Climate Change? Nahhh ...

hmmm

Solar helps Texas carry energy load as heatwave puts power grid to test

 

I can see how you’d imagine Jesus being a socialist and I suppose amid the body of Christ - that is, Jesus’ believers - he was on some level.

But that actually helps make my point. The church grows rapidly in Acts 2 as believers are added by hour, including wealthy folks who give up all their possessions for the common lot. This growth is attributed to the reaction after Pentecost, the speaking of tongues, a miraculous event triggered by a “violent wind.” Now, whether you or I believe in any of that is immaterial; people became socialists on the spot because of it. The choice to make life really inconvenient - and being a Christian was that - was rooted in the promise of an extraordinary reward after what appeared to be an extraordinary event.

And I’m arguing…so it is with climate change initiatives. From a fossil fuel availability standpoint, we are not running out of supply anytime soon. So to the extent we desire to make rapid change, desire is driven in part by what we think will happen to the earth if we don’t do it; that is, the opposite of a miracle, but natural judgment, by way of the earth’s weather destroying us. The “How Dare You!” denunciation and whatnot.

It is a religious conviction. And it may be the correct conviction. But we are going to ask people to radically change their lives, because if they don’t, there will be hell on earth. What else would motivate people to except such radical change, if not a bit part in the war to save the planet.

 

hmm indeed! The lead expert of the story is…

Doug Lewin, president of the Austin-based renewable power consulting firm

The product on which he consults is the source of great success!

 

Yes.

Except for all the science and the metrics and the data and the evidence, it's exactly like a religion.

 

Science and data and metrics tell you what is. Science doesn't generally tell you what to do with what is and it's crappy at predicting the future, too.

Greta Thunberg isn't a scientist. She says as much. But it's Greta Thunberg brought forth to denounce world leaders. That's the religious part.

At any rate, where I think we differ is on how easy this green transformation will be. Based on your posts, you think it'll be easier - perhaps far easier - than I do. If it is, then I think leaders' need to pitch the presumptive reward - saving the planet - goes down. If it's hard, then the need goes up, because people (especially people in this moment) don't want to do hard things.

Now, what I see from climate change activists suggests to me they think it'll be hard. And what I see from politicians like Jay Inslee indicates the same, because he basically lied about the potential rise in the cost of gas before cap-and-trade legislation was enacted. If it's easy, why lie? Because, IMO, it's not easy, and he knows it, and so do all the other politicians up in WA, so they lie.

 

What incentive would a renewables salesman have to expound on - or even mention - your final paragraph?

 

Person with unified theory of everything declares that fact pattern fits his theory.

 

I'm sure it's fine