tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post8595267140221679186..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: "No no no" don't adapt - shout the alarmed at WUWTSouhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-70705165658916965912014-09-29T07:36:37.997+10:002014-09-29T07:36:37.997+10:00It costs money to adapt to higher sea levels, or t...It costs money to adapt to higher sea levels, or to improve the sewers to handle bigger rainfall events, and so on.<br /><br />Deniers may deny denying that it's warming and the seas are rising, but when it comes to whether any money should be spent on adapting to the warming climate, the answer always seems to be of course not, on account that it isn't warming and the seas aren't rising. And then there's a Sandy or Katrina event where the same folks come out and claim that the damage is due to a failure to spend money on the things that we would be spending money on to adapt to climate change, so of course it isn't that the climate is changing, it's just that governments are incompetent at planning. And that's why we need to put people in charge who will resolutely refuse to spend money on flood defenses and emergency preparedness, because if we would just stop doing the little that we do, ... ... I have to stop, the gyrations are making my head spin.numerobisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-68095885141080347012014-09-29T05:57:25.690+10:002014-09-29T05:57:25.690+10:00==> "I know you were probably under the im...==> "I know you were probably under the impression that science deniers want to adapt to and not mitigate global warming."<br /><br />I'm not under that impression at all. Many "skeptics" claim that they're all in favor of "adaptation," but when you look at the larger context for a sense of their political ideology, many of those same "skeptics" are strongly opposed to "centralized" approaches to anything, and opposed to the kinds of "government funding" that would be necessary for serious-scale adaptation.<br /><br />Of course, this is also probably very similar to "Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare"-type thinking, where the <i>concern</i> about centralization and government funding is highly <i>selective</i>, but my sense is that most of the argument in favor of "adaptation" is simplistic leveraging of rhetoric in order to voice objection to the notion of "mitigation" based on a fallacious view that the two are necessarily in opposition or mutually exclusive.<br /><br />The idealized notion of nuclear as a panacea that I often see in the "skept-o-sphere" fits into the same pattern - where nuclear is a panacea as long as it can be a lever to attack other non-fossil fuel energy sources. Conveniently, many of the "skeptics" who just love them some nuclear look past the "socialist" policies of those countries that have relied substantially on nuclear power. Joshuahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08058404311263880189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-35264003143629000582014-09-28T12:22:06.446+10:002014-09-28T12:22:06.446+10:00John forgets that FEMA, the Federal Emergency Mana...John forgets that FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency is a part of the Department of Homeland Security. This is right in FEMA's bailiwick riveratnoreply@blogger.com