Quote:
Originally Posted by wildsage  "The Earth's temperature for the first six months of the year was the second-warmest ever recorded, government scientists reported today." |
...who should die first? If made made carbon based fuel emissions are the cause and the cure, reducing them, then the only way to do that is to kill human beings, to impose our will.
We can put our own economy into turmoil by eliminating carbon emissions and, perhaps, we'll survive it. In the mean time, when the biggest consumer no longer uses them, carbon based fuels will become incredibly cheap and easy to get and use and every other economy on the planet will use them. They'll use them because they won't likely choose to just allow their nations and people to suffer the titanic consequences of the massive reductions that reducing CO2 levels will take. They won't allow the mass starvation and freezing and collapse of their economies. They won't because they have no prospects of surviving that kind of shock.
Unless we force them to stop. That means war.
So, who first? We could dramatically reduce CO2 emissions tomorrow if we just whack 1.3 some odd billion Chinese. That might do the trick right there. If not, who else? And, when that does nothing for global warming, how do we apologize?
And what about the warming on Mars? Maybe we should wipe out India to to save the heating on Mars which, using the same logic, must also be cause by us and not variations on and within the largest heat source in the galaxy.
Let the planet saving begin!