Jon Stewart Endorses Geoengineering, Scares Audience (VIDEO)

Typically, Jon Stewart can be counted on to be a champion of progressive causes--which is probably why he alienates his audience in the clip below. Endorsing the view that essentially holds that we can continue polluting and emitting CO2 at the current rate because a geoengineering solution (seeding cloud cover, placing reflective mirrors in earth's orbit, etc) will emerge to will solve the problem does seem a bit odd:

Now, one thing Stewart may not understand (since he does not have time to pore over climate blogs, and I, alas, do) is that the controversy is not over whether or not Levitt and Dubner deny global warming. That's not the issue. It's whether they've sited the correct science in producing their view that we should turn to geoengineering as a solution. As it is, their argument remains riddled with errors.

Many scientists (rightly) fear that while geoengineering solutions should be looked at as 'plan b's--that they are potentially dangerous and could produce unintended and irreversible large scale side effects. And Levitt and Dubner seem to have jumped to conclusions to justify the solution they prefer--and Paul Krugman says they even got the economics wrong while doing so.

Also, by naming their chapter 'Global Cooling' and referring to climate science as a 'religion,' Levitt and Dubner knowingly (or if not knowingly, quite ignorantly) invoked two of the primary tropes embraced by the climate change denial movement, perhaps in order to stoke controversy or appear hiply contrarian.

The fact is, Stewart, Levitt, and Dubner overlook the fact that it is feasible for the world to collectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And not in any sort of hands-holding-kumbaya-emissions-be-gone idealistic way, either: individual and political will already proved strong enough to move the international community to protect the ozone from aerosol through a set of global agreements. There's no reason that the same can't be accomplished for greenhouse gases.

And the reason there's such a controversy over this is that we're almost there--the US is on the verge of passing climate legislation. The world is inching towards cleaner energy as a rule. China and India are funding huge alternative energy projects. So when Levitt and Dubner come along, on a very public platform, and say, 'Don't bother. There's going to be a magic bullet that will make all this go away,' of course people are going to take issue with it. Many have worked hard for the progress we've made--and of course Levitt is entitled to his opinion. But if you set out to stoke a controversy--don't be so surprised when you get one.

More on Jon Stewart and Climate Change
Jon Stewart Takes on 'Crap and Trade' (VIDEO)
Jon Stewart Takes Down Climate Bill, Interviews Steven Chu

Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:

• Cool the Earth Puts Climate Change in the Classroom
• Dear Audience: A Note from the Directors of Coal Country
• The World's Most Cited Climate Change Denier: The World's Leading Climate Scientist?
• 5 Must-Have Books for Urban Gardeners
• New Traditions for a Greener, Saner Holiday Season
• Eco-Workers of the World, Unite: 8 Ways to Be a Green Groucho 'Marxist'

Do It Yourself

Black Google

Movies

Sport