Goldilocks and Osama

Climate Change seen fanning conflict and terrorism runs the Reuters headline. The premise is that people will fight over resources made scarcer by global warming. Well, people will probably fight if the world gets cooler, too, as is likely that they did in the 17th century. The conclusion must therefore be that we live in a sort of Goldilocks climate, where things are worse if hotter and worse if cooler; current temperatures are just right. This is sloppy thinking. Mankind adapts when things change. Generally, the adaptations are for the better (would we have had the benefits of the industrial revolution if the balmy climate of the Medieval Warm period had not given way to the Little Ice Age?). If, however, adaptation is discouraged then populations becomes victims of change. In that respect, the environmental movement, which has viciously opposed adaptation as an acceptable response to global warming, must bear some of the blame here. A forthcoming paper from CEI will demonstrate how adaptation to global warming can be achieved at little cost and to great benefit.

The story also notes the following:

“You have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history. Despite this, you refuse to sign the Kyoto agreement so that you can secure the profit of your greedy companies and industries,” al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden wrote in a 2002 “letter to the American people”.

Yes, Osama bin Laden supports the Kyoto Protocol. And that’s supposed to be a recommendation?