I've been trying to bring some much needed positivity and optimism to Angryville, I already thanked the Aussie's for reducing their crop size. Now I owe a heartfelt thanks to Saskatchewan for punching far above their weight in the CO2 emissions category. I don't see how this can be construed as a negative, except to note that all those other countries and provinces need to step it up and contribute their fair share. You can't be expected to bear the entire burden yourselves.
On one hand, if it does turn out that we are wrong, and CO2 really does cause global warming, then all Canadians will be thanking Saskatchewan for improving the prospects of agriculture and other miserable existences in these northern climes. On the other hand, if it turns out that there is no connection, then at least you have given the greenies/lefties something to get all wound up about, and that in itself is a worthwhile endeavor, and well worth the effort. So it is a win win situation. Pat yourselves on the back.
On a serious note, as for Darrin Qualman, I had the pleasure of attending an event where he spoke, and sitting down and chatting with him later. While we may be on opposite ends of the political sprectrum, I really admire his thinking, and am looking forward to his eventual book release. He does put his money where his mouth is( unlike some posters on here) with his own solar panels etc. ( well, technically a large part of that was still our money).
He is looking at the unsustainability of nearly everything that we do, and trying to find solutions, and spread the word. On that, we agree. Where we disagree, is he considers the biggest problem, and bases his solutions, on the premise that CO2 is causing CAGW. Neither Darrin, nor myself are climate scientists, and as such, I don't begrudge him for basing his work on the prevailing wisdom( and I use that word lightly) of CAGW, he didn't do the original science which demonized CO2, just built upon that probably false ( and certainly fraudulent) premise. That doesn't make his original work any less important. Although the programming axiom, GIGO ( Garbage In = Garbage Out) does come to mind. The analysis may be the most thorough and brilliant possible, but if the initial conditions plugged in are wrong, the result cannot improve upon that.
What I am trying to say, is go and listen to him, or read his blog, or his future book about civilizations, energy, food, and material flows, filter out the nonsense about CO2 and CAGW, if it doesn't suit your agenda, but make an attempt to understand the bigger picture he presents, and the fact that we do need to address many of these issues sooner rather than later. My other point would be, it is a shame that all of these other unsustainable practices are being virtually ignored while we focus solely on CO2, in fact this war on CO2, ( and the war on modern farming practices) is in many ways making the bigger problems much worse. There is something to be learned from nearly everyone, regardless of their biases( Even ChuckChuck made a good point a while back).
On one hand, if it does turn out that we are wrong, and CO2 really does cause global warming, then all Canadians will be thanking Saskatchewan for improving the prospects of agriculture and other miserable existences in these northern climes. On the other hand, if it turns out that there is no connection, then at least you have given the greenies/lefties something to get all wound up about, and that in itself is a worthwhile endeavor, and well worth the effort. So it is a win win situation. Pat yourselves on the back.
On a serious note, as for Darrin Qualman, I had the pleasure of attending an event where he spoke, and sitting down and chatting with him later. While we may be on opposite ends of the political sprectrum, I really admire his thinking, and am looking forward to his eventual book release. He does put his money where his mouth is( unlike some posters on here) with his own solar panels etc. ( well, technically a large part of that was still our money).
He is looking at the unsustainability of nearly everything that we do, and trying to find solutions, and spread the word. On that, we agree. Where we disagree, is he considers the biggest problem, and bases his solutions, on the premise that CO2 is causing CAGW. Neither Darrin, nor myself are climate scientists, and as such, I don't begrudge him for basing his work on the prevailing wisdom( and I use that word lightly) of CAGW, he didn't do the original science which demonized CO2, just built upon that probably false ( and certainly fraudulent) premise. That doesn't make his original work any less important. Although the programming axiom, GIGO ( Garbage In = Garbage Out) does come to mind. The analysis may be the most thorough and brilliant possible, but if the initial conditions plugged in are wrong, the result cannot improve upon that.
What I am trying to say, is go and listen to him, or read his blog, or his future book about civilizations, energy, food, and material flows, filter out the nonsense about CO2 and CAGW, if it doesn't suit your agenda, but make an attempt to understand the bigger picture he presents, and the fact that we do need to address many of these issues sooner rather than later. My other point would be, it is a shame that all of these other unsustainable practices are being virtually ignored while we focus solely on CO2, in fact this war on CO2, ( and the war on modern farming practices) is in many ways making the bigger problems much worse. There is something to be learned from nearly everyone, regardless of their biases( Even ChuckChuck made a good point a while back).
Comment