Tapping the jet stream?

And have we overemotionalized the climate debate? The most interesting thing about this article is the source.

[Update in the afternoon]

From comments:

What kind of an axe does Rand then have to grind here? It seems to be just hypocricy. We see a string of climate articles with his blurbs suggesting “Warmmongers are in trouble” or some such. Why oh why?

Because the policy outcomes, if global warming is admitted to be real, are something he is against in principle? And yet he advocates against denying evolution in a few posts to the side. Oh, the irony.

My “axe to grind,” if I have one, is that I am a skeptic (not a “denier”) on the need to up-end our economy for climate change, as I am on all religions. If global warming is “real,” we’ll deal with it as the effects become evident, and we’ll have a much better chance of having the resources in the future with which to deal with it if we don’t panic about it right now.

My “axe to grind” is against the overrighteous and hypocritical moralists who want to preach to the rest of us how to live while refusing to live by their own sermons, and purchasing indulgences for themselves. It is against the watermelon socialists who are using this new religion as a means to implement the collectivist (and ultimately totalitarian) social goals that they couldn’t achieve in the Cold War.

This long ago ceased to be about science. And, FWIW, evolution remains on much more solid footing than climate models.