Al Gore identified the problem, writes KENNETH P. GREEN, but his cure is worse than the disease.
Gore: Prize PoliticsIt’s no surprise that Al Gore has added a Nobel Prize to his Academy Award. The political winds have been blowing in his direction for many years now. And to be fair about it, one has to applaud Gore’s climate crusade on several levels: his tenacity, effectiveness, and persuasiveness are all on par with other Nobel winners.
Few informed observers would deny the nugget of truth in Gore’s movie, namely, that the Earth’s climate is warming and that there is a plausible theory linking some of that warming to man-made greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions and land-use changes. It’s also clear that significant action is needed to address the risks of a changing climate. After Hurricane Katrina, we’re all too aware of how easily seawalls can collapse and coastal areas can become inundated by storm surges. In this regard, Gore’s Nobel is certainly warranted. He has done more to raise awareness of the potential risks of climate change than any other individual in human history.
But there is a sharp distinction to be made between the scientific beneficence of Gore’s message and the destructiveness of his favored policy prescriptions. Although it has suited Gore and the environmental movement to claim that the dispute over climate change is about science—and a few vocal critics of climate science have enabled them to do so—the real fight has always been about the choice of response.
See full Article.
Posts
