This is all obviously aimed at politicians that do not buy into the notion that Mankind, or, as one feminist mildly chided me, Humankind, is mostly/solely responsible for every single change in the weather
(The Hill)Â One issue in the 2014 elections that has already tripped up a number of significant candidates is climate change. (snip)
Campaigns fueled by thirty-second soundbites are always disappointing. In an ideal world, the questions “Do you believe in global warming?†or “Do you think human beings cause climate change?†would be followed up by more fleshed-out discussion of the consequences.
Actually, it would be good if those questions were asked. Instead, we get “when did you stop beating your wife types when it comes to “climate change”. Anyhow, moving along, Neil offers his version of questions (you’ll have to pop in to the screed to read his full reasoning
1. Why does it matter that you are not a subject matter expert on climate change, given you regularly make legislative decisions on other topics on which you are not similarly educated?
Interestingly, this is aimed mostly at Republicans, but not at the Democrats who proport to Believe in “climate change” (once again, to be clear, what they mean is anthropogenic climate change, hence the quotation marks from me) who themselves are pushing all sorts of legislation.
2. U.S. military and intelligence analysts have repeatedly said that the US needs to plan for a future world that could be made substantially more unstable by climate change. What is your response to this analysis?
Of course, the military plans for everything. Think they don’t have a plan to invade Canada? How about Barbados? It’s what they do, especially when there are so many who aren’t actually shooters in the military. The top brass is very political, and if politicians, especially POTUS, say jump, they jump. Plus, regardless of whether mostly/solely natural or man-induced, the weather has typically played a factor in war, violence, etc.
3. Do you think poorer countries, like India should be allowed some leeway to grow their economies and in doing so, reduce poverty rates, as part of a longer-term commitment to transition to lower-carbon electricity generation?
I have a better question: since you say you believe in “climate change”, how have you changed your own life to comport to your beliefs? Of course, the above is really about forcing developing nations to stop what they are doing and attempt a “green” economy. It’s the ultimate in “I gots mine, yous can’t have”.
4. Would you support major funding for the accelerated construction of nuclear power-plants both here and abroad, if they were supplanting dirtier sources of electricity generation?
That’s actually a fantastic question. Many “climate change” believers are dead set against nuclear power. Others support it in theory. And it should be followed up with questions about actually supporting measures and legislation to build it. And to allow building other alternatives. Warmists say they are for hydro, geothermal, wind, and solar, yet, when it is time to actually build these, they attempt to either shut it down or want it far, far away from themselves. How long did the fight for the Cape Wind Project go on? Warmists have blocked running transmission lines from solar farms, and blocked solar and wind projects. Not only do they want to stop hydro-power dams, they want existing ones destroyed.
I have more questions for them here. And, of course, they are always welcome to take my yearly New Year’s Day Climate Prediction Challenge.
And, of course, we always go back to the main question: what they heck are you doing to live the life you want to legislate for Everyone Else?
Read: Warmist Neil Bhatiya Has Four Questions For All Candidates On Hotcoldwetdry »
