It’s Time for Conservatives to Own
the Climate-Change Issue
National Review,
by
Dan Crenshaw
Original Article
Posted By: zoidberg,
3/4/2020 9:50:57 AM
There is an interesting political tactic often employed by the Left, and it follows a predictable pattern. First, identify a problem most of us can agree on. Second, elevate the problem to a crisis. Third, propose an extreme solution to said crisis that inevitably results in a massive transfer of power to government authorities. Fourth, watch as conservatives take the bait and vociferously reject the extreme solutions proposed. Fifth and finally, accuse those same conservatives of being too heartless or too stupid to solve the original problem on which we all thought we agreed.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
TulsaTowner 3/4/2020 10:09:20 AM (No. 336540)
Very clever. Own an expensive solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
I don't think so.
The junk-science that is being used for political purposes needs to be countered. Mr. Crenshaw has been taken in by the big lie.
19 people like this.
Great idea, let's sell stuff to those who want it to cut emissions of various sorts.
Then comes the same old hook...get the government involved in what ought to be the business of free enterprise. If, for example, the technology developed by NET Power that captures and recirculates CO2 back through the plant via an innovative thermodynamic cycle to produces zero net emissions is a product with sale potential. It ought to be on the market by private entrepreneurs.
Why establish a “Carbon Utilization Energy Innovation Hub,” within DOE to explore how to make carbon dioxide useful? Private capital would find solutions if there was a market for the products. Do we need an army of government bureaucrats and scientists?
Dan sounds like a government-solution guy...
8 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 3/4/2020 10:19:40 AM (No. 336561)
First, IS there a real problem to solve? We still don't know. The science is NOT settled and it may not even be possible to know what climate will do because it is too complex to analyze. Until we KNOW, no major expenditures. We can certainly support improvements in technology that reduce energy usage, like LED bulbs and digital electronics. We can also support better use of carbon fuels to reduce emissions at a minimal expense. We can build better insulated houses. These are already being done. But we should not be bankrupting ourselves or destroying our lifestyles for a problem that is not definitive.
In addition, if there IS warming, IS IT BEING CAUSED BY MAN? If not then it is a worldwide problem with costs to be shared by ALL. If it is proven to be man made, then costs can be allocated to the most culpable.
Second, IF there is a real problem, let's be real about possible solutions. Wind and solar are NOT possible replacements for fossil fuels. They are not going to be any breakthrough discoveries that make them enormously better. There are physical limits of the energy you can get out of solar and wind and we are rapidly approaching those limits. Nor are they reliable enough to power a nation. Nuclear is a real choice to consider. Continuing to switch to natural gas will help. However, NO one nation should be the whipping boy for this problem. If the world is not unified in this, it is pointless.
The best solutions may be how to deal with problems AS THEY ACTUALLY ARISE. If the oceans actually start to rise faster (they have not yet) what will we need to do and how will we do it. If excess heat proven to be caused by MAN CAUSED warming starts to destroy crops, how will that be managed? Perhaps the solution is a classic one. Move from the problem area to one that is OK.
Right now, we do not know much and the propaganda of the scientific and political alarmists are preventing any real discovery or progress.
8 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Strike3 3/4/2020 10:49:01 AM (No. 336604)
We have know that GW aka CC is a manufactured crisis designed to redistribute American dollars to clean up the entire world for a long time. The Euroweenies were salivating over our potential investment and were crushed when President Trump rejected their demands. There's nothing to own.
11 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
901AtTheRiver 3/4/2020 10:59:11 AM (No. 336617)
This is the biggest hoax of all hoaxes. Solve it by putting the perpetrators in jail and seizing the ill gotten gains.
14 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
bldrrepub 3/4/2020 11:02:50 AM (No. 336619)
Here's the problem: the left has defined this problem like a lawyer in litigation. They have done a "document dump" and trying to wade through it is almost impossible. One finds a hypocrisy and they are quick to show you three more graphs that says what you found is wrong. One finds another, and they produce three more. There is a rat's nest of data, analysis, and models and trying to untangle it only gets you more entangled. It is almost impossible to argue the science because they bury you under a crap-ton of BS. This is why conservatives like Crenshaw are proceeding in this way.
While Greta, AOC, Bernie, and Lizzy propose massive *political* solutions, Crenshaw is proposing an *engineering* solution. In a way he is boxing them in and making them deal with the hard facts. I've had many arguments point out that the US GHG emission reductions lead the world. It is only then when the opposing sides say "well, we need to reduce ours so others can grow economically". That is when you point out that this is not a scientific problem but a wealth distribution problem.
6 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
OkieTom 3/4/2020 11:04:44 AM (No. 336621)
Increased CO2 is not a problem and is actually very beneficial to plant life. Commercial greenhouse operators have known this for decades, that's why they run their greenhouses at well over 1000ppm (3 to 4X atmospheric levels) to vastly improve their crop yields.
AGW is a massive hoax and fear mongering tactic used by the left.
