Hey micro, no problem.
When the poop starts to fly all sorts of things get obscured.
The underlying thing is a fair bit of change appears to be occurring. Now, one can consider it transient, and that it is natural, and will just flip back ... part of natural cycles. Natural cycles are real. And so are the cycles precipited by life. I'm thinking the life component is playing pretty big right now. But that make sense, life causes change. I have no plans on suicide or infertility to make things all better.
It just seems that rather than squabble over whether humans are to blame or the cause, one is better served by determining what is, what is within our power to control, what we can accommodate, and how best to use our resources and efforts. UNfortunately there is a significant anti-technology sentiment in portions of the left and a denial sentiment on the right that screws up the duscussion and moes it rapidly away from where i think it belongs.
I think it is best to work with what we have, work with who we are, and make the best of it.
I don't think throwing trillions at trying to reduce CO2 emissions by 1, 2, 5 or 10% is where the fous and resource should be spent.
However, a little cap and trade would have the side effect of focusing some resources where I think they should be spent .. but for reasons entirely unrelated to global climate. So if cap and trade is a trojan horse to better focus our imagination on where things ill eventually have to go, then so be it. The right idea for all of the wrong (climate change) reasons.
So, should be give carbon tax credits ... or coastal relocation tax credits ... I think the latter. The left wants the carbon tax, the right just says nothing is happening.
| 
