Comment: I'm about to shock even more people

(See in situ)

I'm about to shock even more people

by completely agreeing with you. There is no logical reason this issue 'should' result in less freedoms or more control over us but in either case of the GW debate, it will. That's a definite issue to be dealt with.

I see there being two ways to do so.

First one is to convince everyone that it's a hoax and to drop the CO2 based regulations that we know eventually lead down a dark path. To this, I say good luck. I'm done the science and believe it's a building problem 100% and I'm positive the the majority of other scientists have too. But even if none of us are vocal, there's still the propaganda machine to fight. Sorry, but this way is a losing battle.

The second option is to simply stop using fossil fuels to make our energy. People who state that this costs more are simply uninformed and listening to paid off experts telling them "THE" only renewables (implying PV and wind) can't do it. Sure, those can't do it cheaper, yet (they are getting very close though), but what's not being said is that there are others out there that CAN do it better, cheaper and 100% clean of CO2 emissions.

Even our farming, fishing and cattle raising techniques can be overhauled for INCREASED PROFITS and yield if we just stop listening to the "centralized system is best" people and start doing things locally, using distributed models. Right now, if you combine multiple proven techniques on about 3 acres of land, you can produce enough beef, pork, poultry, fish, shrimp, veggies, spuds and assorted other foods to feed nearly 100 people year round. If the entire US wanted to eat from people doing this, all of those mini-farms would fit inside Texas with room to spare and with no farms outside that state.

All I've been saying this entire thread is that both halves of the problem (the freedom and the GW issues) go away if we go renewable, so why don't more people embrace it?