See, it’s cool if you are a Believer to use fossil fuels to say they’re evil and killing Gaia, because they are a Believer. You, on the other hand, dear reader, you don’t believe, so, you must be forced to drive a Chevy Volt
(UK Guardian) Averting the worst consequences of human-induced climate change is a “great moral issue” on a par with slavery, according to the leading Nasa climate scientist Prof Jim Hansen.
He argues that storing up expensive and destructive consequences for society in future is an “injustice of one generation to others”.
Hansen, who will next Tuesday be awarded the prestigious Edinburgh Medal for his contribution to science, will also in his acceptance speech call for a worldwide tax on all carbon emissions.
In his lecture, Hansen will argue that the challenge facing future generations from climate change is so urgent that a flat-rate global tax is needed to force immediate cuts in fossil fuel use…..
Exactly how did he get to England? Swim?
Then there’s the whole “slavery” thing, but, climahysterics are going to be always try and out-do each other with more and more dire predictions.
The article spends a lot of time describing how Hansen thinks people who use fossil fuels should be taxed, the price of fossil fuels should be dramatically raised, and the money redistributed to those who drive weenie mobiles, because fossil fuels are evil, except when they are used to get Hansen to England. And, as Tom Nelson points out
Under the global carbon tax proposal, the mechanisms for controlling fossil fuel use would be taken out of the hands of individual states influenced by energy companies, and politicians anxious about winning elections.
And whose hands, exactly, will the mechanisms be put in? If you’re taking it out of politician’s hands, aren’t you taking it out of the hands of the voting public? Sounds like fascism, eh? Or maybe straight to totalitarianism.
