Skip to main content

Priorities Gone Crazy

.
Apparently the global warming scientists have been doctoring the books. There were enough reasons to believe their theory but the evidence just didn't support it. In fact it supported the opposite. Quandry. What to do. They (the scientists)  are certain that increasing human activity is changing our atmosphere and more heat from the sun is getting through to warm the earth. Jeez. Hard to prove.

Greenland is melting but the ice is getting thicker in Anarctica. Does either occurance have anything to do with the overall warming of the planet? Since the answer is still not clear one way or the other, isn't it simply prudent to accept that the human footprint grows with the population, and that we may be able to reduce the effect of global warming by better controlling our harmful activities? 

Okay, I can accept that as long as we put the idea in perspective. Let's not go hog wild with grand and expensive changes to accomplish improvement. Global warming, if there really is such a condition, should NOT be at the top of our priority list. 

If true, it has the potential to harm society SOMEDAY - but not soon. There are many other more urgent concerns.

More important examples list: 
  • Eliminating WAR as a political or religious tool.
  • Increasing medical care availability.
  • Improving the making and distribution of nourishing foods.
  • Replacing fossil fuel energy sources with nuclear power. 

I don't believe the potential man made global warming that might have adverse impact on human beings one or ten centuries from now - is as important as any one of the above.

Anyone agree?

Comments

Rain Trueax said…
The problem is global climate change could be important or maybe won't be but we might not know until it's too late. I think they should skip the stupid carbon tax credits which will only make money for some people and instead go for fossil fuel taxes which are easy to instigate (even if unpopular) and use the profits for energy research and applying what we already know. The thing is we know it's not good to be sending so much money to countries that are our enemies. It fouls up our balance of trade; so do what will discourage the use while investigating better ways to get around and heat our homes. If carbon dioxide happens to be important, it will help that. The arguments over the glaciers and ice shelves go way beyond just our oceans rising but even water supplies many places like China where they depend on glacier melt. I have read several recent article on all of this and will try and put the links into my blog whenever I get to the subject. Overall though I agree with you that we have a lot of very big immediate problems to deal with, and a lot of the suggestions for energy don't seem to me to be that effective except for making money for somebody who is in the green systems already. Wonder who that could be...
December 4, 2009 at 2:50 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gloves Off

. OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS BETRAYED OUR TRUST AGAIN. Whether we are Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative, makes no difference at all. Our legislators voted according to "what's best for them". It was clear that the people want to reduce the costs and improve access to our overall health care system. It was also VERY CLEAR that they did not want the 2000 page legislative monstrosity that was produced by a small number of far left liberal Democrats, who worked behind closed doors to fashion a pork filled blunderbuss that virtually no one has been able to read, or discuss, or debate, or offer alternatives to specific unreasoned clauses. It is (now) a BAD BILL , passed by BAD POLITICIANS, that compose a BAD MINORITY segment of America's out-of-control government. AND WE HAVE NO LOGICAL WAY TO PAY FOR IT EITHER. The far left liberals like to point at  SOCIAL SECURITY   as a text book success. They are wrong and will not admit it despite the concrete evide
20 comments
Read more

Why Blackwater Mercenaries

Over some years the name Blackwater shows  up in the news. It is, by their own estimation, the largest mercenary group in the world. I think I first noticed it when reports from Iraq mentioned they were employed (by whom?) to escort and protect members of the Iraqi government from place to place. Then I became aware that they had joined several of the firefights between our marines and Iraqi enemies. I wondered just how these mercenaries (that supposedly came from the United States) were  hired by someone (who?) to fight? That led to the question of just who would be responsible if a situation involved the accidental killing of an innocent bystander? It  might be a little sticky for an unauthorised mercenary contracted by the United States but not a member of our military forces.  Or suppose a Blackwater type killed a military Iraqi combatant and was then captured by the enemy. Would he be treated as a spy, or as a American combatant, or whatelse?  And would the Geneva Convention
18 comments
Read more

Sarah-palin-itus

. Am I the only one that watches the liberal roar caused by the soccer mom . . . and laughs?   I suspect Sarah is a nice and decent person who will eventually prove to be a better political critic than elected official. But who knows. She projects an effervescent personality, a better than average intelligence, and solid conservative values. Still,  as a political leader of consequence I suspect she is a female Peter. You do remember THE PETER PRINCIPLE don't you. Dixon
10 comments
Read more