Attending the latest CAR Mid-winter business meetings it became readily apparent that the GREEN movement has become today's Beanie Baby, the 'Save The Whale' of the 2000's, the latest cause du jour. It's the same 'cause & effect' crowd updated from the 70's - for every effect in the world, somebody will join the cause. 

Back then we used to debate, in all seriousness, the prevalent trend toward 'global cooling' caused by pollution and greenhouse gases. Somewhere during the mid-90's, AlGore decided he needed a new career to hang his battered hat on and found enough sycophants to produce a PowerPoint on 'global warming' that won a Nobel Prize. By and large it was the same hack science (and some of the same hack scientists) leading the cooling cause that subsequently lead the warming cause.

But now that that theory is falling into some disfavor, the cause has shifted to 'global climate change'. This is a much mo betta cause because it is at least couched in reality - the global climate does change. Of course the fallacy of this is that humans are almost totally responsible for it. This self-indulgent and self-centered way of thinking smacks of so much hubris and ego it would be laughable except for the fact that it is and will continue to cost us millions to chase unreachable goals based on unprovable 'science'. 

Yet everybody from our President to our Governor and much of our media is on the bandwagon because it's the 'in' thing to do. I was reminded of this last week when a gentleman of some stature in our state association boldly stated that in the pursuit of environmentally correct goals, cost was really irrelevant. He was advocating for sweeping mandates that would force every California homeowner with a pre-1979 home to undergo an energy audit (much like the onerous bill from Fabian Nunez we defeated last year). He specifically targeted single pane windows making the bold claim that installing dual pane windows in the estimated 7 - 9 million California homes that still have single pane would have a very noticeable and beneficial effect on OUR PLANET.

OMG! What a set of cajones on this croaker,eh? I wanted to ask him what the resulting carbon off-set would be against the 15 billion or so Chinese burning coal on open hearth fireplaces but I was afraid I'd be stoned by the PC crowd. The PC crowd was much easier to deal with when they were just getting stoned themselves, but even that nostalgic event has gone up in (CO2 emitting, particulate laden) smoke. 

If you've read my rants before, you are aware that I am as much in favor of conservation and responsible use of our resources as the next person (as long as that next person isn't Ed Begley, Jr.) But it seems that every hack legislator or hack inventor of some widget or gizmo may now be assured success simply by applying the GREEN appellation to their particular vice, whether or not it makes sense. If it breaks the bank, who cares - we owe it to the environment. If the science is weak - don't worry trust us. If the supporting statistics don't extend more that 30 or 50 or even 100 years, well it just doesn't matter. 

Every living thing exacts a toll on nature for it's existence. Man is the only creature that has the luxury of feeling guilty about it. Will that guilt change the outcome? Not one wit. Our planet exists on a geological scale measured in millennia, not decades or even centuries. Right now based on environmental conditions, man is the dominant species on the planet. It was not always so - and will likely not always be so. Dinosaurs once ruled the planet but in spite of not driving Hummers, not emitting greenhouse gases and not spraying DDT, they disappeared from everything but the history books through no fault of their own. Sad to say but at some future date humanity, as we recognize ourselves, will also be remembered only through some historical record. 

And the history books will not indicate whether or not my home had single pane windows.

Well, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.