Mandavilli; Not to minimize having to navigate the Trump noise machine, but WAS the CDC really tying to get the best, constantly changing information into the hands of the public and policy makers so THEY could decide on the most cost effective decisions [and leaning on the FDA to promote cheap and dirty screening tests to lower costs of spread prevention]?
Climate skepticism: Wrong and much in bad faith as well, but how much was enabled by the idea of climate realists that “everything will have to change” (trivially true as “everything” changes every 20-30years anyway) but implying rapid, painful adjustments in popular lifestyles and abetted by apocalyptic warnings, deaminization of fossil fuel producers, and refusal to zero in on changing the incentives to emit CO2. If we has a smart environmental movement, I think climate denial would be be unimportant.
The "painful adjustment" people were, IIRC, overwhelmingly enthusiastic about carbon taxes, and about carbon-emission reparations to the likes of Pakistan as well...
Maybe so, but neither of those positions come through in the MSM reports.
If I had any political capital left over after getting the world to adopt a tax on net CO2 emissions, I would use it to promote reparations in the form of investments in mitigating the harm of CO2 concentrations.
Blame for the Iraq war. Let's leave a bit for MOVE ON's "It's about oil." meme.
Agreed...
Mandavilli; Not to minimize having to navigate the Trump noise machine, but WAS the CDC really tying to get the best, constantly changing information into the hands of the public and policy makers so THEY could decide on the most cost effective decisions [and leaning on the FDA to promote cheap and dirty screening tests to lower costs of spread prevention]?
Dyson: Did you see Chad Orzel on "1948?"
https://chadorzel.substack.com/p/in-praise-of-1948
_I_ at least learned a lot.
Thanks much...
Climate skepticism: Wrong and much in bad faith as well, but how much was enabled by the idea of climate realists that “everything will have to change” (trivially true as “everything” changes every 20-30years anyway) but implying rapid, painful adjustments in popular lifestyles and abetted by apocalyptic warnings, deaminization of fossil fuel producers, and refusal to zero in on changing the incentives to emit CO2. If we has a smart environmental movement, I think climate denial would be be unimportant.
The "painful adjustment" people were, IIRC, overwhelmingly enthusiastic about carbon taxes, and about carbon-emission reparations to the likes of Pakistan as well...
Maybe so, but neither of those positions come through in the MSM reports.
If I had any political capital left over after getting the world to adopt a tax on net CO2 emissions, I would use it to promote reparations in the form of investments in mitigating the harm of CO2 concentrations.