Hufschmid's main page
My other global warming articles

Preventative maintenance
for Global Warming?

Is Greg Craven the genius we have been waiting for?

18 Dec 2007
updated 19 December with "Craven's logic"

Greg Craven, a high school teacher in Oregon, is getting national publicity for a video he created that supposedly proves beyond any doubt that we should try do something now to stop global warming.

For example, two news articles:
 • USA Today

Craven's brilliant video:
Craven provides more details here:

Craven's argument is that we don't know if the frightening stories about global warming are accurate, but if the stories turn out to be correct, then we will suffer tremendously if we do nothing about it.
Craven's reasoning is similar to the concept of "preventative maintenance".

For exampe, airline mechanics don't wait for a part to fail. Instead, they try to prevent problems from occurring by replacing parts before they cause problems.

Greg Craven is applying the concept of preventative maintenance with global warming. He tells us that we should do something now to prevent global warming because if we wait to find out if the theories are correct, it will be too late. However, the concept of preventative maintenance doesn't apply to global warming. Four big problems with Craven's logic are:
1)  Craven assumes there is a point of no return 

Craven assumes that if we wait to find out if the global warming theories are accurate, it will be too late and we will suffer tremendously. He assumes that the climate is like a sheet of glass that can suddenly break, and once broken, it can never be fixed.

However, there is no scientific support for this assumption. It makes more sense to assume that if we can increase the temperature by producing carbon dioxide, then we can decrease the temperature by reducing our production of carbon dioxide.

Craven's attitude could be described as a threat, or an ultimatum.

2) Craven advocates that we assume the frightening scenarios are correct 

There are a lot of assumptions about the weather. For example, some scientists believe that variations in the sun's energy is the main reason that Earth's temperature fluctuates. However, Craven ignores the non-doomsday scenarios and advocates that we assume only the most frightening scenarios are correct.

His reasoning is that if the frightening scenarios are correct, then we will destroy the Earth if we don't do something to prevent them from coming true.

The absurdity of this type of reasoning might become more apparent when you realize that it could be applied to lots of idiotic issues. For example, Jeff Rense, Stanton Friedman, and Steven Greer tell us that aliens from other planets are here on the earth, and they might want to kill us.

Thererefore, we could create a video that is identical to Craven's video about global warming, except that it would advocate we prevent a global alien invasion.

We would use the exact same reasoning that Craven that uses; namely, that we don't know if the scenarios of aliens invasions are correct, but if we don't prepare for an alien invasion, we will suffer tremendously if the aliens attack us.

  3) Craven assumes that global warming will be awful 

He assumes that a warmer climate will make our lives miserable and ruin the earth, but there is no evidence that we should be afraid of global warming.

As I pointed out in my other articles about global warming, a warmer planet might make some areas inhospitable to us, but it would make other areas much nicer. For all we know, we would prefer a warmer planet.

Likewise, aliens from other planets might want to help us, not hurt us.

4) Craven assumes that the global warming scientists are honest and capable of thinking properly 

The people who promote the theory that aliens from other planets are here on the earth are con artists or lousy thinkers. Therefore, if we were to pay a global tax to stop a global alien invasion, we would be trying to stop a nonsensical concept.

The people who promote the theory that Arabs attacked us on September 11th can be shown to be liars or incompetent. Therefore, if we were to attack Afghanistan and Iraq in order to stop the Arab terrorism, we would be starting a war that could never accomplish its goal because it would be based on a Zionist trick.

Before we implement a global tax to stop global warming, we should take a look at the people who promote this theory. There is a lot of evidence that they are connected to the Zionist crime network, and that the tax is just another trick to extort money and manipulate us.

“You can trust me because I am a scientist.”

Have you seen this news article from 2007: Scientists warn ET may be dangerous

Should we ignore the possibility that aliens are planning to attack us?

We can't solve a problem until we understand it

Craven admits that we don't know if the global warming theories are correct, but he says it doesn't make any difference. He says we should prepare just in case. But if were going to prepare for possibilities, why not prepare for a global alien invasion

If a government official or professor were to advocate a global tax to prevent a global alien invasion, he would be ridiculed. But how is a global tax to prevent global warming any more sensible?

“It's better to be safe than sorry!
So let's pay a carbon tax!

And it would also be prudent
to prepare for an alien invasion.
Let's pay a UFO tax

Greg Craven
"Craven's Logic"

Update: After reading the article above, a college student came up with the expression "Craven's Logic" to describe Craven's silly reasoning, which we could define as:

Craven's Logic: adj. Assuming that the worst-case theory on a particular issue is correct, regardless of the evidence, simply because we would suffer the most if the worst-case theory turns out to be correct.