While debating global warming, I am often told that if we don't do something we will drown the Bangladeshi people. That of course presumes that they are so stupid as to stand still while the ocean waters cover them--which says something about the lunacy and condescension of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) advocates. But that aside. I want to assure the AGW folk that I am not scheming to drown the Bangladeshi's as rapidly as possible. But it is always phrased that way, as if all of us GW critics just love the sound of the gurgle as the last Bangladeshi gives up his last breath. What hooey and political nonsense.
The Wall Street Journal had an article which talked about the view of global warming from Bangladesh. It concerned Mr. Begum. Mrs. Begum's husband earns $44 a month. They have no savings and they can't afford school for their children or the $4 to go to the health care clinic if they get sick. (This is why we need to get their economies going to fix the health care) She cooks her food next to an open sewer (how appetizing). Her village has had lots of politiicans coming to visit to see what they could do to save the Bangladeshi's from global warming. Her life never changes. These heartless people come, see and go away doing nothing for her life. When they explained what global warming was, she said:
"Mrs. Begum's biggest challenge is not what the sea level may do in five or 10 decades. She has a more modest request: "It would be a heaven's gift if a proper drainage system could be arranged in this area where all the drains are covered and do not overflow."
"For Mrs. Begum, the choice is simple. After global warming was explained to her, she said: "When my kids haven't got enough to eat, I don't think global warming will be an issue I will be thinking about."Bjorn Lomborg, "Global Warming as Seen from Bangladesh," Wall Street Journal, Nov. 9, 2009, p. A17
A guy with whom I have been debating asked me how I intended to fix the environmental and health problems. I wrote this which is consistent with the above.
The solution will require two things, energy and the recognition that CO2 is not the problem AGW folk think it is. Let's look at the socieities which have low air pollution and good environmental laws. They are the Western wealthy countries. You want clean air, you have to give the third world, economies that actually grow to make them wealthy enough so they will both care about the environment and have the money to fix it. Wealth would solve that problem. Poor people in poor economies don't care about the environment. They want food.
Environmentalists want fewer children on earth. What countries are having fewer children? Well, it is the rich western countries. As incomes rise women have fewer children. That would solve that problem.
What socieites have good healthcare? Why once again, it is the wealthy western nations. If you want to fix the third world health problems you need to get their economies growing so that they can have the money to get to health care.
Remember this as people tell you what is good for the Bangladeshi's, as if someone sitting comfortably in a comfortable western home knows what is good for the poor Bangladeshi's.