Some of it is pure PC. Democrats know they're "supposed to" care about global warming and feel guilty about driving their SUVs back and forth to soccer practice and going through warehouses full of fast-food containers on family trips. But so long as the politicians play their prescribed roles (Democrats: furrowed-brow, ineffective concern; Republicans: utterly insincere, ineffective concern), it's just not a voting issue.
And he scores points with me here:
That was the premise of a recent exercise conducted by political scientist Bjorn Lomborg (author of "The Skeptical Environmentalist") with a number of U.N. diplomats (including U.S. Ambassador John Bolton). Lomborg gave each functionary a fictional $50 billion to spend on world problems - obliging them to chose which problems need to be solved first.
Anyone who mentions Bjorn Lomborg is OK in my book! But go read the article to find out how the UN diplomats spent their $50B. You'll find that your Kyoto-loving bureaucrats aren't even interested in addressing global warming fictitiously, much less in reality!
I am looking forward to checking out a discovery channel documentary on global warming on sunday night.
ReplyDeleteIf the signatory members of the Kyoto accord on environmental limitations for developed nations were REALLY interested in curbing global warming,which is still a debateable threat, then why exclude those nations that have the most potential for growth in fossil fuel use, India and China? They make the excuse that they don't want to limit developing nations and economies, but that is exactly WHEN you need to put the limits in place, before people become used to the wastefulness and cheap fuel. But instead they want to play this game of winners and losers and punish countries whose economic infrastructure is almost inextricably twisted with fossil fuel. If they are serious, then EVERYONE signs on to the limitations. Otherwise it's just another attempt to punish and hamstrings advanced nations.
ReplyDelete