The
case for climate change, formerly the case for global warming, entails a
series of propositions that begin with the unobjectionable and escalate
to the absurd: that the climate is changing, that these changes are
likely to be dangerous and destructive, that these changes are in the
main the result of human action, that carbon-dioxide emissions are the
major factor, that these changes can be forestalled or reversed by
political means, that such political actions are likely to be on the
right side of the cost-benefit analysis, etc. The least plausible claims
are those holding that specific events, such as the horrific damage
inflicted by Hurricane Sandy, are attributable to specific U.S.
public-policy decisions. That this lattermost claim is absurd and stands
in contravention of the best scientific analysis has not stopped the
most hysterical climate alarmists from making it, but then it is the
nature of hysterical alarmists to exceed the bounds of reason.
Among others, Chris Mooney of Mother Jones was sure enough
of himself to declare categorically of Sandy: “Climate change, a topic
embarrassingly ignored in the three recent presidential debates, made it
worse.” Bill McKibben of Democracy Now and others on the left made
similar statements, while Businessweek practically wet itself.
There is little or no evidence that this claim is true in any meaningful
sense, and many climate scientists believe that warming has resulted in
fewer powerful hurricanes striking the United States. As usual, the
science is complex while the politics are unfortunately simpleminded.Read more: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/332382/sandy-and-climate-change-editors
No comments:
Post a Comment