According to White House science advisor John Holdren, natural cycles would be throwing us into another ice age. The only thing that’s holding us back from an ice age is human activity, namely the burning of fossil fuels, which is actually counteracting the Earth’s natural tendencies toward a cooling climate. I guess this would explain why we haven’t really experienced “global warming” for decades now. It provides a convenient excuse. Here he is, reading his teleprompter during an online question and answer session:
I’m confused. This science guy is making it sound like thanks to carbon emissions, we won’t have to endure another ice age, at least for now. What happens if the EPA and the green industry achieve their goal of outlawing the current energy conglomerates, and as a result carbon emissions are greatly reduced to the point that the Earth can then continue unhindered on its natural course toward an ice age? Will an ice age be any better than what they’ve been predicting for years (with consistent failure)? Is it better for us to freeze to death or to burn to death?
It seems like the best-case scenario is what we have now, somewhere in the middle. Of course, that’s all assuming that this guy knows what he’s talking about. If he’s in the Obama administration, he’s nothing but a mouthpiece. Whoever wrote his teleprompter script will probably be fired. Everyone knows you’re not supposed to make any comments about the energy industry that can be construed as painting them in a positive light. Crediting them for averting an ice age is way to positive.