Scientific American: Effective World Govt. Will Be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...e-catastrophe/

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, far more is needed. To be effective, a new set of institutions would have to be imbued with heavy-handed, transnational enforcement powers. There would have to be consideration of some way of embracing head-in-the-cloud answers to social problems that are usually dismissed by policymakers as academic naivete. In principle, species-wide alteration in basic human behaviors would be a sine qua non, but that kind of pronouncement also profoundly strains credibility in the chaos of the political sphere. Some of the things that would need to be contemplated: How do we overcome our hard-wired tendency to “discount” the future: valuing what we have today more than what we might receive tomorrow? Would any institution be capable of instilling a permanent crisis mentality lasting decades, if not centuries? How do we create new institutions with enforcement powers way beyond the current mandate of the U.N.? Could we ensure against a malevolent dictator who might abuse the power of such organizations?

---

Agenda 21

Yes, yes, sure it will whatever excuse works and floats your boat I guess.

media is owned ... agenda is fraud in arts and science ... the lie is their god

I'm a scientist and I disapprove of this message.

Global government can no more solve climate change than they can solve hunger, disease or war.

Only free people with a chance at improving their lot and life and the ability to leave their children better off than they can hope to accomplish anything good for everyone.

Put the government in charge and they'll crash the climate inside of a decade, just like they've crashed the economy.

Pure propaganda to scare people into the NWO enslavement.

I can't remember who but some big person said that the elites needed an issue to use to brainwash people into following the new world government. That issue was the new elitist religion known as environmentalism.

Listen, I'm an environmentalist. I'm just not the anti-human collectivist kind like the rapist Al Gore who wants to use violence to force people into his hoax - cap and trade scheme - so he and his Left wing buddies and make trillions.

Ever notice that no scientist or people in the media never use the term global warming anymore? That's because it has been completely debunk. The hockey stick was a fraud. All of their predictions dating back in the 1980s have turned out to be wrong in terms of the earth's temp. What do they use now? The new term is climate change. It's pure propaganda!

Warming and cooling cycles are normal and have existed for millions of years. Humans couldn't raise the temp if we tried. We only emit 2% of co2 even if you believe that is the culprit.

The ice caps on other planets are melting too. The temp is determined by the sun and the solar system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WilliamC

I'm a scientist and I disapprove of this message.

Global government can no more solve climate change than they can solve hunger, disease or war.

Only free people with a chance at improving their lot and life and the ability to leave their children better off than they can hope to accomplish anything good for everyone.

Put the government in charge and they'll crash the climate inside of a decade, just like they've crashed the economy.

---

Ditto. There is no motivation for them to "solve" climate change, hunger, disease and war. Quite the opposite.