I have long believed that God has a great sense of humor. I also believe that this sense of humor has been recently displayed as the debate over “climate change” has been reignited since the President’s State of the Union address just over two weeks ago. In the middle of his nearly 90 minute speech, the President flatly stated that “the debate is settled. Climate change is a fact. And when our children’s children look us in the eye and ask if we did all we could to leave them a safer, more stable world, with new sources of energy, I want us to be able to say yes, we did.” This is an incredibly confident statement from the President of the United States when the science behind such an assertion is shaky at best, and most of the country he governs has been a solid sheet of ice since Christmas. In fact, since the President uttered this statement, even the South has been hit with two massive snow storms!
Most champions of climate change assert that the world is warming, as a result of too much carbon dioxide being emitted into the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels and industrial production. Most of these climate change zealots assert that industrial production and economic development must be slowed or rolled-back, and that energy prices must be raised through government action to force people off using as much gas in their cars or heating oil in their homes. It seems that those preaching man-made global warming somehow forget the fact that people are part of the ecosystem as well. As such, destroying human prosperity and the economic development that makes it possible, because the global temperature may fluctuate one degree, is reckless and shortsighted.
Furthermore, the “evidence” that the world is warming, and that man caused it if it is, is dubious at best. Most of the reports that flatly assert global warming / climate change as a fact are generated by a division of the United Nations called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC has been telling the world for two decades that Western nations, the United States in particular, must curb industrial development or the planet is going go heat to the point of boiling. As such, the IPCC issues periodic reports detailing the “science” that supports their global warming claims as part of its efforts to advance treaties like the Kyoto Protocol. Treaties like Kyoto would, even by the admission of global warming scientists, do little to change global temperatures, yet the UN advances them anyway. I believe that this is for two reasons: 1.) To provide the UN with the ability to build a network of global governance and 2.) It advances a geopolitical socialism wherein rich nations are made to pay more (in the form of carbon offsets), while developing nations like China are exempt.
These kinds of schemes would do nothing to arrest the so-called “greenhouse effect,” but would do much to slow economic growth in the United States and shift industrial manufacturing to nations like Russia and China. If the US is called upon to reduce its fossil fuel emissions by 20%, while Russia and China are exempt, US manufacturing will move plants to those countries, thus growing their economies at the cost to American workers. Furthermore, since those countries are exempt from greenhouse gas standards, overall emissions globally will go up. All of this is a mute debate, however, since much of the “science” that asserts climate change is, in the words of the President “a fact,” is fabricated.
In fact, one of the IPCC reports the President and his allies use as proof that climate change is man-caused, and that the planet is heating-up, is more the work of propagandists than physicists. A chart included in one such IPCC report, now referred to as the “Hockey Stick,” shows global temperatures remaining unchanged from the year 1000 AD to 1900 AD, and then wildly rising thereafter. The point the writers of the report then make, based off the chart, is that the industrial revolution began the heating of the planet, and industrial output driven by a fuel economy is killing the planet. Such reports provided ammo to the Obama Administration when it tried to push its job-killing, gas-price-skyrocketing, “Cap and Trade” policy early in the President’s first term. Though Congress rejected “Cap and Trade” back in 2009, when the President’s party controlled both chambers, Mr. Obama is now trying to implement the same policy through executive orders to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
This report suggesting that the planet only started to warm after the industrial revolution is a work of pure fiction. Most scientists, whether or not they agree with the theory of man-caused global warming, agree that from the year 800AD-1300AD average temperatures were hotter than even in the twentieth century, while from the year 1300AD-1900AD they were much cooler – to the point that era has been referred to as a “little ice age.” Both of these climate cycles occurred before the Industrial Revolution took firm hold in the United States. So, why on Earth would an American President try and impose a $300 billion hit to his home country’s economy in the name of reversing “climate change,” when the evidence for it is so shoddy?
That’s the question the American public needs to be asking as we head into the 2014 Congressional Midterm elections. Republicans must retake the Senate, and retain the House, to try and reverse and block the President’s unilateral attempt to impose the job-killing, gas-price-hiking, “Cap and Trade” policy all by his lonesome.