14 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
nosillod 3/4/2020 11:12:39 AM (No. 336624)
Mr. Crenshaw reinforces a point I have been saying for years. Why don't we make better use of natural gas? I'm surprised there hasn't been a move to make automobiles that run on natural gas more mainstream. We have massive amounts of natural gas and it burns more efficiently and cleaner than gasoline. How can the global warming kooks argue with it? I know they will, but it will only further hurt their credibility.
2 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
mc squared 3/4/2020 11:23:46 AM (No. 336633)
Crenshaw advocates replacing one power & wealth grab with another: tax credits, never alluding to the idea that GW / CC is a scam from the get-go.
6 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Foont 3/4/2020 11:50:19 AM (No. 336650)
Spokesman for the right wing of the progressive party speaks out. The left wing runs out revolution and cultural degeneracy and the right wing, after a suitable period of time, mores to enshrine these as "conservative" principles. And people wonder how we got to where we are.
4 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
hershey 3/4/2020 12:22:51 PM (No. 336693)
More puke inducing nonsense from NR...they need to stop funding this outfit....
5 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
KatieJo 3/4/2020 12:36:15 PM (No. 336703)
I am so disappointed in Dan Crenshaw. CO2 is not a problem, only an imaginary problem to those who would control and impoverish us. So disappointed.
7 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Heil Liberals 3/4/2020 12:44:01 PM (No. 336710)
I like Rep. Crenshaw. However, his solution involves crony capitalism at its finest with "tax credits" to a select few who do what the government wants. That is not a free market solution. A free market solution would be a company freely partnering with DOE, no strings attached, to work on innovative, cost-effective solutions. That's fine. That's their windmill to tilt.
I do not believe that CO2 is a problem. It is a means to increase production of crops and trees. Plant a trillion trees? Fine. They are a renewable, valuable resource on which people can rely. Carbon capture? Sure, if it makes real sense and reduces the cost of energy.
Otherwise, it's another government teat on which friends of politicians get to suckle.
4 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
kono 3/4/2020 1:16:55 PM (No. 336742)
The lede ought to be part of Social Studies lessons starting sometime in grade school, as a sort of inoculation against the disease of "progressivism".
The rest of the article could be an adjunct to that lesson, showing how much our alternative ideas are subject to having the same fallacious derivations that lead, themselves, to other centralized, collectivist, big-government errors.
2 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
DVC 3/4/2020 1:38:33 PM (No. 336764)
To "get on board" with this fraud, this hoax, we have to agree that CO2 is a problem.
That CO2 is a problem is NOT proven in any way, shape or form.
In fact, CO2 is absolutely, without the slightest doubt or controversy, THE crucial foundation stone of life for all green plants. And those green plants are the foundation of all life on this planet. And more CO2 has been increasing green plant growth and will continue to increase our green plant's growth and growth rates. These are good things from our very slightly increased atmospheric CO2 levels.
Any "bad effects" of CO2 which might occur in the future, are highly conjectural, unproven and mostly UNPROVABLE.
No, we just push back at these crazies with facts, not agree with their BS premise and propose some different solution.
4 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
BarryNo 3/4/2020 1:47:25 PM (No. 336776)
Crenshaw, I will gladly take on the Climate Change debate, as I would be arguing from a scientific viewpoint against Warmists who seem to only appeal to authority and talking points.
And after I presented facts and disabused them of the fraud their 'authorities' have fed them. I will simply say, "No, we are doing enough. No, there is no man made Global Warming. And yes, I DO think you and yous are hypocrites because the manufacture of your electric toys cause more environmental damage than hydrocarbon cars, and all of you leaders, including the sulky, sainted Greta create tons of carbon waste by either jetting around on private planes or forcing their enablers to jet around so sainted sulky Greta can have a crew for her transoceanic yacht, which probably has a hydrocarbon driven motor to use for electric power and to power the boat when the wind isn't favorable.
And despite everything, the world will still be here tomorrow for you to rant and rave about.
2 people like this.
Why is “Greenland” a frozen waste land?
3 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
JunkYardDog 3/4/2020 2:55:36 PM (No. 336868)
There is no global warming issue-it is wholly a lie concocted by the Left, cherry picking data to support a foregone conclusion. The Left does not offer a "solution" to the "problem", it is a veiled grab for POWER. no more and no less.
2 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
anniebc 3/4/2020 7:08:13 PM (No. 337056)
"First, identify a problem most of us can agree on."
Actually, this is not what the left does; they make things up. We hardly agree on any of the things these crazies identify as problems; we think they are the problems.
1 person likes this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
4Justice 3/4/2020 9:58:36 PM (No. 337137)
Two things...CO2 rises as a result of warmer temperatures. Second, just because CO2 levels rise or temperatures rise over a certain period, it does not prove cause and effect. Liars figure...I see these we sites with long-winded discussions about this graph and that graph and this reading taken here vs. there, and all I see is people TRYING hard to justify why they are right. But no matter what they say, there is absolutely nothing there to prove cause and effect, especially when there are so many variables left out of the equation. This is why manipulative leftists are able to con so many people.
1 person likes this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
judy 3/5/2020 12:26:23 AM (No. 337185)
Trump said ...tell me how the billions spent on climate change changed anything & I will listen.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "zoidberg"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)