California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher asked a panel of economists and one scientist if they agreed with rather comical solutions some studies proposed to combat man-made global warming.
Rohrabacher, a skeptic of catastrophic man-made warming, cited studies calling for the banning of pets, frequent flier miles and raising of energy taxes as solutions to climate change.
“I have read a number of studies that have indicated there are certain solutions that are being advocated,” Rohrabacher, a Republican, said during a Wednesday hearing on technological solutions to warming.
“One study is that we should be eliminating pets — dogs. Dogs should be eliminated and that’s part of their solution, that we’re going to do that,” Rohrabacher said. “There was one that talked about ending frequent flier miles” and others suggesting a “major increase in parking fees and gas taxes.”
Rohrabacher’s concern was that many proposed solutions to global warming rely on controlling human behavior, instead of market-driven ones. Rohrabacher has previously called global warming a plot “to create global government to control all of our lives.”
WATCH:
“Do any of you on that panel agree that, that approach — no more dogs … no more frequent flier miles?” Rohrabacher asked. “Do any of you support that type of human control in order to come to grips with what you’re telling us is undebatable, the man-caused global warming?”
The only panelist to answer was economist Ted Nordhaus, who said he did not endorse those policies to fight global warming. Nordhaus said he supported some tax and regulatory policies but said the technological change would play the biggest role.
Also on the panel were Oren Cass, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and Phil Duffy, president of the Woods Hole Research Center. Climate scientist Judith Curry was also invited to testify, but “extreme weather” prevented her from traveling to D.C.
However, Curry did post her testimony on her blog. Curry’s testimony stressed, “that we cannot know exactly how the climate will evolve in the 21st century, we are certain to be surprised and we will make mistakes along the way.”
Read more at Daily Caller
For anybody reading this. Go viral. Killing my pet!!!! Do you have any concept of how that will be received??? The pure emotional backlash will be a tsunami even from the PC’s and Virtue signallers. The utter coldness of the idea is not far from Ted Bundy’s mindset. I’ve said this before. I have more fear of the Alarmist solutions than their apocalyptic predictions. Case in point above. Actor James Donald at the end of The Bridge on the River Kwai; ‘Madness, madness!’
So according to some University/Collage egghead Spot and Puff will have to go because of all this Global Warming/Climate Change poppycock No More Garfield or Snoopy all because some university professor with their walnut sized brain came up with some dumb study making this wild and idiotic ideas
Don’t write me or this site. VIRAL IT. Comprendo??? The power lies in the masses not the tiny few Denier websites.
Regards
BTW I think Starlings are neat. Ugly but they communicate more eloquently than the average person.
I have read articles that stated that pets, especially large dogs, need to go because of their carbon foot print.
The fact that only one panelist responded to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher’s question on pets probably means that some support the idea.
Al Bore and Leonardo DiCaprio leave Carbon Craters
Its not even carbon, co. its carbon dioxide.. co2. And it is food for nature. We need more of the stuff to feed humanity.