What to do about the impending global meltdown?

Under the Creation Mandate, efforts to conserve natural resources, optimize energy use and efficiency, recycle, and reduce consumption and consumerism are examples of faithful stewardship. Problem is, say global warming alarmists, such voluntary measures are not sufficient to avert our cataclysmic inferno. Maybe that’s why An Inconvenient Truth pitchman, Al Gore, has not seen fit to reduce the energy consumption of his own residence, which is using 10 percent more energy than a year ago, enough to supply the energy needs of nearly 20 average homes.

What is needed, according to the climate change party line, are governmentally enforced controls like the Kyoto Treaty. But whether or not forced restrictions such as Kyoto are demanded by principles of Christian stewardship really depends on the answers to six questions:

Is the earth warming?
Is warming an overall bad thing?
Is human activity the primary cause?
Would forced standards sufficiently reduce global temperatures?
Would they be cost-effective?
Would forced standards not create more—or more severe—problems than they solve?

Click here for the "answers."

Comments

[Dan Gill]

Seems like Regis may have read "Cool It!". It's a great book on the subject.

[Regis Nicoll]

Dan--Can't say as I have; but I've done enough study on the matter to confirm my intuitions based on common sense and on my professional experience with computer modeling.

[MV4455]

I find your article to be very troubling since a cornerstone of Christian principles is honesty. Your comments about the warming trend either show a lack of understanding of the issue or are intentionally misleading. There are many forces that impact the climate, most of them natural. Despite the fact that natural forcings would indicate a cooling trend, average temperatures are still well above the mean.

There are other inaccuracies in your article that are consistent with the widely used talking points broadcasted by the "skeptic" community. To a lay person, they appear very reasonable, but in reality they are logical fallacies.

It is fair to challenge Kyoto as well as other efforts to reduce our carbon footprint, but try to do it without trying to muddy the water with spin and swift boating Gore to divert attention away from the science.

[Regis Nicoll]

MV4455--It's not what I say about the warming trend, it's what credentialled experts are saying. Despite the claims of GW skeptics, I allowed a 80% chance that warming was, indeed, occurring. And because, as you agree, the majority of warming is the result of natural forces, that alone supports my conclusion that draconian measures like Kyoto would be ineffective and unwarranted.