Is it a bad thing to want to change how we live so we are less wasteful, more efficient and protect the environment – not for environment’s sake so much as for our own sake, since we have to live here?
Is it wrong to mislead the public and use “truth through omission” tactics by presenting only the data that supports an agenda that wants these changes in our society no matter how much one has to fraud and lie to the public?
I am sure the ranks of those who support all manner of environmental controls and use global warming as a basis for their desires on businesses and on us are made of two types of people:
- People who actually believe the earth is warming.
- People who don’t know if it is or isn’t but don’t care either way.
Of those who don’t care either way, there are two types of people:
- People who stand to profit by the rules, regulations and hype of climate change.
- People who may not profit, but simply believe in a means to an end.
The means to an end is that an unfounded belief in global warming is not a bad thing in itself, so why not force the changes on everyone for their own good regardless of whether global warming is fact or fiction.
The people who make up the second bullet points, those who do not care either way but simply believe in a means to an end are the most dangerous.
These are the people who believe they know better than you do, and that they will make your decisions for you. Their desire to be self-important, to “leave a mark” on the world, and to present themselves as “holier than thou” do not need facts, evidence or proof to support their ideological visions.
They are visionaries, they wrongly hold themselves up to the same level as Martin Luther King Jr., or John F. Kennedy or Gandhi. These global warming visionaries have a dream, and their dream is to control everyone and every business by forcing their dream onto us. They see it as a mission to make us believe in their dream and to understand that regardless of the exorbitant costs, the extensive collateral damage, the numerous unintended consequences or the countless moral hazards of their dream, that their dream must be fulfilled.
Their dream is righteous and their dream is just.
Hitler, Stalin and Mao were all visionaries too. They did not care about all of the costs, damages or consequences of imposing their dream on others either. However, their dream was much less attractive than the dream of global warming visionaries, and the damages they created were felt very quickly. The damages imposed by global warming visionaries could continue for countless generations before anyone figured out whether they were wrong or right.
Global warming visionaries dream of all their wants. They want to rid the earth of pollution, they want the elimination of toxins and global warming, they want to save all the animals from extinction and to convert all energy sources over to green ones. These wants, these dreams are easily sold to everyone because this is something we can all agree that we want. Regardless of whether or not we believe in global warming, we want this. I want this too. However…
We can not just look at the benefits of any given idea, or vision. We must look at the costs. When you add up the monetary costs, the collateral damage, the unintended consequences and the moral hazards of any given idea, you may discover the costs to achieve the vision far exceed the benefits of that vision.
These self-important visionaries only report the benefits, never the costs. And the benefits sound so wonderful, so serene and desirable, they are a siren song that lulls us into believing that we must share in the dream of these self-important visionaries who though lacking any credible evidence to support many of their claims, just make the world sound so wonderful if we follow them.
We must understand reality. We live in reality, in a world of gray. There are few absolutes. Benefits always come with costs. In business and our daily lives, we have limited resources such as time and money. Therefore we must sacrifice each of these every single day to achieve the benefits of what we want, but we have neither enough money nor enough time to achieve everything we want, so we achieve that which is most important. We prioritize. We sacrifice. We meet somewhere in the middle, in that gray area that lives between all that we want and all that we can actually achieve based on our time and our money.
The wants and costs of global warming are no different. We must ask ourselves, what are the costs? Where is the gray area? Who decides when the costs are too high for the wants?
This is the lead post on several I will be doing on global warming.
Categories: Global Warming