Quote:

Taking drastic, and economically catastrophic, actions to forestall a theoretical problem that we can have negligible affect upon even if the doomsayers are correct, makes little sense. Promoting panic and demanding immediate action serves an agenda, but not an environmental one.




Well, see, that's where we differ. As I have pointed out many times before, except for companies that are too stupid to get out of their own way, it is not and does not have to be "economically catastrophic". There are loads of companies out there right now on the leading edge of technology making wind power, eco-friendly, etc... equipment, cars and machines, all cashing in on this desire to treat the planet which gives us life (or can take it away) better. Now, personally, doom or gloom aside, I really don't see much wrong with treating our home better. Would you allow someone to come into your home and dump their junk? Again, decisions we make today will not affect us today, they will affect your grandchildren. SOOOO, if we are a little overly cautious and adopt policies and technologies that make our planet cleaner, AND can be economically beneficial (to companies who don't shove their heads in the sand) to many. There's a LOT of money to be made in Green Technology and thousands of companies are cashing in nicely (GM, Toyota, Honda, Vesta, GE, etc...) So, you have a choice, join the bandwagon, say cumbaya to green and profit from it, or be left behind. The rest of the world has embraced green and is going that way and making money. Are we a captialist country that embraces new ideas and technology or will we just let the rest of the world take that away from us too?