I am going to do a series of posts making a case for why we have a moral obligation to take action on CO2 emissions and to do so right away. I am aware I am writing to a deeply skeptical and probably jaded audience.
As is customary, I’m going to start with a quick explanation of my “credentials.” Geoff B told me that he has been studying Global Warming since the 80s and sent me links to his favorite pro and con global warming websites. He didn’t say how many hours he’s spent studying this topic, but it sounds like its hundreds or maybe even thousands of hours by now. Probably many of you have equivalent amounts of experience studying these issues. What can I possibly say to someone that knowledgeable on the topic? I really better have good credentials so that I can command some real authority, right?
So here are my credentials: I have done the following so far to educate myself on the whole global warming and CO2 emissions issue.
1. I watched An Inconvenient Truth
2. I watched The Great Global Warming Swindle
3. I attempted to read the IPCC report and made it a few pages in before I got bored and quit.
4. I Googled on the Internet for a few hours to find answers to questions.
In total, that’s, um, 10 to 15 hours of research if I’m lucky. More likely it’s 6 to 8 hours, plus whatever I happened to pick up in the popular media, of course. In any case, if you have only picked up knowledge about CO2 emissions from the popular media, I’m probably less than 10 hours ahead of you in terms of research.
In other words, I am a complete idiot on the topic of global warming. I know next to nothing about it, have no credentials whatsoever and can’t even begin to make scientific arguments on the subject.
And that’s precisely why I’m the right one to make the case that we have an immediate moral obligation to act on curbing CO2 emissions. For I am going to argue that while the subject of global warming is complex, confusing, and contradictory at times, the choice to act on CO2 emissions is simple, obvious, and requires only very basic knowledge.
I will probably ramble on this subject for several posts to break things up. This is a complex subject and requires a complex explanation, especially if I’m talking to a skeptical audience. I will attempt to roughly follow topics in this order (though each may or may not take several posts):
1. My Global Warming / CO2 Emissions History. In a series of posts, I’ll explain my own search for the truth on this topic and share my frustrations with those on both sides of the “debate.” I’ll try to make a point of showing the dishonesty and problems that exist on both sides of the so-called “debate”.
2. My Case for Immediate Action Curbing CO2 Emissions. I’ll then explain my actual argument on why I believe the need for action is immediate. I’ll also explain why the “debate over global warming” shouldn’t be happening in the first place and why both conservatives and liberals should at least be in agreement that we need immediate action against CO2 emissions. I’ll also explain why this agreement to take action will not equate to agreement on what action to take and doesn’t have to — and must not — hurt the economy.
3. A Conservative CO2 Emissions Manifesto. I’ll explain my specific frustrations with the Republican party over this “debate” and why they are morally inferior to the Democratic party’s stance (if only barely) and give my suggestions on how to create a “conservative CO2 agenda” that will restore the moral authority of the Republican party on this subject.
4. Thoughts on Climategate. Near the end, I’ll explain why we owe those involved in the Climategate scandal more of a hearing than we are giving them, even though the scandal is real. I’ll use my own “conservative’s manifesto” to explain how we could more productively respond to the global warming enthusiasts.
5. Miscellaneous and Final Thoughts. Anything else I couldn’t fit in that seems worthy of discussion.