These lines will on day make sense to the dems, their environmentalist pals and their propagandists in the media who will have cost us not ten years but many decades in the energy race. We are getting further behind daily as the rest of the world races to acquire new energy sources and build new plants of the coal, nuclear, oil and even cowshit if it burns variety. Even the French got it decades back as they are producing enough nuclear power to meet their energy needs…We on the other hand are still discussing the energy equivelent of “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin” from midevil catholicism. I wonder what will finally convert the non-believers? Ten dollar a gallon gas. A dollar crisis as our trade deficit spirals out of control, gas lines, rationing…I wonder…

To my mind, the trend for consistently ignoring realities in favor of common memes is so well established that it will be years before there is a change in trend.

By contrast, when the abatement plans start hurting the industry, there will be no mainstream expert – no climatologist, columnist or green activist – around to blame the new rules. On the contrary, they will all be cheering Obama’s actions. Unless the abatement plans kill off some big, preferably unionized companies in close succession, the media won’t question them. And even if the media start questioning the plans, the critics will probably shut up if Obama starts doling out subsidies – which would off course only make a bad situation worse, but who’s complaining?

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/11/02/obama-coal-plants/

They mostly say that Obama never said he wanted to bankrupt “the industry” and that McDole said the same thing. (He probably did.) Yadayadayada …. Obama’s policies will still have the same effect. God help us all when he puts RFK Jr. in a position of power — that guy is the very definition of “enviro nutcase.”

Also, and more fundamentally, the swing toward a new paradigm, once the old one has reached a stage of palpable implementation, is a logical consequence of the practical “nonsensicality” of the old dogma. You pursue a dogma to gain power and satisfy your interests, which is why it tends to be at odds with a worthwhile overall end, realism etc..

The desire for controlling CO2 output does not really relate to global warming. It’s just an excuse to damp down and control technology and industrialization. This is about Luddites with political power who use the state to inhibit progress. No amounts of science and logic will stop people who think this way.