In diagramming the media’s agitprop coverage of “Earth Day’s” “results” (some of which was phoned in ahead of time), Andrew Bolt writes, “global warming is one of those holy causes in which journalists may freely lie, and indeed must and do.”
And perhaps surprisingly, they’re not ashamed to admit it: “Climate Change: Get Over Objectivity, Newspapers” was the headline of an essay which ran in Editor & Publisher in 2007, one of the legacy media’s house organs.
The environmental benefits of economic decline, though real, are fragile, because they are vulnerable to intervention by governments, which, understandably, want to put people back to work and get them buying non-necessities again—through programs intended to revive ordinary consumer spending (which has a big carbon footprint), and through public-investment projects to build new roads and airports (ditto).
* * *
One beneficial consequence of the ongoing global economic crisis is that it has put a little time back on the carbon clock. Because the climate damage done by greenhouse gases is cumulative, the emissions decrease attributable to the recession has given the world a bit more room to devise a plan that might actually work.
Sort of a deliberate Rendezvous With Scarcity, you might say.