Acting for the Sake of Acting is a Fool's Errand

Salon has a piece titled, "Why do people still deny climate change?" It opens:

At the expense of being tedious, from a climatological perspective, 2011 was a real killer — both figuratively and literally. If not quite so hot as 2010, which tied 1998 for the warmest in recorded history, it’s likely to end up among the top 10, all occurring over the past 15 years according to the World Meteorological Organization.

So? Records go back 150 years. It sounds like temperatures increased after coming out of the Little Ice Age and have now plateaued. Where's the problem? Why is a slightly warmer world than 100 years ago a bad thing?

The author then notes that in 2011, "Extreme weather plagued much of the world", and proceeds with a laundry list of meterological events. All of these events have happened in the past, and will happen in the future. Linking them to climate change is tendentious. If the world were cooling, would we have fewer extreme weather events? Why the assumption that warming menas more extreme weather?

The piece meanders into insults ("It’s remarkable how well some people can type with both eyes closed and their fingers stuck in their ears") before ending with this:

Everybody wishes global warming weren’t happening. But the evidence is overwhelming. Alas, one can’t help doubting that human beings, genetically predisposed to tribalism, can quit fighting each other long enough to act.

It's remarkable that the author is able to insult those who disagree with them and then ask that we quit fighting.

More importantly, what does the author want us to do? Cap carbon emissions? What will that accomplish? Can it survive a cost benefit analysis? That's how you get people to act. Vague whining and name-calling of your political opponents won't accomplish much.

One of the reasons I'm a skeptic about the hazards of climate change is that the alarmists rarely debate it. They don't have confidence in their theories. You can find dozens of examples of Richard Dawkins debating evolution vs. creationism - but not one of Al Gore debating global warming. Global warming alarmists rely on the opinion pages - places where they can avoid answering questions.

Alarmists, it's simply not enough to say we have to do something about climate change. I need to know the costs and what it will accomplish. You guys can't answer those questions, and that's why nobody has acted thus far.