The Blindness of Mary Robinson and Michael EnrightIn a muddle-headed monologue Enright demonstrated intellectual ineptitude, or was he just being a deliberate liar? Contrary to what Enright would have you believe:
More recently Enright has invited Mary Robinson to venture further into the relm of the ridiculous.
- Atheism is NOT a belief system.
- Certainly, the scientific view of Dawkins is NOT a belief system. Dawkins presents evidence. Evidence which shows that god is unlikely to exist. Dawkins does not claim to "know" --- which is what sets Dawkins aside from faith-based believers, like Enright. In a fit of unintended irony, Enright missed the point!
Mary Robinson opines that the discussion about climate change has been "too technical" and she prefers to discard reason in favour of appeal to emotional flights of fantasy.
In the world according to Mary, the damage done by Typhoon Haiyan is all because of climate change caused by carbon emissions and it's all the fault of us North Americans!
Any thinking person might pause to wonder if crowding 105 million people onto the Phillipines Islands might have something to do with the poverty of those most faithful followers of the Pope. Obviously the Philipines Islands have far more people than can be sustained on their own turf. Like rats on a sinking ship they scurry to other shores.
Still the pot boils over with brainless breeding. Three cheers for the Pope!
The selfrighteous Mary Robinson blames all ill on carbon emissions. A Canadian requires greatly more fuel to survive the long Canadian winter than a Filipino enjoying a more tropical climate. If carbon emissions are a serious concern then the likes of Mary Robinson and Michael Enright would be advocating for the depopulation of places like Canada.
Oh I wish... A more tropical clime would suit me, fine!
Instead, Mary opportunistically wags her moralizing finger and bitches that Inuit can't maintain their lifestyle. Of course they can't. The Inuit have become infected by Mary's Catholic doctrine and their population has grown to far more than can be sustained by the hunter-gatherer lifestyle to which they cling. Perversely, their best hope for gainful employment may be industrial resource extraction. Ah well, Mary can wag her finger at that too!
Mary Robinson says that Canada should be subsidizing other nations because Canadians benefited from the fossil fuel era. Well, I'd suggest that Ireland should subsidize native Canadians. After all, it was overpopulated European nations that stole the American Continent in the first place. Most European nations have since become responsible, reducing reproduction rates. But not Ireland, oh no! Mary Robinson seems quite content that her tribe continue to reproduce like rabbits --- flooding the world with Paddies.
Mary Robinson promotes solar, wind and wave power as the the great solution. Changing to low carbon is not trivial. Those of us who think through the technical details realize that these alternative energy technologies are not benign! I guess that Mary forgot about hydro power, but then that's not benign either! And then there is the ethanol industry. Another North American joke, instead of producing food we make "renewable" fuel so inefficiently that the price of grain increases and Egypt and much of the rest of the Middle East runs riot.
Don't get me wrong. Moving to low carbon would be good --- but we don't know whether or not it is possible to do this and still maintain the production required to provide for the existing billions.
What we do know is that at the start of the fossil fuel era the world population was less than 1 billion. It's an absolute certainty that carbon emissions would be a non-issue if population had been stabilized back then. If only... the Earth's resources and modern technology would be more than sufficient to provide a high standard of living for all without denuding the landscape and crushing ecosystems.
In the world according to Mary Robinson the worlds population will blindly grow from 7 to 9 billion in the next 36 years. Ever more brutal poverty and inequity will follow.
There can be no reasonable outcome unless we start being open and honest about the main problem, overpopulation. Might I remind Mrs Robinson that Martin Luther King saw that overpopulation was the biggest problem. What's more, he had the brains to realize that it was a solvable problem! Nowadays, our so-called leaders (and selfstyled radio moralists) are brainless and gutless --- unable to either comprehend or speak an obvious truth, with one exception.
But then Michael Enright and Mrs Robinson are both lackies to the Pope --- and the selfish attempt of this religion to agressively outnumber it's rivals. Only the Muslim religion is more odious in this regard.
Mary rattles on about "sustainable development", that tired old oxymoron. Mary Robinson, you proffer a non-solution while continuing to promote the problem.
Greenhouse gas emissions rise because of population increase! With a reasonable global population, say 1 billion, carbon emissions would not be a problem. Environmental devastation, poverty, and war are the excrement of overpopulation.
Mary Robinson wages moral outrage at fossil fuel, that faithful whipping boy, but is wilfully blind to the underpinning problem.