John Wolcott will lead the discussion that was originally planned for Part 2 of our CA last spring. His presentation remains unchanged.
Last February, Vince Arguimbau led a discussion entitled, “Agreed carbon emissions cause global warming, but is it an existential threat?” continuing to say, “If scarce resources were maximally devoted to reducing emissions then would the result be worth the cost? If not then how do we efficiently allocate resources to ameliorate and adapt to the changing environment?”
The first IPCC report on the existential threat of global warming was issued in 1990. Since then the debate has degenerated into two polar opposite factions battling from ever more distant ends of the spectrum to the point where each is talking past the other at increasing volume and vehemence.
Accordingly, let’s not debate whether GW is settled science or merely religion, but instead begin a conversation as to how the Global Warming/Climate Change/ Existential threat might be more fully addressed
Articles of Interest
Babcock Ranch Survives Ian 30 miles from Ft. Meyers
Libertarian vs Authoritarian
Post: Europe’s version of the burning of the Amazon rainforests
Mark Mills, physicist and Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute
https://dariendma.org/wp-content/uploads/All-Elec-Cars-by-2035-2.mp4
ESG Does Neither Much Good nor Very Well
The Coming Global Crisis of Climate Policy
Climate Gains are ‘inconvenient truth”-It’s not all bad news for the environment.
The real-world consequences of green extremism.
The net-zero transition: What it would cost, what it could bring
YouTube presentations
Keeping Your Cool on the Climate Debate with Bjorn Lomborg
Why renewables can’t save the planet Michael Shellenberger
Youtube Presentation
Blogpost
Germany’s Climate Chancellor Angela Merkel grossly mis-allocated resources and failed the climate
Wall Street’s Green Push Exposes New Conflicts of Interest