So many people praise the UN. My hair stands on edge when I hear UN praise and environmental change, global warming, sustainability, green/energy saving in the same phrase.
I believe I'm on the same side as most here towards my feeling about the false prophet. But it's possible I have a contradictory feel about some aspects - particularly the push for green energy. And like all my posts, I am open to be corrected.
To me, the idea of green energy, which uses the natural elements of our planet (solar, wind, tidal, geothermal) is appealing for a few reasons. Firstly, it's abundant; infinite from a human lifetime's perspective and theoretically free (if installation and maintenance were free). Secondly if not yet, could eventually become advanced enough, that it's clean. That is, no polluted air to breathe in, and/or less degradation to the natural environment via less open cut mining and sea drilling. Thirdly, it's allows for comparatively quiet operations - including modes of transport that currently use combustion engines. If there was a choice between dirty and clean, quiet and noisy, expensive and cheap, I would pick the best of each of those options.
If the argument (from the false prophet and supporters) is misguided, but the outcome is favorable (to everyone else), is it worth biting the tongue?
It's not lost on me either that for the world to have gotten to an advanced enough state, to be arguing about fossil fuels and global warming, we needed the things being argued against to advance us to a technological level that allows it to be. I'm not so sure the leftist protesters understand the irony, or fundamentally, the physical requirement.