Dear brokenladder,
The concensus you cite regarding global warming may not be so perfect as you claim.
I ran a search on LewRockwell.com for "global warming" (http://tinyurl.com/mkpmx) and got 290 hits... and most of these present an alternative viewpoint. In one of your recent posts you chided someone for not presenting an alternative theory. Well, read some of these columns. The "solar" theory seem particularly interesting. And, regarding the "concensus". . .
There are not one or two "contrarians" who dispute the claims of the Greens concerning global warming but over 17,000 scientists. These scientists in fact have actually signed a petition stating their opposition in no uncertain terms. As the organizers of the petition point out, the signers "so far include 2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists who are especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide on the Earth's atmosphere and climate." As they further point out, the signers "also include 5,017 scientists whose fields of specialization in chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and other life sciences make them especially well qualified to evaluate the effects of carbon dioxide upon the Earth's plant and animal life." (http://www.lewrockwell.com/reisman/reisman18.html)
Besides. even if global warming is indeed happening, and is indeed caused by human-caused CO2 (or even methane from human-raised cows - see http://earthsave.org/globalwarming.htm - methane is 21 times stronger as a greenhouse gas), what is the political action, if any, you are proposing? Are you willing to give up your liberty (or worse yet, my liberty) in order to ameliorate this problem? Are you going to make it a crime to use fossil fuels? Are you going to ban cows and other animal husbandry? Eat a steak and go to jail? If we eat vegetables instead, how do you expect to reduce the methane people will generate?
Are you then going to mandate a reduction in population (and how would this be enforced world-wide)? For that matter, how are you going to reduce the CO2 and methane produced in India and China (for example), especially as they try to enjoy an increased standard of living brought to them courtesy of globalization?
Crying that the problem is "urgent" and "important" doesn't inform us how to proceed. Explain exactly what political actions you would suggest the Libertarian Party of California recommend! What laws, if any, should we support to address this "urgent" and "important" issue? Assuming it isn't just Socialism's Trojan Hourse (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/englund5.html).
Rich
(Attachment ma_grp_160.gif is missing)
noon8window.pdf (36 Bytes)