First, straight up: I'm a skeptic of manmade "global warming" or "climate change." I'm a denier, if you will. Go ahead and slap a swastika on my forehead and brand me with names, if it makes you feel better, believers and alarmists! We "deniers" have names for you too. Advocate warmaholics are like Jonestown cultist lunatics, from my perspective, except that the Rev. Jim Jones has been replaced by Al Gore. His followers have disavowed debate based on his very command, and they've lost all sense of scientific reasoning; they only see the science and empirical evidence that supports their position, while they ignore any science and empiricism that makes it clear--global warming is global garbage, and the media is complicit in the sham.
I've been collecting an ever-increasing quantity of articles on the subjects of global warming and the now en-vogue "climate change" for well over a year now, and the number of articles and stories has grown exponentially and the tone more and more desperate, as we enter the tenth year since the so-called "warmest year on record." (1998) Originally, I was collecting these tidbits with the idea of writing a book, but that's really already been done by others who are probably better at it than I am. So, I figured I would start a blog to take out my frustrations over this utterly stupid fearmongering.
You warmaholics go ahead and drink the kool-aid; this blog will serve as a testament both now and in the future to define what can happen to people who refuse to waste good glucose to feed their own brains, and therefore, reason. When all the hoopla ends (just as it did with Y2K, SARs, and other media-hyped portents of doom), this blog will be here to remind you that you were sheep and turned your thinking over to someone else.
Why am I hoarding global warming articles from Reuters, AP, and other news outlets as if they were gold rush nuggets? My first idea was to be able to remind the world at a later date what the media and politician's once said, once it was shown that anthropogenic global warming (AGW) IS NOT HAPPENING; for some reason, the public tends to quickly forget what was once proclaimed as gospel, and the media and politicians capitalize on this laziness. Examples include the media articles of the early 70s that proclaimed the coming new ice age; in less than thirty years, the media forgot what they once said and were now expounding the opposite in terms of climate. They certainly were embarrassed to be reminded of their stupidity, so they reacted by either not discussing their past mistake or simply quibbling over the details.
I want people to remember that these "trusted leaders" and "purveyors of truth" once told us we were headed for doomsday. Maybe people will learn that the media really does take up positions--they don't just tell us the facts, as they often claim, and I hope people already know that politicians are out for power, no matter the political affiliation; the more we depend on government to solve our problems, the more powerful it becomes. And remember, we're supposed to be "the government." (Government of the people, by the people, for the people...remember?)
The point is to point out how the media and certain political groups have chosen to hype this issue, even with the oft-ignored, growing evidence to the contrary (from scientists...and scientists who ARE NOT ALL AFFILIATED WITH "BIG OIL," as Al Gore would lead you to believe). All serious scientists in the world collectively groan when they hear the "inventor of the Internet" extoll pseudo-science that is so flawed that it's laughable. His movie is inconveniently wrong; his Nobel Prize win is laughable and proves that the award no longer means what it once did. His Oscar? Who cares? A bunch of liberal elites giving a meaningless award to another liberal elite is meaningless.
Let me just say now that, as a molecular biologist, I don't believe in man-made climate change, as it is currently proselytized in the media. I believe the climate changes naturally--it has and always will. The media has taken a pseudo-scientific, politically-connected "consensus" (science has never been about consensus) and has attempted to turn us all into zombie-sheep who desperately need some entity to step in and save us from ourselves.
Though there are claims to the contrary about political motives (from people like the Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen), make no mistake--this is a political issue. The volume of weekly news articles, television programs, and movies, fed to us with an increasingly desperate tone, make it clear: the media has so bought into this that they cannot back out now--if they repeat it enough, it will become mythological truth to the faithful, even if shown to be wrong by an ignored body of climatologists. That's already happening, but most media sources are obviously not convinced by the contrary scientific positions, thus they've so far chosen to ignore the evidence that doesn't fit their agenda. That's real denial!
What's required to "fix the problem" has already been proposed in a few articles, which I will discuss in later posts. Basically, more government revenue is needed from the "big offenders." (Translation: you fat, lazy Americans need to pay up for poisoning the Earth.)
This is about bigger government, except that it has now morphed into a global plan; there appears to be a move afoot to empower the United Nations as the arbiter of accepted, environmentally ideal behavior. The U.N. wants to become a socialist entity that the public feels must be relied on to save us from our "capitalistic transgressions."
This really is just an old political duel--this is capitalism versus socialism all over again; they've merely dressed it up in new clothing to distract everyone. Don't be fooled...oil is the lifeblood of capitalism, and oil is under direct threat now from socialist elements. We should reduce our dependence on foreign oil to enhance our security, but WE CANNOT eliminate our need for oil. If we do it as quickly as demanded by the climate alarmists (remember, we must ACT NOW before it's too late), the world economy will face disaster. Liberal elites need disaster (or heck, even perceived and believed doom) to create and foster governmental dependence. What they really need is another "Great Depression" to fight off the "conservative hoards" via the introduction of a new New Deal.
Pay no attention to that Al Gore behind that curtain!Technorati Tags: 1998, AGW, Al Gore, alarmist, Americans, Associated Press, capitalism, climate, consensus, Cullen, cynic, denier, disasters, doomsday, fear, global warming, government, hysteria, Incovenient Truth, Jonestown, kool-aid, media, news, Nobel, oil, Oscar, politics, portent, prediction, realist, reason, Reuters, scientist, skeptic, socialism, U.N., weather
No comments:
Post a Comment