Not to be taken Seriously

 Is global warming real?

 Is global warming an existential threat to our world? 

Must we act? Is it critical to act now? And what will those actions look like?

All good questions but yet who will answer those questions and what will the solution be that saves our world?

I am a conservationist so no matter what the circumstances are surrounding the risks of global warming, I will always take the view that humanity should ALWAYS be taking steps to conserve any and all natural resources. I believe that “waste” is bad and conserving resources is always better than waste. I believe there should be an inherent communal agreement that we should, as a humanity, should always strive to do things and take steps that “conserve”. Whether that is conserving water, or trees, or animals, or fossil fuels, there should never be a path chosen that wastes these resources when another path that “conserves” these resources could be chosen. So, conservation is where I will always come from. Which means that I will always support initiatives that from all practical means, including the economic impacts of such initiatives, conserve our resources. So, I am 100% behind the notion that we should conserve our fossil fuel reliance by taking actions and supporting policies that reduce the consumption, and thereby “conserve”, fossil fuels The net effect of this kind of thinking is less usage of fossil fuels and therein less carbon emissions. Less carbon emissions will always be “good” because that means we are conserving the consumption of fossil fuels. To be clear, I support initiatives that will reduce carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.

The burning of fossil fuels for transportation is the number 1 creator of carbon gas emissions in the world. Therefore, one could easily argue that this number 1 creator of emissions should be the number one target for reduction. The question is what are the policies necessary to “conserve” fossil fuel consumption?

In August of 2021, President Joe Biden decided to convene a summit of experts to address his stated goal of reduction of gas-powered vehicles to a target of 50% of all vehicles sold by 2030 must be electric. Conspicuously absent from the attendee list for the summit was Elon Musk whom at the time, his company Tesla, was the number 1 producer of EV’s in the world. Basically, the worlds number 1 expert on EV technology and implementation was not invited to the meeting. The worlds foremost “expert” was excluded from this stated existential threat to humanity meeting. Why was Musk excluded? Simple answer…Politics. You see Tesla is a non-union company and Biden was not interested in including anyone that was not aligned with his “union” donor base. So, the question is: If the world is facing extinction from global warming resulting from fossil fuel combustion which occurs when automobiles burn gasoline, then why wasn’t the world most successful and arguably foremost expert included in the meeting?  Which leads me to this question: How are we supposed to take global warming seriously when our politicians do not take it seriously? A serious problem would seek serious solutions by including all of the necessary expertise to participate in addressing the problem.

Hypothetical question: If the world was facing extinction by a rogue asteroid heading straight for the earth, do you think the worlds leaders would only include "union" companies in convening the pool of experts to find a solution to save the planet?

It comes down to this simple summary

Is climate change an existential threat to our survival?

Is climate change and the threats to our world real and representative of a clear and present danger to humanity?

If yes to these fundamental questions, then leadership must consult with, and develop initiatives to address that challenge.

All of the worlds’ experts MUST be included in this life threatening endeavor

If this process is politicized then it cannot be taken seriously. Period!

A true problem cannot be politicized

To do so simply renders the problem political

The resulting conclusion is the people in charge cannot be taken seriously and therefore the problem is not serious.

Mr. President, don’t ask someone to believe something when it appears you don’t believe it yourself. Leadership must demonstrate that a problem is serious by taking actions that are serious.