Selwyn Duke, at the American Thinker asks Let's say man is changing the climate. So what?
No, I’m not a guy who “just wants to see the world burn” (and that would be literally). Rather, if anthropogenic climate change were occurring, why should we assume it wouldn’t be beneficial?
Oh, it’s not just that the Earth is greener and crop yields are higher when CO2 levels are greater; it’s not just that relative warmth breeds life. It’s also this:
Some scientists have said the Earth will soon enter, or has already entered, a significant cooling phase. Others even contend that another ice age is nigh. And if this is so, any man-caused temperature increase would merely mitigate this naturally induced but deadly phenomenon.
A warmer environment is better for human life than a cooler environment. So, why assume that a warming world is bad? Duke thinks we can chalk it up to prejudice. I think there is something to this. Most devout environmentalists have the belief that man is a cancer on the earth. We do change the environment to suit ourselves, but then, what living thing does not? The fact that we can even exist is due to plants developing photosynthesis, providing oxygen for animal life. Beavers build dams which changes the environment to suit them. Bees will increase the flowering plants they like best. Mankind, being men, changes the environment more spectacularly, but we are doing what all nature does.
In reality, moderns’ thinking so often reflects a kind of misanthropism or, at least, a bias against Western-triumph-born modernity. People believing that extraterrestrials furtively visit our planet never assume the aliens’ matter-of-course environmental impact could be malign; they’re too advanced. People pondering a hunter-gatherer tribe (e.g., the North Sentinelese) generally assume they just must live “in harmony with nature” and be innocuous; they’re too primitive. Never mind that American Indians deforested stretches along, and caused the sedimentation of, the Delaware River long before Europeans’ New World arrival (to provide just one perspective-lending example). The activities of man, or modern man or Western man, depending on the precise prejudice, just must be harmful for the simple reason that he engaged in them. So, yes, racial profiling is a problem — against the human race.
In fairness, we can do and have done much to damage the environment. In fairness again, though, forested area in the U.S. is greater than it was a century back and our water and air are cleaner than they were 60 years ago. And in recent times the Great Barrier Reef has actually increased in size (this isn’t necessarily due to man’s activities). So we can also be good shepherds of the Earth.
Some don't merely believe we are a cancer on the earth, who should be eliminated (expect for them, of course), but believe we should all be humiliated as much as possible. Thus, Klaus Schwab thinks we should own nothing and be happy about it (or else.) He thinks we should eat bugs because...well just because. But even more bizarre is this story by Monica Showalter at the American Thinker entitled Globalists present their newest plan for us: Beer crafted from raw sewage. There is simply no reason to use sewage to make beer. It would be cheaper, if fresh water is in short supply, to use desalinized sea water using one of several systems. Or better still, import beer from a country with good water.
For a movement that claims to be all about saving the Earth, the green environmentalist globalists sure do come up with repulsive ideas.
...snip...
Like edible bugs, it's undoubtedly expensive given all the processing it would take to make it safe to drink. And like a lot of things, they may find they made "mistakes" in establishing the purity.
Wouldn't it make more sense to make the beer in some place where it makes sense to make beer, where beer tastes good, buying it from another country if necessary? Is there some reason there's a need to look to the sewage stream for one's beer? It's like teaching a dog to dance -- sure, it can be done, but why?
More to the point, the whole idea is repulsive.
Like eating bugs, the yuck factor makes one wonder why? But then, when you realize that at heart the save the planet movement is a misanthropic anti-human movement, you begin to understand. Gentle readers are urged to read both articles.
No comments:
Post a Comment