Global Warming
Tomorrow morning, I need to rush home from dropping my daughter off at school to be on a live radio broadcast, in which I’ll be speaking on the imperative to move to clean energy. Also featured on the program is a representative of the National Resources Defense Council. I interviewed someone from the NRDC for my book on renewables, so I’m fairly familiar with the cut of their jib. You have to like people who stand up and do the right thing under incredible pressure to yield.
In preparing for this live discussion, I’d like to try to concentrate on the basics of clean energy; I’d like to make this is simple and as black and white as possible. But that’s not easy. The more I learn about this the more complicated I understand it to be. There is a lot to discuss about the subject of global warming alone, for instance. But discussions on the subject are usually 10 parts politics for every one part honest, objective science. I could prove that 2 and 2 are 5, using logic that I find in a lot of places.
The fact is that almost everything you read was written for a reason – and that reason is very seldom to inform you of the complete unvarnished truth. We’ve all come across the idea that global warming is a hoax. There is a paper being circulated now that takes this a step further, alleging that the hoax is aimed at creating enough fear in people that they will accept increased infringements in their liberties and ultimately a unified and tyrannical world government.
Personally, I’m a bit skeptical. I have to ask — in my mind, who has more credibility: thousands of research scientists – many of whom I’ve met and come to know as trusted friends — or a guy writing a paper with outrageous ideas and essentially no supporting evidence? Hmmm.