivations of the global warming crowd range from the genuinely concerned to the rabid left. Here’s an example of a member of the later group cheerleading a declining economy as a saviour from the supposed threat of global warming.
A slowdown in the world economy may give the planet a breather from the excessively high carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions responsible for climate change, a Nobel Prize winning scientist said on Tuesday.
Atmospheric scientist Paul J Crutzen, who has in the past floated the possibility of blitzing the stratosphere with sulfur particles to cool the earth, said clouds gathering over the world economy could ease the earth’s environmental burden.
But in typical “I still want mine” fashion, he likes it if you don’t have a job but he’s worried about his own.
“We could have a much slower increase of CO2 emissions in the atmosphere … people will start saving (on energy use) … but things may get worse if there is less money available for research and that would be serious.”
Less money for research would “be serious”? For him maybe. But what benefits has “reasearch” actually delivered to mankind in the global warming arena? I see lots of money spent, lots of Nobel Prizes awarded, lots of people made to be fearful but no proof given and no solutions offered for this elusive “problem” other than that you should change the way you live. Heaven forbid we should lose that “research”. That would truly be serious. At least for Mr Crutzen.