I spent Tuesday and Wednesday at the Naval War College Current Strategy Forum. It was two days of very interesting talk about the US, its role in the world, current economic problems and general international relations. At times it was downright fascinating.
One thing really began to get on my nerves after a while, and that was the extent to which speaker after speaker--irrespective of their ideology, party or background--talked about climate change as if it were a problem that we had created and a problem that we can--no, should--solve.
I realize that raising questions about climate change science and the like put one in the category of Holocaust Denier and Flat-earther, but here goes.
I am ready to acknowledge that man has and is changing the world's climate in some measurable way through his activities. I am ready to acknowledge that man can and in some cases should move toward activities that contribute less to this problem.
But I am not ready to concede that the change in our climate is MOSTLY or even SIGNIFICANTLY impacted by man's activities. The sea has claimed and revealed land for time immemorial--that is, climate change is the natural condition of our planet.
What I see at work here is a strain of do-gooderism that attempts to restrain the bad (read man, corporations, the West) in order to advance the good (Mother Earth, rain forests, primitive peoples, etc). By whipping the world into a frenzy of fear (remember AIDS?) proponents of radical climate change therapy hope to scare the rest of us into actions they desire. Their propaganda is so thoroughly ingrained in the academy and in certain political ideologies that it is seen now as irrational to doubt.
George Carlin said it best...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arbpu1xKAow
WHAT????
ReplyDeleteHow can you question climate change?
All one need do is look around and see the realization of the global cooling that these self same "experts" were predicting in the 1970's.
Has this nuclear winter clouded your thinking? :)))
Preemptive strike on Iraq because even the possibility that a threat exists merits our action.
ReplyDelete-but reducing our footprint on nature, you know, the thing you like to get out in on the weekends, the thing that provides you the air you breathe, the flyfishing opportunities, the blue crabs, the true relaxation, your very life, because there is only a small majority of scientists who agree the threat exists? Well that's just ludicrous. We might not be able to consume as much. It might be hard and that simply won't do.
bbauer
ReplyDeleteWhy is it called Greenland?