What if it’s a big hoax?

djred_ww0aakdzo

25 Comments

  1. robertguyton

     /  September 10, 2017

    When was that cartoon drawn, Pete? 10 years ago…?

    • That’s by Joel Pett,, first published in USA Today in December 2009 just before the Copenhagen climate change conference.

  2. David

     /  September 10, 2017

    Great job at ignoring the massive costs that get imposed to achieve this ‘better world’. Those costs don’t come from nowhere and have a huge impact on people’s lifestyle.

    Just look at the first in the list, ‘energy independence’, the US has achieved this with fracking, yet the Green’s hate this with a passion, why?

    • Pollution and overconsumption can have a massive impact on people’s lifestyles.

      • David

         /  September 10, 2017

        ‘overconsumption’? Who are you to judge this? The lack of overconsumption is known as poverty.

        • Patzcuaro

           /  September 11, 2017

          It is easier to bury your head in the sand ad pretend it is not happening. Shouldn’t the aim always to make a better world, to save something for the next generation.

          • David

             /  September 11, 2017

            My view of what a better world is is very likely to be a very different view of your ‘better world’.

    • duperez

       /  September 11, 2017

      I get massive costs to achieve this ‘better world’, I get a huge impact on people’s lifestyles.

      I also have a picture of a vehicle going down a great hill at very fast and ever increasing rate. The passengers on board feeling comfortable in their padded cabin are telling the driver to go faster and not use the brakes at all because the thrill of the ride is so great.

  3. Blazer

     /  September 10, 2017

    the biggest hoax perpetrated since 1913…is the financial system and the creation of ‘money’!

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  September 11, 2017

      Money was invented long, long before 1913, Blazer. So were financial systems. These exist, they are not hoaxes.

  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  September 11, 2017

    Unfortunately the cost is trillions rather than nothing.

    • Patzcuaro

       /  September 11, 2017

      Which will be more costly, starting to deal with it now or waiting until we have irrefutable proof.

      • David

         /  September 11, 2017

        Given we will be significantly richer in future and have better technology, it’s a very good idea to wait for the irrefutable proof.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  September 11, 2017

        How many people do you want to kill now for no perceptible difference in global warming?

        • Patzcuaro

           /  September 11, 2017

          People are dying unnecessarily all the time, what exactly are you referring to.

  5. David

     /  September 11, 2017

    The opportunity cost of throwing billions and billions at researchers and subsidising now bankrupt green businesses is an end to child poverty, a cure for cancer etc etc.

  6. High Flying Duck

     /  September 11, 2017

    The cost is also the opportunity costs of trillions being spent stopping carbon emissions instead of actual pollution reduction, cleaning waterways, ridding the oceans of rubbish, eradicating diseases and the list goes on.

    Climate change legislation involves the diversion of vast sums on money that could be spent in far better ways to have a negligible effect on the levels of carbon in the atmosphere.

  7. Zedd

     /  September 11, 2017

    looks like something from Mr Ts election campaign ?