“They asked rhetorical questions designed to create confusion, to create doubt.” The same complaint made against every scientist and every intellectual who sig

“They asked rhetorical questions designed to create confusion, to create doubt.” The same complaint made against every scientist and every intellectual who significantly challenged the Church or the State in a public forum. When this becomes your complaint, you’ve moved from reasoned discourse into the area of theology known as apologetics, talking chicken or no. Let me know how the auto-da-fe works out for you, Naomi. Every eyeball-minute spent trying to sell or refute “climate change” is an opportunity wasted on addressing today’s concrete issues in global water quality, water supply, fire management, air quality, soil quality and the like. It’s a perverse sort of global irresponsibility. I guess so many folks are salivating over a multi trillion dollar global slush fund, with no practicable short or middle term accountability, that they don’t care about the hundreds of thousands of excess deaths, young and old, occurring over the next few years by not focusing on fundamental issues today. (They are probably the wrong color of victims for those folks to care about anyway.) And if “climate change” proves to be an unsound waste of global talent and resources that could have been better spent on direct near-term water, air, soil projects...well, they got their pot of gold or egoboo, didn’t they? Imagine, trillions of dollars going to any despotic global regime smart enough to preload GPT-3 with global warming essays, and with no practical means of holding them accountable, since any impacts will be decades into the future and a tiny interconnected impact at that. What could possibly go wrong? Meanwhile another child died of lung disease in Delhi. Are you aware the near-term impacts of bad air quality on health and quality of life? Now consider no clean water, or no water at all, for major global cities. These are hard enough problems on their own but any climate effect is a compounding one, not a core one. Too many people, not enough land, too few trees, too much polluting economic activity, poor agricultural practices, not enough clean water, over urbanization...a few Trillion on these core elements might get the world somewhere. Again, maybe for the slush fund people this may affect the wrong color people. There is the international political benefit of blaming decades of political mismanagement on some mysterious outside element with deep pockets, instead of taking responsibility for local actions. But local action is the most critical element in addressing the issues. Of course, once the slush fund money is doled out, I don’t think they would care if kids’ lives were ever spared. Just a guess. BTW...this is not a classic Red-Blue issue.