The on-line wsj has an article headlined "A Climate Absolution? More like a 160-page evasion of the real issues that confront global-warming science." and states:
"We realize that, for climate change true believers, last week's report will be waved about as proof that the science of climate change is as “settled” as the case for action. It’s never hard to convince yourself of what you're already disposed to believe. But if their goal is to persuade an increasingly skeptical public about the science of global warming, and the need to restructure the world economy to ameliorate it, they need to start taking the politics out of the science."
(you need to subscribe to read the article)
Capital Press, the West's AG website has an article well worth reading - an extract:
"This [Precautionary] principle holds that no new development or activity should be allowed until the proponents can prove that no damage will occur to the environment or public health. The principle has taken hold in Europe and in some quarters of the United States, particularly among environmental and health-advocacy groups.
Under the precautionary principle, many of the millions of technological advances that have occurred since the dawn of time would not pass muster.
Fire? Forget about it. Think of all the damage fire causes every day.
The wheel? Nope, not even close. Where there are wheels, there are carts, wagons, cars, trucks and, inevitably, roadkill.
Electricity? This is the most dangerous of all developments. Electricity causes health and societal problems ranging from electrocution to obesity, because people sit too long in front of their television sets.
And the internal combustion engine? So what if it has advanced society as much as any other invention, it pollutes the air.........But to presume that every development is bad until proven otherwise seems to be an idea out of the Dark Ages."
When will these environ(mentalist)s give up?
H/T: International Policy Network's DailyNewslink email.