Further supporting the suspicion that the global warming debate is degenerating into the Salem witch hunt of the 21st century, here is a recent story from Fox News:
The heads of major fossil-fuel companies who spread disinformation about global warming should be "tried for high crimes against humanity and nature," according to a leading climate scientist....."Special interests have blocked the transition to our renewable energy future," Hansen writes in an opinion piece posted on the institute's Web site. "Instead of moving heavily into renewable energies, fossil fuel companies choose to spread doubt about global warming, just as tobacco companies discredited the link between smoking and cancer. Methods are sophisticated, including funding to help shape school textbook discussions of global warming." FULL STORY
Hansen provides no proof of his accusations, only a typical "I told you so" and a "last warning". He goes on to say that in the next 5-10 years, the arctic will be completely free of sea ice in the summer months. And even though he calls for prosecuting the oil barrons, he makes no mention of the environmentalists who repeatedly lobby and block expanded nuclear enery.
On the flip side of this, here is a link to a petition urging the US government to reject the Kyoto Treaty along with the ideas behind human induced climate change. The petition states:
The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate.
This petition has been signed by over 31,000 American scientists, all of whom have almost certainly been bought off by the oil industry...at least that's what the Left would have us believe, since they constantly tell us that human induced climate change is the consensus opinion of the scientific community.
My opinion on human induced climate change has been thoroughly documented on this site. It interests me that this issue is as polarizing as any political issue in America today, even though the scientific evidence is hardly conclusive. Still, people who believe in global warming defend it as furiously as they defend a woman's "right to choose", as if there is no debate and no question in the scientific data. That suggests a certain arrogance, yet small-mindedness, among the Leftist elites.
No wonder they nominated Barack Obama.
I posted this to exemplify the global warming crowd. This NASA nut wants to prosecute people for crimes against humanity without providing a shred of evidence of such crimes. But, hey, who needs evidence? It's never been of much importance to the "believers".
13 comments:
What I can't figure out is why the proponents of global warming (so-called) try to make it such a huge issue. Personally, I don't believe global warming is man-made, but either way, there are bigger issues to worry about.
Doc,
Are you still in OK?
Obviously, there is a debate as to whether human activity contriutes to global warming. But not all climate change is global warming.
Those among us who are gardeners are familair w/ microclimates. It is possible to manipulate the environment to grow plant species far outside their usualclimatic zones.
At various times in history, including th epresnt, human activity has altered local climate on a much grander scale. During the Iron and Bronze Ages, the people of Greece completely deforested the country we now know as Greece w/ disasterous environmental results. Soil eroded, hydrological systems were affected. Greece went from a fertile forested land to the environmentally impovershed one we see today.
Other examples of climate change through deforestation are Lebanon; teh Amazon basin (current); and Nepal (also current).
To some extent, these activities have disrupted weather patterns.
More later.
TLGK
Interestingly enough, many of those 31,000 American scientists have absolutely nothing to do with the study of climate. Just google some of them and you'll see pretty fast how bogus it is.
I think it's interesting that you mock the thoughts of the "believers," while many in your crowd, as Christians, would undoubtedly be in support of legislation or policy that is in accordance to relgious views, using the Bible as your "evidence." You'd probably claim that the Bible is enough, but for many people it means very little, especially when it comes to public policy.
Allison,
Google "Evagelical climate change."
TLGK
what global warming? We recently had to replace our old furnace because we still need the heat during the day up here in the Northwest, and here we are in June! In the evenings when my husband retires, I have to turn on the gas fireplace by my recliner in the great room because he lowers the temp to 64 when he goes to bed. We had record snows this winter, so the weeds are now taller than my rhododendrons.
We once knew an astrophysicist [sp?] who was working on a grant in Hawaii at the big observatory on the big island there. He said his project was to track the damage that aerosols and other pollutants were doing to the atmosphere. He mentioned something about them finding holes in some layer up there that would lead to increased global warming. This was in the 1970s.
I have lost track of him over the years. I will have to google him and see what he is up to now if he is not retired. I wonder what his final analysis is about global warming.
Emilie
Port Orchard, WA
"many in your crowd, as Christians, would undoubtedly be in support of legislation or policy that is in accordance to relgious views, using the Bible as your "evidence.""
Allisoni, I like how you stereotype Christians with such broad strokes. I for one don't know a single person in my church or family, nor a single Christian leader who would support religious-based legislation. That actually goes AGAINST our religion. I suggest you wise up and educate yourself on Christianity before you continue slandering and wrongfully stereotyping us. I think you wouldn't be so quick to pigeon-hole any other group of people...it wouldn't be politically correct.
