It’s so true: every time Hillary opens her mouth I wonder why I ever thought about voting for her. It’s also clear the Paris Climate Accord is not much more than a vacuous feel-good exercise that does nothing to reduce CO2, but is fundamentally unfair to the US. It’s really a bad deal and wholly unnecessary. Industries can innovate and adopt more energy efficient practices and develop greener power sources with or without it.
Where I don’t follow you is in the “Chicken Little, the Sky is Falling” attitude about climate change and the insistence that we have to make drastic changes to cut CO2 output or we will go extinct in short order. The fact is the climate is changing and has always been changing for 4 billion years. We’ve had some fairly dramatic shifts in the not too distant past and they had nothing to do with anthropogenic CO2 release. 12,000 years ago an Ice Age was going into an inter glacial period but large parts of North America and Europe were still covered with thick sheets of ice. Sea level was much lower — you could walk from Siberia to Alaska. More recently we went into and came out of a Little Ice Age. The idea that we will achieve climate stability by controlling CO2 has no basis in science or the historical record. Rather than waste effort and money trying to halt climate change, we need to think about a strategy of efficient adaptation that minimizes disruption and focuses on addressing the specific detrimental effects and makes the most of the beneficial effects of the climate change anticipated to happen. Moving back from the coasts and up to higher ground, building on stilts, adopting more water-borne culture (Venice) and promoting wetlands are responses to rising sea level. Higher CO2 is good for many crops and should allow for increased food production. I could go through challenges and opportunities in a dozen more areas, but I think you get the idea. Global warming is no bed of roses, but it doesn’t have to be the end of life as we know it if we plan intelligently.