“We seldom discuss climate change, rather, because we focus almost exclusively on state and local matters. Weighing the costs and benefits of climate-change policy is best done at the federal and international levels.”
Fallacies come in many colors, shapes and sizes. The fallacy is blaming federal and international policy makers for something when each of us is responsible. This is pointing the finger at others when each of us needs to take action.
“On occasion, of course, our editorials do stray beyond Oregon's borders, but in such cases there is generally a direct and significant Oregon connection.”
The pollution from China strays across the Pacific Ocean to Oregon. The people migrating from drought stricken California stray across the Oregon border. The storms from the Pacific Ocean stray across the Oregon border leave less snow and more rain causing less dissolved oxygen for fish, rapid runoff in the spring and summer droughts.
“…written multiple editorials about federal legislation that would allow increased harvests on land…”
Cutting down trees stops sequestration of CO2 and does the opposite of what we should be doing.
“Federal and international efforts to combat global warming are not Oregon-specific.”
Never heard of the phrase “Think global, act local”? Action dealing with climate change are all local actions. There is no such thing as federal or international effort. The only effort to deal with climate change is by an individual.
“We do sometimes write about state-level climate-change regulation, and almost never favorably. Why not? Because, again, weighing the costs and benefits of climate change policy is best handled at the federal and international levels.”
Using a fallacy to justify what you write and your actions. Just like Rush Limbaugh.
I don’t see any point in continuing. Your confidence in understanding the current and future situation blocks your acceptance of the need for change. Classic case of denial, just like an addict hooked on the past.
Posts