Loop, I am no longer in Oklahoma and have moved to the Lone Star State, more to come at a later date.
Doc,
My in-laws currently live in TX, an unlikely occurrance, but I won't go into the dtails.
There are a lot of different parts of TX, some quite nice, nevertheless, I note the influx of people from TX to CO therefore I suspect it is nicer here.
Ft. Bliss? Ft. Hood? I look forward to hearing form you. I know you must be busy.
TLGK
I do not retract my statement. It's not called the "religious right" for nothing. The gay marriage debate, for one, is only opposed by people who have nothing besides the bible to back them up. It may be a stereotype, but obviously what it's based on is alive and well.
======================================
As The Midmight-Sun Beams Down...
and the Northern Hemisphere Warms,
the Perma-frost will yield its icy
grip, and massive amounts of "green-house gases" will escape into the Atmosphere! The North Pole will lose its Ice-Cap Now, and Melting Glacial Waters will cause Oceans to Rise, and Atlantic & Pacific Currents to radically shift!
The polar bear is doomed, and the Arctic Seal will multiply, then to consume most of the surface fish!
Mama Nature's Chain Reaction.
Fishermen will, of necessity become loggers & carpenters, to continue the Deforestation Process, and a vicious, destructive CHANGE will dominate the earth, and NOT just Democratic Politics!
Think about these things for 10 minutes. Enjoy your cold beer in your LA-Z-BOY Recliner, turn on MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, and enjoy his Hate-Dubya Rant, while you still can!
Do You Think I'm 'pulling your leg'? Hah! reb
======================================
www.lazyonebenn.blogspot.com
I never saw Olbermann until a few weeks ago. Compared with Bill O'Reilly, he is positively lucid.
TLGK
"The gay marriage debate, for one, is only opposed by people who have nothing besides the bible to back them up."
I have no idea where you come up with stuff like this. There are MANY groups who oppose gay marriage. Some because they want to protect traditional marriage and family. Some to prevent a slippery slope of ever-changing definitions of marriage. Some are pure Darwinists who believe homosexuality contradicts basic Darwinian principles. Many oppose gay marriage because they don't believe it is an inborn trait, but rather a lifestyle that doesn't entitle one to marriage. For some, the Bible plays a role, but to state that the ONLY people who oppose gay marriage do so for religious reasons is ridiculous.
And since you bring up the idea of faith while also discussing gay marriage, I'd like to remind you that there is NO scientific evidence supporting an idea that homosexuality is anything more than a psychiatric condition with an incredibly complicated etiology. Believing otherwise is basically a strong act of faith.
So what's the difference between you supporting gay marriage because you believe homosexuality is okay and me opposing it because I believe homosexuality is wrong? Both beliefs are based on blind faith. Is there something superior about your belief that allows you to ridicule and demean the belief of others?
And "religious right" is a term coined by the Left. It's generally used mockingly as a mild slander and, yes, exemplifies the Left's general dislike of Christians. A more accurate term would be "Christian right" but that lacks the appealing aliteration. Anyway, it's the equivalent of me using the phrase "immoral Left". I doubt you'd be amused.
Don't believe me? Just look close the next time you hear "religious right" and see who used the phrase. Most likely it's someone pretty far Left.
There are MANY groups who oppose gay marriage.
I'm honestly intersted: Can you name/point to any that aren't either religion-based or simply bigoted (I'm not talking about "bigoted," as in, "they don't agree with me," I'm talking about out and out "I hate gays" type of folk - and they are out there)?
I have not seen/heard from any non-religion or bigotry-based folks opposed to gay marriage and am wondering if there are some out there.
Also I'm wondering if you are okay with the term, "religious Left"? I have problems with labels in general, but sometimes they are a little helpful in describing general groups and Religious Right and Religious Left are helpful describers sometimes.
A problem with Christian Right is that that group would exclude Mormons and perhaps others so we'd have to use the term "religious right" for those folk anyway, so religious right makes some sense as a catch-all phrase.
Also, "religious right" would include, I think, that segment of Muslims who would be opposed to gay marriage (yet another religious group opposed to gay marriage for purely religious reasons).
I did a short google search and did not turn up any non-religious opposition to gay marriage, but perhaps you are aware of some?
I mean, I am absolutely sure that somewhere out there, there are a small segment of, let's say, atheists who oppose gay marriage for reasons of tradition or some such. But a whole bloc of atheists or agnostics or otherwise unreligious? I'm not aware of any.
Post a Comment