Who Wants To Explain ‘Climate Change’ In 1,000 Words?

It seems rather tedious

Explaining Climate Change In 1,000 Words

In a previous post, I argued that we need a new American narrative for talking about climate change. This is a necessary but not sufficient condition for creating a bipartisan consensus across our political divide in order to establish stable, long-term policies to the benefit of all Americans. These policies must, as I’ve also written about before, strike the right balance between affordability, security, resiliency, and carbon intensity.

Crafting this narrative won’t be easy. I’ve been thinking about it for a while but am far from ready to try writing even a first draft. So I decided to start with something simpler which is to write 1,000 words explaining climate change. The audience is American citizens who are not experts, who have different levels of knowledge and interest, and who range across the political spectrum. I made the arbitrary decision that anyone willing to read a piece with this title would tolerate up to 1,000 words. And that’s probably stretching it given people’s busy lives and how much people use social media today to consume information.

You know what? I’m already bored with this cultish screed. The boredom starts with the notion that there MUST be bipartisan consensus to Do Something. Because when skeptics start saying these are good policies that might intersect with the cult, we are dismissed. Most Warmists refuse to accept building next generation nuclear power plants, for instance. I’d be fine with white roofing shingles, tax credit for EVs, and a few other things, because some are just straight good for the environment without being dictatorial. Some will help mitigate the Urban Heat Island effect without being dictatorial.

And, seriously, they’ve been trying to Explain and Spread Awareness for 35 years: what is going to change now. I can explain it in less than 1,000 words: anthropogenic climate change is a made up concept using the small increase in Carbon Dioxide, what the cult calls “carbon pollution”, to push for massive government control over citizens, during a period of warming that has happened on and off throughout the Holocene. If you want to know how real it is, take a look at the lifestyles of those pushing it the hardest, especially government “intervention”, and see if they are making their own lives “carbon neutral.”

Where does this leave the average American? Each person has to decide for themselves such things as how much time they want to spend learning about and engaging on this issue (e.g., through voting, community efforts, and expressing their views in various ways), how important it is in the total picture of their life, and what changes (if any) they want to make in their own lifestyles (such as diet and frequency and modes of transportation). People who have more money have the luxury of having more choices. Another important choice is the extent to which a person engages with others, including those who have a very different view. Whatever choices an individual person makes will have no effect on climate change. That said, America will benefit if everyone respects the choices that others make.

Yup, still bored. And notice that it is mostly about forcing Other People to comply.

The post Who Wants To Explain ‘Climate Change’ In 1,000 Words? appeared first on Pirate’s Cove.