Now here’s a curious quote from an organization which has spent years lobbying and propagandizing against the idea of climate change.
American Enterprise Institute:
If warming proves to be uncontrollable and dangerous, what could we do? A growing number of climate scientists believe that there may be only one possible answer to that question: change features of the earth’s environment in ways that would offset the warming effect of greenhouse gases, a concept known as “geoengineering” (or “climate engineering”). The most plausible way of doing this would be to use very fine particles in (or above) the stratosphere to block a small fraction (roughly 2 percent) of sunlight. (http://www.aei.org/event/1728)
Here’s a quote from the same organization in November 2009.
Do we really suppose that anyone can construct a database of weather observations for the entire planet and its atmosphere adequate to make confident predictions of weather and climate 60 years from now? (http://www.aei.org/article/101355)
Do you detect an inconsistency? I don’t. Not when you recognize that the American Enterprise Institute is in fact a conservative “think tank,” and like most organizations of its type, its main goal is to ensure that people who are very rich continue to remain very rich. Organizations like AEI have this goal and defend it because they sincerely believe it is the best way for all, and also because people who are very rich—the oil companies and so on—give them money and pay their salaries.
They’re just loyal to their ideals. And money.
And you can see that their ideals are entirely consistent with holding two contradictory ideas at once.
There’s no global warming. And what we should do about it is geoengineer the warming away.
Because what the two ideas have in common is that the businesses they are defending—poor little Big Oil, poor little Big Coal, etc.—are let off the hook for doing something about the planet in any way that would inconvenience them.
Both options, denial and geoengineering, allow the “business-as-usual” approach.
Doesn’t this suggest that AEI was not really sincere about climate change in the first place? That it was not searching for a truth, but a loophole?
Yes, it does. It’s called propaganda, and that’s what organizations like AEI do.
They like to talk freedom, but their underlying agenda—as exemplified in their scheme to unilaterally (yes, without consent) engineer the climate of the planet—shows that their idea of freedom is a situation where they and people like them are in charge and calling all the shots.
American Enterprise Institute:
[I]n reality, important economies remain largely beyond the influence of environmental advocacy groups.
You see, in the next stage, the people advocating and engaged in geoengineering don’t intend to consult you or anyone else about it.
Just like they didn’t consult you about it when they and their compadres in the conservative “think tank” business decided to mount a multimillion dollar campaign to confuse the issue of climate change. A very successful campaign that, at the very least, has vastly increased the costs of fighting back.
These people have cost world governments billions of dollars already that would not have been needed if we had acted sooner. Every delay raises the price, and foot dragging has been their MO from the start.