Ever since Americans have been duped from the fanatical "green" zealots that global warming is now climate change, Ive seen an increasing number of people fall for the shifting of dialogue, literally right under their noses and without question. The basis is that our climate is out of control because "we the industrious" are releasing excessive amounts of greenhouse gas, thus making our atmosphere a lot less predictable, and causing an eventual apocolypse. The greater debate however is amongst people who believe all this is happening; on whether its man made, or as a result of a natural/cyclical pattern the earth evolves in. There's no doubt to which side I stand. I mean, hell if you expect me to be here and give a balanced view then chances are you're either new to my opinions or you've been secretly having a liberal séance group send warm and fuzzies my way. Hate to disappoint but as MoNique says, "Dat shit aint happuh-nin". So listen up folks, debating climate science is best left to scientists, not political opportunists who see us moving in a new, improved green economy. Trying to have government reorganize an economy is a bad idea, having government do anything is generally horrendous. The workers are lazier and less efficient, they are held to less accountability and they get away with murder... just ask Vince Foster...ooooh.
That being said, with the "climate change" topic so heated, why isn't there any debate? Al Gore has not once debated it even at the bequest of leading scientists Dennis Avery and Lord Monckton of Brenchley, a former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, but yet he's out there advocating for it, and poses to make billion of dollars off it. Why has Dr. Arthur Robinson of Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine been able to gather 31,000 leading climatologists to reject man-caused climate change? Why is Mars getting hotter? Why are NASA's thermal readings of the sun indicating that its possibly in its warmest period in over 11,000 years? As Mark Levin writes, "... the Enviro-Statist abanadons reason for a faith that preaches human regression and self-loathing". Folks, long story short... its a power grab.
Since the freedom strangling efforts by Nixon in 1970, the EPA has done all it can influence society using aggressive yet efficacious actions to "clean America". What its done, using their proselytes, has mobilized a movement based on incredulous science and the elimination of debate. A great quote I like to throw against all you liberty haters out there is from Dr. Richard Lidzen. "With respect to science, the assumption behind consensus is that science is a source of authority. Rather, it is a particularly effective approach to inquiry and analysis. Skepticism is essential to science; consensus is foreign. When in 1988 Newsweek announced that all scientists agreed about global warming, this should have been a red flag of warning." Only of recent has there actually been a debate storming. With the half-assed passing of the Waxman/ Markey bill this past summer, many are looking to see it make its way through the Senate, even though the bill was never completed. The bill is officially DOA in the Senate. I could go into this for days, but recently with the University of East Anglia's emails being released (or hacked) to show the world that all the temperature records were lost or extrapulated, and then they took it upon themselves to fill in false temperature proxy, shows that people are starting to loose faith in those leaders sounding the trumpet for a green, clean, pristine mother Earth. Not too mention how Prof Michael Mann from my Alma Mater was given half a million in research grants to "prove the science was real" after gaining noteriety by the now-infamous hockey stick graph. If it were not for sharp eyes like that of Ross McKitrick and Steve McIntyre, this faulty science would not have its feet at the fire.
With Old Barry swinging by Dopenhagen, its rumored to believe he feels its his messianic duty to pledge $10 billion in our tax money to combat climate change in developing world economies. Let me say this...with China holding $800 billion of our assets, do you think were going to dole out this, and try to limit economic growth by imposing 17% reductions in emissions? Waxman/ Markey is dead. Barbara Boxer and John Kerry are humorously attempting a similar yet less ambitious bill, thats wrapped up in the syntax of "security" and "business friendly", but no ones convinced.
It's time to get real people. We did not pass the Kyoto Protocol, because our Senate voted 98-0 against it. It was a flawed treaty and with this recent scandal and growing government dissent in our country, I'm pretty sure, we the people are going to flick this world convention the finger just like 1998. My predictions are that Obama does not have the political capitol to pass this, but watch how the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) reacts. America, tougher times are ahead, and I believe you might see some of these green-Nazis from other nations try and take action against us if this isn't ratified. Angela Merkels appearance not long ago indicated that the nations of the world want us... but we want science... and truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment