It has been said many times on this blog, whether or not climate change is a problem, there is only one response: adaptation.
Climate change mitigation action, such as carbon taxes, emissions trading schemes etc, have done nothing whatsoever to alter the climate, but have cost the global economy billions, and probably trillions, of dollars – dollars which could have been spent far more wisely.
It is scandalous that so much hard-won cash has been squandered on pointless environmental gestures, when millions are dying from lack of clean water or cheap electricity. As the author of the following article points out, these decisions are not ones that should be made by scientists:
It is interesting to enquire initially just whose job is it to tell us how to respond if we believe climate change is happening and materially human-induced. When various clever non-scientists raise concerns about climate change models they are waved away by specialists in the area, told that these are proper scientific questions for proper scientists. Yet all too often scientists fail to apply the same rules to themselves. The issue over whether there is global warming and what the human contribution to it might be is – at least to a material extent – a scientific question. But whether we should do anything about it and, if so, which of the available technical options is best to adopt, is emphatically not a question for scientists. Instead, it is a question for economists, which then puts you very much in my world. (source)
And for those morons who continue to label anyone who questions the climate dogma ‘deniers’, the thing we should be denying is any more of the money you want to flush down the pan on mitigation…
There’s plenty more – read it all.