Why Conservationists Should Be AGW Skeptics

Too many (i.e. all) birders I know are avid "warmenists."

I'm of the opinion this is a poorly thought out avenue of advocacy. It blindly endorses a political notion born of "findings" by an embarrassingly amateurish cadre within a nascent scientific discipline with little consideration (much less apprehension) of the positive effects of global warming itself, and the detrimental impact Anti-Global Warming focus has on more specific and readily addressed environmental and conservationist issues.

Say the average American gives $5.00 to "environmental" causes per year. Times 200 million adults, that's a cool billion. For one billion dollars, I could buy every private parcel of real estate in seven or eight rural Michigan counties, plant it with Jack Pine, and save the Kirtland's Warbler forever. For half of that, I could supply the entire watermen fleets of Jersey and Delaware with quality bait bags, reduce their horseshoe crab requirements by 70% and save the North American subspecies of the Red Knot forever. For one quarter of that, I could bird-proof 50,000 tall buildings in migratory pathways. For one tenth of that, I could outbid a developer on sixty-five beachfront acres of saltmarsh and sandbar and maybe save the Piping Plover for a while. For one 100th of that, I could offset the entire year's legal and operating expenses of a grassroots organization fighting to save a historic property from demolition and development that would threaten a prized and vulnerable preserve next door.

Well, somewhere between that 65 acres and the measly million is what's left after donations to global warming causes are factored out.

I certainly hope that these errant dollars actually have a positive impact on the 92 per cent of all species "threatened" by global warming in the online taxonomic resources. These same resources inform me that the American Roadrunner is threatened by sprawl, without comprehending that the warming that "threatens" the Cerulean Warbler will expand the Roadrunner's habitat by a factor of a billion (assuming you rely on Albert Gore for your science).

I don't like contradictions. I won't justify them, and I certainly won't accept them as scientific.

Fuck carbon, fuck TV ads from gigundo corporations with "green" graphics, fuck lighbulbs, ethanol and brainwashing kindergarten kids about footprints. I'll take the Warbler.