How about the show the Cosmos put on last week? A meteor streaks across the sky in Russia, causing explosions that injured more than a thousand--AND an asteroid passes closer to the planet than some of our communications and weather satellites within days of each other. Astronomers believe that the two events are likely not related. But they do exemplify the very REAL threat to all life on our planet.
And yet, I am not hearing any calls from environmentalists, animal rights groups, the United Nations or Democrats to do anything about this. The objects that struck and passed near planet Earth last week are dust bunnies and pebbles compared to some of the other objects floating around the solar system and the galaxy. And NASA readily admits that they are unable to track more than 99% of those space rocks. We got a couple weeks head notice about the asteroid--but there was no notice at all about the Russian meteor. So where are the alarmists demanding immediate action to "protect the planet"?
This is a threat that we know IS going to happen again. The dinosaurs flourished during one of the warmest periods in Earth's history (as did all of the plant life and fauna that now provides us with oil and coal). But they didn't die off suddenly because the planet got "too hot". They (along with nearly all other life on the planet) were killed by the after-effects of a giant meteor strike--which blocked out sunlight and caused severe global cooling. A couple of other mass extinctions can be attributed to meteor and asteroid strikes as well in the billions of years of Earth's history.
So again, why the lack of outcry from those looking to "protect Mother Earth"? Is it because this threat can't be blamed on the rich, or industry, or the United States? Is it because the "industrial war complex" would actually be part of the solution? Or is it because you would have to admit that one medium sized meteor strike would do enough to lower the temperature of the Earth far more than the uber-expensive green energy programs that you promote to retard the progress of mankind?
Now don't think that we need some Hollywood solution to prevent an asteroid strike. There's no need to build titanium Space Shuttles to land on the asteroid so crews of miners can blow it up by drilling a hole 500-feet deep and dropping in an atomic bomb to miraculously destroy the rock seconds before disaster. (Armageddon is without a doubt, the most laughable sci-fi movie in the history of cinema.) Most astrophysicists believe a laser or a proton ray could be used to "nudge" the threatening object on a different path while it is still millions of miles away from Earth--causing it to miss us (this time around). Also needed would be a system of satellites and ground facilities facing out to track sudden changes in orbital patterns of objects in our neighborhood.
If we have been so willing to waste billions of dollars to keep wind turbines functioning, I would think spending the same amount to actually protect the planet from a REAL threat might be a better use of our resources.