I look at the titles in the Financial Times page - http://www.ft.com/climatechangeseries - and my mind simply cannot grasp the dissonance between the various stories! Most of the stories warn of dire consequences and events due to "global warming" while the one story - Comment: Sceptics - clearly reports that there has been no warming for 10 years. I know, and I hope you do also, that there is significant credible scientific opinion and evidence that climate change is not influenced by man, is not abnormal and is highly unlikely to be catastrophic to mankind.
The FT approach is not unusual however - it is the standard for most of the mainstream media. This approach is what is driving the multi-trillion dollar Warner/Lieberman bill before congress. Sen. Warner, when challenged that the bill may have severe economic consequences, stated that the bill has "built in controls that would allow a future President to curtail or change any part of it should it be detrimental" (I paraphrase) Like you buy your kid a car that can go 200 mph but it's OK because you can always take it away if he gets out of control!!!
A year ago the conventional wisdom was that man-made global warming was "unequivocal." This is the word used in many places in the IPCC reports and by many in the global warming business. Yes, it was and is a business - all of the advocates stood to gain financially from the proposition and most did. Since then many credible scientists, engineers and others with good scientific data have started to come forward and show that the global warming theories and models are deeply flawed.
Has this dissension been given the same level of attention as the media gives global warming? Obviously not - see Warner/Lieberman above! In a classic capitalistic approach, big industry - GE, BP, most major oil companies, many large engineering companies, etc. have embraced global warming and expect to see huge profits from their "innovations" and "greening" of their products. Do you really believe that solar and wind power is imminent? Is a hydrogen car just around the corner? That we will have a "sustainable world" in the next decade? This is what needs to happen to satisfy the scenarios presented by these alarmists. One solution, which has been proposed by influential UN politicians, but has not received much press, is a rapid and large reduction in the number of people in the world. Which brings me to;-
Cap and Trade is going to be the biggest boondoggle of all. Trillions of dollars are going to change hands - where are these funds coming from? You, me, our children and their future generations. In a world which by any measure is in a very fragile financial situation a massive program such as this can tip the scales and cause a world wide depression. If you think I am overstating this danger consider what happened to the USSR in 1998. It collapsed! Banks and factories closed, unemployment was rampant, human essentials were unavailable. People died! What pulled Russia out of the hole? Exploitation of large oil and gas reserves and - not least, a quick return to autocratic government under Putin. Can this happen here? Damn right it can! Only, we may never recover. We do not have the will to exploit our oil reserves, do we have the backbone to avoid autocratic government?
Well, I just am trying for a sanity check. Do I believe all this global warming stuff or do I believe my lying eyes?
Todays "Sip of Reality" - http://icecap.us/index.php