>Nathan, Miles and Doug all protest that I must be wrong about global
>warming, but in all seriousness, if they believed one per cent of
>the predictions of impending environmental disaster WOULDN'T THEY
>FEEL OBLIGED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
>
>I really do not see the point of explaining why a point of view is
>wrong when plainly those who are expressing it do not even
>themselves take it seriously enough to act upon it.
>
>Nathan in particular takes exception to my argument that it is
>hypocritical to continue to increase energy and resource consumption
>while warning of the dangers of increased consumption. He thinks
>that I am arguing for an individualistic solution when we need a
>collective solution. So where's Nathan's - or Doug's or Miles' -
>collective solution?
A simple first step would be a sharp increase in the gasoline tax in the U.S. I'm afraid the Hudson will be lapping my ankles before that happens.
Doug