January 06, 2019
Samuel Miller-McDonald, who writes at The Trouble today that perhaps the only hope for avoiding catastrophic global warming is for a nuclear war to reduce human population and consumption. You need to read the whole thing to appreciate its full dementia, but here is the climax of the argument:One wrench that could slow climate disruption may be a large-scale conflict that halts the global economy, destroys fossil fuel infrastructure, and throws particulates in the air. At this point, with insane people like Trump, Putin, Xi, May, and Macron leading the world’s biggest nuclear powers, large-scale conflagration between them would probably lead to a nuclear exchange. . .
A devastating fact of climate collapse is that there may be a silver lining to the mushroom cloud. First, it should be noted that a nuclear exchange does not inevitably result in apocalyptic loss of life. Nuclear winter—the idea that firestorms would make the earth uninhabitable—is based on shaky science.
He sure seems to be an expert on shaky science, if nothing else! Go to Power Line for the rest of the story posted by Steven Hayward (and leave your drink on the desk because you will be laughing -- writer Hayward will be pounding away at your funny bone as he usually does with things like this): https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/01/green-weenie-of-the-week-nuclear-war-will-save-us.php
[nuclear] exchange that shuts down the global economy but stops short of human extinction may be the only blade realistically likely to cut the carbon knot we’re trapped within. It would decimate existing infrastructures, providing an opportunity to build new energy infrastructure and intervene in the current investments and subsidies keeping fossil fuels alive.
End excerpt.
The dern fool doesn't seem to understand that we will begin rebuilding with DIRTIER fuels than now. Coal is still easy to come by, and America has lots of coal. We aren't going to have infrastructure in place to make solar panels or windmills, which require rare earth elements and high tech industrial capabilities. Well not just go to natural gas but to the dirtiest fuels imaginable, because we'll be all busted up and will have to do what we can, not what we think will be good in a hundred years.
Oh, and those who use fossil fuels will thrive, so there will be little incentive to use "renewables". So called renewables (which really aren't) were disregarded in the first place because they were inadequate. If the industrial revolution didn't choose them then, when we were transitioning, why would people choose them when they were desperate?
This guy is a huge twit.
I love this one too:
It could shock us into reimagining a less suicidal civilization, one that dethrones the death-cult zealots who are currently in power.
End excerpt.
Death-cult in power? ??? It is the environmentalists who advocate population reduction through abortion, euthenasia, catastrophe'. What of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement? These are people who want Mankind to become extinct "for the good of the planet". Methinks this dope is accusing others of that which he himself is most guilty.
BTW - isn't it Donald Trump who is trying to end wars in the Middle East? Seems to me the Internationalists who brought us the Paris Accord are the ones who started those wars, and want them to continue.
I disagree with Hayward at the end; Climate change isn't the sole issue here. The Gang Green wanted to rid us of industrial civilization and found global warming as a useful tool, not the other way around. They believe it is possible to create an utopian society if we can but rid ourselves of industrialism and capitalism. They are basically atheistic or social justice religious who believe Mankind is inherently good and that it is just a matter of aligning things properly to create paradise. Most are ultimately communists in some fashion. The notion that it is impossible to create a truly just social order is anathema to them, and they cannot bear to think that the world isn't fair (which shows they are immature, childlike in their views, really.) They have pinned all their hopes on dismantling the industrial civilization that has given us so much (like air conditioning, heat, lights, medicines, cheap clothing, transportation, etc.) Their is a dream world where living in a home-spun life frolicking amid the daisies is somehow going to be wonderful. Our ancestors didn't find it so; on the contrary, life was poor, hard, brutish, and mercifully short. And peace? When resources are limited people take what they want from others, and maybe enslave them to boot. The machiens ended slavery, and helped stop civil warfare. Oh, the big countries fight, but non-combatants are relatively safe by and large, in industrialized lands.
Fear of global warming does not rot brains - hatred of Wekstern Civilization does.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
04:43 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 891 words, total size 6 kb.
35 queries taking 0.2282 seconds, 182 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
