Would you sign a contract for how much you’ll be paid 40 years from now? Unless you were independently wealthy and could care less, of course not—because you have no idea how to gauge the purchasing power of that income in some future society. You have no way to guess what life will be like then, given the rapid changes you’ve seen just in the past decade alone. So it would be insane to bind yourself to a future salary a decade from today, let alone in 2050.
It would also be foolish to sign a contract that obligates you to limit how much you spend on food and transportation.
So why are world leaders rushing to sign a contract for how much their countries can emit–from nature and all of life’s activities–in 2050 by as much as 50% below 1990 levels? They have no idea what life will be like then—especially now that science and scientists are being called into question. Even if politics is not part of the scientific equation then, in all likelihood we could have the technology we need to make emission caps moot.
Even if the U.S. doesn’t sign a new ‘Kyoto II’ agreement in Copenhagen next week, the U.S. Congress is considering legislation to constrain American life to the tune of more than a household spends on groceries every year for eight years.
The problem with countering insanity, it’s been said, is that insane people think they are sane, so they keep on doing what they’ve been doing no matter the evidence.
Let’s hope enough sane leaders are going to Copenhagen who have the courage to say “the sky is falling” on climate hype, and demand we rethink this gambit through.
