I remember the first Earth Day and I think that that the environmental problems we had in the US at that time did have to be addressed. Rivers were polluted, we couldn’t see very far in our large cities and in industrial areas, and yes, the air was toxic. And a LOT of that has been cleaned up – and from a Conservative standpoint, that was a common good that Government played the right role.
There’s also a problem with the environmental problems we have today; they are still man-caused but of a far different nature. Instead of actually dealing with severe and and actual environmental problems, they are now from a political and ideological standpoints. When science ignore the science, that’s a problem that spans past the scientific realm and when it spills into the political realm (and where it rooted and grown like Jack’s infamous Beanstalk) it REALLY has acquired a financial component.
But in going forward, potentially spending Trillions a year to spread the wealth mitigate less than one or two degrees of warming, it might be useful to look to the past to see where we’re going in the future. As with NASA’s James Hansen’s predictions back in 1988 as to how things would look into the future.
As Watts Up With That? points out, the models that much of our current enviro-frenzy is built upon, that James Hansen pushed and pushed and pushed, have turned out to be flat wrong:
One of the most important publications on the “dangerous anthropogenic climate change” is that of James Hansen and colleagues from the year 1988, in the Journal of Geophysical Research published. The title of the work is (in German translation) “Global climate change, according to the prediction of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies.”
In this publication, Hansen and colleagues present the GISS Model II, with which they simulate climate change as a result of concentration changes of atmospheric trace gases and particulate matter (aerosols). The scientists here are three scenarios:
Read more