The links contained within this text are part of the points I am making. While you can read this without clicking the links I doubt you will be able to fully understand what I am saying without doing so. Also, I did not have the time to fact check every article I linked to. However, they are not the basis of my arguments, rather in support of it so please don’t hold me accountable for their reliability.
I recently read a article stating that we might be brainwashing our children regarding global warming. Strangely enough the responses I saw defending the global warming alarmists were not defending the science. The common theme was that it can’t hurt to want to protect the planet. Unfortunately it can hurt to want to protect the planet. It can hurt your wallet and the planet. The desire to help alone does not guarantee positive results, especially if we fixate on one problem which may not even be a problem.
Why shouldn’t we exaggerate or even lie? It’s for the greater good right? Global warming has become championed by many people with many agendas. It has become so pervasive that the idea of man causing the planet to warm unnaturally is accepted as undeniable fact. This further empowers the people with agendas. There are many examples of the negative impact of trying to save the planet.
E85 (Ethanol) is probably the most championed biofuel. The problem is it arguably pollutes more than gasoline. There is also evidence to suggest that E85 is a a net energy loss. We are literally burning our food, subsidizing the production of Ethanol with tax dollars which then brings up the cost of food. What did we accomplish? We wasted money and polluted more.
The quest for biofuels is destroying the rain forests. The governments subsidize biofuels and in doing so they make destroying the rain forests lucrative. I don’t know about you but I was under the impression that the rain forests were of importance to the planet. I suppose it is far more important to adhere to the Kyoto treaty.
Let’s take a look at the Kyoto treaty. It exempts China, which emits more carbon dioxide than the United States (a obvious fact that they try to hide). So, when you really look at Kyoto what you get is something that wasn’t even set up to curb the supposed cause of global warming at all. It was set up to weaken the strongest nations by forcing them to adhere to Kyoto but it left billions (China, India and so on) exempt. It was politically motivated and it shows some of the true motives behind the global warming scare. Kyoto is bad for the planet. So once again, in a attempt to save the planet all we end up doing is wasting money and causing more pollution. Take a look at how polluted China is and try to seriously convince me that America is the one that needs to clean up.
One reason global warming was championed by so many people was because it presented a chance to weaken the United States and other western powers. America is not the toxic waste dump that many people make it out to be. I’ve been all over America and I’ve been to three countries in Europe. I can verify that America for the most part is less polluted than our European counterparts. However, I haven’t even been to a country that hosts one of the world’s most polluted cities. America does have some of the world’s cleanest cities. You don’t tell the cleanest they need to clean up while telling the dirtiest that they don’t have to worry about it. The trick is they needed to find something that the richer countries seemed to do more than the other countries. In comes global warming and carbon dioxide emissions to make the west the villain.
This has empowered socialists. Kyoto was one example of what they seek to do. They were trying to give developing countries a industrial advantage. Of course this was worse for the planet but who said socialists care about the planet anyway? I’m not the only one who sees through this farce though, even the PM of Canada is fully aware of what is going on. If there is any truth to the science, the cause has been hijacked by people that would prefer to punish the rich rather than save the planet. When they talk about a carbon tax (note they specify carbon not any other greenhouse gas) who do you think they have in mind?
Problem and Solution?
When one looks at global warming they have to consider a few things. It would appear that the global temperatures have not risen since 1998. This alone draws everything into question. The junk science global warming alarmists use is another thing you have to consider. If they can not be relied upon to give us the facts, then how can we discern what is really going on? If you accept that the temperatures are going up (and I won’t argue that they’ve gone up since the “Little Ice Age”, which was a good thing considering how much suffering that caused) you then have to decide if you think man is the cause. Once you have done that you then have to decide if global warming is harmful.
We need to hold the entire planet to the same standards. When you talk about global climate change it concerns the entire globe, not just America or the EU. If we’re all contributing to global warming then we all have to provide the solution. This means India and China’s full cooperation would be every bit as important (if not more so based on their population). Also, this means we would have to analyze all the contributors to green house gases. For instance, methane is 20 times worse than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. Cows emit methane at a rate that would make them pose a greater threat than cars. In fact cows seem to be quite bad for the planet. This is just one example but the point is we need to know all the facts in the situation if we are to deal with it in a constructive manner. There is no room for us to narrow our focus down to one potential cause for the problem.
We always seem to have some environmental scare. Before all this it was global cooling. I was told after Katrina that global warming was going to cause more and more hurricanes. Even though I tried to explain what was really going the alarmists kept running their mouths until the slowdown in hurricane activity shut them up. Remember when we went to plastic bags? A big part of that was to save the trees. Now they’ve decided plastic bags are far worse and we should use paper bags. They’ve even taken to legislating against the use of plastic bags. This is a problem that environmentalists helped create! What if they’re wrong this time? Overreacting is not a good thing. Do you want to tell me what light bulbs I can use? Do I really want to mercury all over the place? Why not let me choose between mercury free energy wasters or mercury laden energy savers? We don’t want to live in our own filth and we don’t want to die. It doesn’t mean we want to pay $4 for a gallon of gas either. I support clean living. Let’s just try to do it in a logical and reasonable manner. Perhaps we can even be truthful…
April 2017 M T W T F S S « Nov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30