Methinks you missed the point. Fox opinion shows are the diversity that the other channels lack. Fox doesn’t present a diversity of ideas, it presents a different set of ideas from everyone else.
Sophistry and Illusion said:
Which requires at least one step in a chain of logic to understand. How does painting roofs reduce CO2? The answer is that painting roofs white means they will reflect more sunlight, which means they will absorb less energy. Absorbed energy becomes heat, so it means buildings will be slightly cooler, which means their cooling needs will go down, which means less energy required to run A/C. That energy typcially comes from fossil fuels, so less energy used equates to less fuel burned. Ergo, less CO2 produced.
I don’t know anything about the numbers, but the principle is sound-ish. (One could argue that same amount of energy will be produced, just used some other way. Perhaps.)
Bwa ha ha ha ha! He’s not arguing the numbers, nor is he arguing that the fuel would still be burned and the energy used for something else. He’s not even missing the chain of logic to get from white roofs to less energy. No, he’s worried that reflecting the solar energy will mean less energy reaching plants and less being absorbed by skin. He’s either a moron, or he does a good impression of one.
Hint to Mr. Milloy: the sunlight being absorbed by roofs is not being absorbed by plants or skin. If the sun somehow managed to decrease output, painting the roofs black so they absorb more energy won’t help plants photosynthesize or humans make vitamin D. All it would do is make buildings warmer. And possibly increase the amount of fossil fuels being burned.