One of the reasons that Barack Obama is well-situated to kick John McCain's ass this Fall is that he has the most comprehensive vision for combatting climate change - truly the issue today that has the potential to unite the right, left and independents.
McCain would refuse to join a global climate change regime without India and China. Clinton talks vaguely about leading such a regime, but with her hawkish foreign policy would likely bankrupt the US in a war with Iran before she's invest seriously in climate change. Obama would put the money McCain wants to use for Mars exploration toward investment in green technology. As he puts it, "If we can go to the moon, we can replace the internal combustion engine. If we can go to the moon, we can build windmills and solar panels."
Even if this is idealistic rhetoric, it is rhetoric that will resonate with vast bipartisan swaths of the electorate this Fall - more than a Mars mission, and certainly more than obliterating innocent civilians in Iranian cities.
To compare the candidates on international law issues, click here.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Change I Can Believe In
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Diototus
I think your political assessment is correct, however. . .
Way back when, I took the course on Meteorology and Climatologic. One thing I learned was that when I went to Grad School International Relations would be much more fun and interesting. Going over charts with net solar energy absorption isobars and reading documents where I was not sure if the it was the original Russian author or the translator, or both that had no sense of writing style, I learned a bit about the subject. The information that is put out are things like Al Gore’s very well done piece of propaganda but which have no scientific value, and other things that are to technical for some one who never wants to see another net solar energy absorption isobar in his life. But everything that is sort of mid level that I can understand is unconvincing at best.
To keep updated and informed on the subject consider which does a good job of filtering out the best from both sides for those who are not science geeks.
And remember 2007 was a year of Global cooling.
.
.
Blogger messed up the last two links
http://climatedebatedaily.com/
http://eclecticmeanderings.blogspot.com/2008/01/2007-year-of-global-cooling.html
I have to admit: I care very little about climate change, especially as it pertains to the election. I know, I know, that makes me horrible, but I've read too much stuff that says there are waaayyy too many variables to blame climate change on just us. Plus, there has been a lot of stone-casting in the supposedly open-minded scientific community. Demonizing scientists who stray from convention hinders scientific advancement and discovery. What it does do is provide support for the budding green movement and the industries involved.
Color me cynical, but I'm not sold yet. And climate change is the least important thing I'm concerned with in this election.
I think the world would be a lot cooler if we weren't in Iraq.
Post a Comment