Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
... the current emissions of CO2 are benign in order to justify permitting CO2 emitters to engage in the experiment and just hope for the best?

No, I do not.

It is clear and evident social insanity to frame the question as something that "the science must prove beyond reasonable doubt" before those engaged in the experiment have their social entitlement to play with the CO2 levels in the atmosphere revoked.

The only sane way to proceed is to demand that those who wish to emit at a rate that increases atmospheric concentration of CO2 and other GHG need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to be safe. Because the risk if they are wrong about it being safe so far exceeds the benefit if they are correct about it being safe that if they are wrong, emissions reduction is not a cost-benefit trade-off, but a priority decision.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Wed Nov 19th, 2008 at 02:40:50 PM EST

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series