Who made YOU the scientific arbiter of what good environmental practice is–and what ISN’T?
“Environmentalists” seem to MEAN well, but then go “over the top” on regulation–using sometimes spurious claims of environmental catastrophe to buttress their contentions.
They’ve been at it long enough for time to prove that their overzealous claims never came to pass–the modern equivalent of “the boy who cried wolf”–leading to distrust of their claims (even if they WERE well-founded.
I believe that the point George H is making (one with a lot of support) is that the climate is ALWAYS changing–and may not be anthropomorphic. The far left often goes on the attack if anyone challenges their beliefs (“idiots like you”–“believe a return to an unlivable climate for your present selfishness”–“Medieval beliefs and thinking like you expressed”).
“Do the right thing” by keeping things “green”–yes–but unsubstantiated claims of global climate disaster cause the environmental community to lose credibility.
“Regulation by press release” is hardly good policy for making laws. You can’t make regulatory policy “just because I say so”–that harks back to the old policy of “because I SAID SO!” or “the Divine Right of Kings.”