Check out this brilliant piece today by one of Canada’s best columnists, Lorrie Goldstein of The Toronto Sun. Cutting right to the heart of the issue, Goldstein identifies the one thing we know for sure about the “science” of Global Warming/Climate Change: that it is a dishonestly-manipulated propaganda tool used by the anti-Western, anti-capitalist, anti-American left to further its political goals:
Cool the climate hysteria
‘Every generation needs a holier-than-thou, ideological mantra … to wrap themselves virtuously’By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN, TORONTO SUN
Global warming is the gift that keeps on giving to climate hysterics.
For those already pre-disposed to being anti-western, anti-development, anti-growth, anti-capitalist and most of all, anti-U.S., it’s the perfect propaganda tool.
After all, as they screech, the survival of the Earth itself is at stake and they alone are on the side of the angels. They alone care about the legacy we will leave our grandchildren.
To this crowd, the rest of us are “climate deniers,” in a league with the devil, in the pay of Big Oil and out to destroy … uh … ourselves.
Even better for climate hysterics, they will never be called to account for their simple-minded campaign to demonize fossil fuels, which is aimed more at arbitrarily controlling human behaviour — and for so-called “green” politicians, raising taxes — than reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
That’s because everyone alive today will be dead long before we know how much of the scientific “consensus” on global warming is correct.
Over the short term — and when talking about climate change, this means considerably longer than the life span of everyone now on the planet — we know that no matter what we do, GHG emissions, which are cumulative and last for anywhere from 50 to thousands of years in the atmosphere, will continue to rise for many decades, along with global temperatures. That would be true even if we were reducing emissions now, which, for all the shouting, we aren’t.
But beyond that — and that there will be a significant impact on climate, and us — the scientific “consensus” touted by climate hysterics abruptly ends.
There are huge unknowns, competing theories and debates within the scientific community about what will happen, where, when and how severe.
The insistence of climate hysterics (and opportunistic politicians) that the debate over anthropogenic global warming is “over” — aimed at replacing rational decision-making with “do as we say” diktats — is laughable.
If it’s “over,” why are governments still spending billions of our tax dollars researching it, dwarfing anything spent by the fossil fuel industry, which climate hysterics would have us believe is funding anyone who doesn’t bow before them? The reason for all this publicly funded research is because of all that we don’t know.
But what we do know is that what the hysterics claim, that virtually any weather phenomenon today is “proof” of man-made climate change — harsh winters, mild winters, dry spells, wet spells, more snow, less snow, heat waves, cold snaps, you name it — is nonsense.
The climate is always changing and was changing long before we arrived. Plus, weather isn’t climate, something hysterics (and pseudo-green media) mention when it suits them, ignore when it doesn’t.
Ultimately, responding to global warming is a political issue.
In that context, as retired U.S. foreign service officers Teresa Chin Jones (who holds a doctorate in chemistry) and David T. Jones, wrote perceptively in their 2007 article “The Zen of Global Warming” (available at AmericanDiplomacy.org):
“It appears that every generation needs a holier-than-thou, ideological mantra … with which to wrap themselves virtuously, while belabouring their opponents as the political equivalent of demonically possessed …
“Pick your weapon/words and come out slanging. In this regard, the Kyoto agreement and global warming have become among the most knife-edged shibboleths of the current culture wars.
“To complicate matters, global warming and its political surrogate (the Kyoto accord) appear to have become aspects of bilateral differentiation between nations — distinguishing the moral, environmentally-conscious, energy-conserving Kyoto cultists, from the right-wing, gun-toting yahoos and Kyoto-deniers epitomized by the United States.”
POPULATION IS INCREASING
They argue for a pragmatic approach — energy conservation and industrial innovation to develop alternative energy sources, based on the precautionary principle that, regardless of global warming theory, we know the Earth’s population is increasing and that non-renewable energy sources (oil, coal, natural gas) are precisely that — non-renewable.
“In short, we do not need a new ‘Crusade’,” they conclude, “but rather, a new Industrial Revolution.”
Exactly. One based on technological innovation, that climate hysterics — their Luddite heads filled with dangerous notions that humanity can be returned to a pre-industrial, pastoral state — will fight every step of the way. Ironic, isn’t it?