Global warming is socialism by the backdoor

アメリカだとClimate Changeは社会主義だとか、共産主義だとかいう反応が保守からは起こるようですね。動画の最初の部分を見るだけでも実感します。経済寄りであるWSJも環境問題には慎重な態度をとっているようです。Steven E. Koonin氏はオバマ第一期政権でエネルギー省の科学担当次官を務めた人のようです。

THE SATURDAY ESSAY
Climate Science Is Not Settled
We are very far from the knowledge needed to make good climate policy, writes leading scientist Steven E. Koonin
By STEVEN E. KOONIN
Sept. 19, 2014 12:19 p.m. ET

The idea that "Climate science is settled" runs through today's popular and policy discussions. Unfortunately, that claim is misguided. It has not only distorted our public and policy debates on issues related to energy, greenhouse-gas emissions and the environment. But it also has inhibited the scientific and policy discussions that we need to have about our climate future.

Climate Changeや人類の環境への負荷の有無を問題にしているのではなく、"How will the climate change over the next century under both natural and human influences?"という問いに科学界は答えることができていないから政策立案するのは時期尚早ではないかというのがこの方の懸念のようです。

The crucial scientific question for policy isn't whether the climate is changing. That is a settled matter: The climate has always changed and always will. Geological and historical records show the occurrence of major climate shifts, sometimes over only a few decades. We know, for instance, that during the 20th century the Earth's global average surface temperature rose 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

Nor is the crucial question whether humans are influencing the climate. That is no hoax: There is little doubt in the scientific community that continually growing amounts of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, due largely to carbon-dioxide emissions from the conventional use of fossil fuels, are influencing the climate. There is also little doubt that the carbon dioxide will persist in the atmosphere for several centuries. The impact today of human activity appears to be comparable to the intrinsic, natural variability of the climate system itself.

Rather, the crucial, unsettled scientific question for policy is, "How will the climate change over the next century under both natural and human influences?" Answers to that question at the global and regional levels, as well as to equally complex questions of how ecosystems and human activities will be affected, should inform our choices about energy and infrastructure.

バリバリの保守派と違い、不透明だから何もしなくてはいいとは言っていませんが、慎重な判断を求めている感じです。

Society's choices in the years ahead will necessarily be based on uncertain knowledge of future climates. That uncertainty need not be an excuse for inaction. There is well-justified prudence in accelerating the development of low-emissions technologies and in cost-effective energy-efficiency measures.
But climate strategies beyond such "no regrets" efforts carry costs, risks and questions of effectiveness, so nonscientific factors inevitably enter the decision. These include our tolerance for risk and the priorities that we assign to economic development, poverty reduction, environmental quality, and intergenerational and geographical equity.

直前のこの時期でのこのエッセイの発表ですから、WSJの立場は明確ですね。。。