Honest and informed debate is what’s needed
The notion of global warming—or, to be more politically correct, anthropogenic (man-made) climate change—is a topic that’s been tackled in this space before. Personally, I remain skeptical, but I freely admit that I am not a scientist and I have no idea if or to what extent human activity is contributing to climate change.
Now if only some of the main proponents of man-made global warming would do the same, maybe climatologists and other researchers who are seriously studying the phenomenon could have a rational debate on the topic.
The good news on that front is, the hysteria surrounding the subject last year seems to have abated somewhat. It probably peaked last spring with Al Gore’s Oscar win for his global warming propaganda piece “An Inconvenient Truth” and subsequent Nobel Peace Prize.
The bad news is, leading proponents of the idea of anthropogenic climate change are working very hard to squelch any voices that disagree with the dogma of their new, secular religion.
A column written near the end of 2007 by Alan Caruba, founder of the National Anxiety Center (www.anxietycenter.com; motto: “The good news is…the bad news is wrong!”), neatly summed up what I’m talking about.
“I have been witness to the complete subversion of science in the service of an utterly corrupt new religion called environmentalism,” Caruba wrote. “If I were to devise a plan to destroy the greatest economy, creator of wealth, center of innovation, and exemplar of individual liberty that has ever existed in human history, I would patiently create fear of a global disaster involving the one thing over which humans have never had and never will have control, the earth’s climate. I would then propose a ‘solution’ that would cost that economy billions in ‘carbon credits’ to keep it from occurring.”
Basically, what Caruba’s saying is that the climate change “solutions” proposed thus far are part of a political game aimed primarily at bringing the U.S. and the world’s other large industrialized economies down to a level more closely approximating those of other, less fortunate nations.
What I’m saying is, we need to do our best to make darn sure that anthropogenic climate change is for real before we allow anyone or any organization to start imposing carbon credits, “cap and trade” schemes or other draconian measures that would cripple the U.S. and other industrialized countries.
That’s going to require honest and open debate among people who may actually have an idea of what they’re talking about. I hope we can get to that point, but I’m not holding my breath.