I’ve been reading a lot of people including scientists voicing opinions on the other side of the pollution issue. Typically, these are well thought out opposing or mitigating arguments about global warming. It is good to know both sides of the issue.
I read in last week’s issue of Newsweek a fact-filled column by conservative and very dry-witted commentator George Will providing compelling evidence that, as in the past, the predictions about running out of oil may be too conservative.
His column is well worth reading…but yup, I got the impression he’s arguing that liberals are too conservative when it comes to global warming. At least that was my inference.
These opposing arguments including Will’s provide some fascinating details to inform the overall discussion but they appear to be saying we should continue polluting because…we can? Uhhh, that we should continue to be over reliant on oil…because we can, regardless of the problems inherent on burning it as fuel?
I understand market forces play a role but I also keep hoping that somewhere in the conservative or libertarian (ultra-conservative) world there are some think-tankers trying to make arguments for something other than just sitting tight with the status quo while nit-picking at efforts to make a better world!
Are they out there? Tell me where and I’d love to read or see their stuff. I just don’t see the logic in continuing to pollute a planet and be over reliant on a particular source of energy…just because we can.
No comments:
Post a Comment