The strongest reply to that I've seen is that many people think that the recommendations to fix the problem would be too costly elsewhere...like cutting out coal from our energy matrix would have costs high enough for industry that it would cause damage to our economy, etc. So in their mind, it is like saying, "An asteroid is coming to earth, burn your house down!" and then the asteroid misses and you are stuck without a house.
I don't agree with that of course, I agree with you, but that's the argument I've heard. Judah On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Raymond Camden <[email protected]> wrote: > > My question is this. > > Isn't most of what is recommended to help fix the problem good for the > environment anyway? > > As a dumb example - imagine an asteroid is heading towards Earth and > you were told to pick up the trash in the park. > > Ends up - the asteroid missed us AND picking up the trash didn't > prevent anything. > > But shoot - the park is cleaner, right? > > I mean - what is so crazy about erring on the side of caution when our > fracking _planet_ is involved? ;) > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I do not question that the climate is changing. I am just not sure of >> the cause of the change. >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:329809 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
