Monday, April 28, 2008
An Arctic Fail
Probably his happiest moment is when he says this:
Did you catch that in the second paragraph? Good news indeed! Once all of the sea ice permanently melts, then we can transport goods between the continents and save on fuel and cut down carbon emissions.
Climate-change pessimists worry about increased resource competition, coastal flooding, infrastructure damage from melting permafrost, changes in wildlife migration patterns, and stresses on some species –especially polar bears – as well as on the indigenous cultures of the region.
But climate-change optimists imagine a world where international shipping can take a direct northern route, linking Asian, North American and European markets, cutting the consumption of fuel and reducing carbon emissions by using substantially shorter shipping routes; they foresee tremendous potential for maritime commerce to stimulate the economic development of Arctic ports, from the Port of Churchill on Hudson Bay to the depressed coastal communities of the High Arctic.
The argument here is mind-bogglingly insane. Instead of parroting all the latest nonsense about global warming being false, we're now seeing nut bars like Zellen stooping to telling us that we can offset the damage by first causing the damage so that we reduce our emissions. Splendid idea, that.
Here's an idea to go along with that one, and it fits well, since it keeps the Arctic theme rolling: I suggest that we kill almost all of the polar bears, even ahead of the melting ice helping that along. Then, with so few predators in the way, their prey will rebound to astounding numbers. And then the polar bears that are left alive will have so much to eat their numbers will bloat before you know it. Hell, maybe the new ones will somehow be able to figure out how to get by in this brave new world. Provided that when they're swimming for days on end they can avoid all the giant, greenhouse-friendly freighters plying these exciting new waters.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]