OPINION: Proponents Of Global Warming Remain Close-Minded

(Photo courtesy inhabitat.com)

(Photo courtesy inhabitat.com)

By Josh Weizel – Editorial Editor

Global warming has remained a controversy in the political world. This issue has caused debate because scientists argue that increased carbon pollution in the atmosphere is causing a greenhouse gas effect, which is causing the planet to heat up. But skeptics argue there is no substantial evidence that man’s actions are causing the temperature to increase. There is a debate in Washington D.C. about which policies the government should enact. There are those that argue that Cap and Trade, CO2 control, is necessary to set a limit on emissions and root out greenhouse gases in our system. Then there are those that argue that government should not interfere with the free market and if the free market is allowed to naturally progress our country will naturally develop alternative fuels.

This nation is under attack by individuals who are anti-reason when it comes to this issue. It is incomprehensible that those who even question the existence of man-made climate change are labeled anti-science. What seems to be missing from the argument is that science is always changing and there is not just one science and once-believed scientific views can be disproven.

Let’s take their arguments one step at a time. The proponents of man-made climate change argue that increased C02 emission is causing the planet to warm up, but what these individuals fail to realize is that 500 million years ago when C02 was much higher, modern forms of life still survived even with high temperatures on planet earth. The proponents of climate-change don’t understand that while the climate is changing naturally, as it is scientifically proven the climate is always changing and our planet has gone through many temperature patterns including the Medieval Warming Period and the Mini Ice Age.

Let’s get some facts straight. Despite what scientists argue about the earth getting warmer in the present time, during the 500 million years that life has existed on our planet, the climate has been warmer than it is in the present time. During the Cambrian period, which is the time period when most modern life forms like mammals emerged on this planet the temperature averaged 25-75 degrees Fahrenheit. The reader may believe that these statistics come from Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, but the truth is they come from a Ecology Ph.D scientist named Patrick More.

There are many problems with those that argue that man-made climate change is real. One problem is that we have based our views on climate change on a computer model that is only a model and it can not say anything scientifically for certain. How can we base it solely on a computer model when we can barely even predict the correct weather or temperature for the next day? According Dr. Freeman Dyson of the Princeton Institute for Advanced Studies, “A computer model is not a crystal ball. We may think it sophisticated but we cannot predict the future with a computer model any more then we can make predictions with throwing bones or appealing to gods.” The truth is that people cannot simply say that the science behind man-made climate change is settled because to this day scientists still do not have the complete groundwork for theories like Newton’s law and Schrodinger’s equation.

What the other side does not realize is that just because there is a correlation between higher CO2 levels and higher temperatures does not prove causation. The other side will argue it from an emotional state instead of facts. They will argue that human actions and evil greed is causing extinction of the polar bears. What they fail to realize is that animal extinction even before human existence was a natural part of nature. It is scientific fact that certain species exist today because the earth went through a cooling period a few million years ago, and that since the polar bears are a separate species of brown bear they evolved as polar bears when the Arctic Ocean froze over for most of the past 2.5 million years. What the alarmist media won’t tell people is that there is no proof the polar bear population is decreasing because of man-made climate change and, in fact, its population is higher than it was 30 years ago. Although it is true that the polar bear population is gradually slowing down, there is no evidence that it is because of man-made climate change. In fact, it is because they are being trophy hunted and 20,000 to 35,000 bears have been shot, which is more than 700 shot every year by trophy hunters and natives.

The proponents of symbolically going back to the Dark Ages and who are anti-progress and reason will argue that that the science of man-made climate change is settled, but what those like President Obama, Al Gore, and Hillary Clinton fail to realize is that no science is settled and scientists are always finding new evidence about old scientific theories.

It is deplorable and shameful what the environmentalist movement has done. The dark and brutal history of the environmentalist movement is unimaginable. The environmentalist movement banned DDT as a pesticide but it eliminated the birds that carried malaria. According to the National Association of Science, elimination of the birds has prevented 500 million deaths. The environmentalist across the globe will argue that the ban of DDT was a necessary ban because it was harmful, but the reality is there is no evidence that the chemical DDT was harmful. The question is why they would do this when DDT was not a harmful chemical. Could they just have been stupid or could they have done it for a sinister reason like to slow down the earth’s population in the name of an earth where less resources are used?

The other side will argue that their real goal is to protect the world, but their real goal is to keep citizens under a state of fear, believing that man-made climate change is a reality. This is their real goal because their only true evidence is a computer model and not actual mathematical or scientific evidence. Their real goal is to ultimately control people not through a dictatorship of the mind and soul. These individuals would be willing to sacrifice anything even if it meant sacrificing our fundamental freedoms and constitutional rights as long as they had their perfect utopia.

Those on the other side of the argument also argue that our country should enact Cap and Trade and put a severe limit on carbon emissions. Those on the other side would like to put a limit on carbon emission by 80 percent or more. What the far left extremists who support Cap and Trade don’t realize is the simple reality. The reality is that it is not realistic to completely move away from fuels when it dominates so much of our economy. The truth is that would result in higher oil prices for consumers and less economic growth. The plain and simple facts are that four million Americans would lose their jobs from a Cap and Trade program which will lead to $4,022 to $6,752 loss in disposable incomes per household which will be a real life effect on working class families. It is ironic that the very people who advocate for Cap and Trade are the same people that always preach about how the poor are not being treated fairly in this country when in fact the Congressional Budget Office, which is a nonpartisan organization, has estimated that reducing carbon emissions would affect the poor. The reality is that even a 15 percent decrease in carbon emissions would cost the lowest income Americans 3.3 percent of their incomes but only 1.7 percent of the incomes of the higher brackets.

While it is a reasonable position to want to move to more alternative fuels and the proponents make valid points about moving to more alternative fuels what they fail to realize is that it does not have to be done in an arbitrary manner by taxation and regulation which will affect the poor and middle class and it can be done more effectively by the free market then by anti-free market policies. There are also modest things our country can do to protect our air and water because even if people are skeptical of man-made climate change, that should be bipartisan. It’s time to stand up for the truth. It’s time to stand up for reason.

(Some information courtesy epw.senate.gov, instituteforenergyresearch.org, discovermagazine.com, and The National Science Organization)

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s