> From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Your solution is perfectly sensible but only if it has no appreciable
> cost.
Back at 'cha, dude!
Keep in mind that the "status quo" has a cost, as well. I know you deny the
connection, but what if -- what if! -- human-caused climate change caused the
loss of a billion dollars worth of corn from the drought last year?
The Hirsch Report claims that climate change will soon have an impact
equivalent to 3% to 5% of global GDP *on the low end* and perhaps 15% on the
high end. That's a lot of corn.
The "precautionary principle" says that when the result of an action *may be*
catastrophic, don't take that action, even if you aren't certain of cause and
effect.
Of course, those who deny humans are impacting the climate aren't swayed by the
precautionary principle, anyway. But at some point, the discussion moves beyond
trying to convince the opposition to trying to convince the fence-sitters.
----------------
:::: I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only
the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach,
and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. -- Henry David
Thoreau
:::: Jan Steinman, EcoReality Co-op ::::
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|