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.
Change for the Better
And now on to some change we do have control over...
First, you may have noticed for the past couple of months a new monthly column. Launched in January, End of the Line (it’s on the last page, get it?) presents a Q & A with a finishing industry newsmaker. We thought an interview format would be an interesting way to wrap up each issue, and in coming months you can look for interviews with technical and business people who (we hope) have something interesting and insightful to say about some aspect of the finishing industry.
Second, it gives me great pleasure to announce a new columnist for PF’s Electrocoat Clinic. Lyle Gilbert, a long-time veteran of Metokote Inc. and one-time contributing editor to PF specializing in E-coat and powder coating topics, has taken the reins from Ron Jacob. After several years of handling the Clinic, Ron recently accepted a long-term overseas assignment. We wish him all the best.
Lyle brings a wealth of first-hand E-coat knowledge and industry connections to the job. He’s moderated PF’s online E-coat Forum for several years, and we’re fortunate he agreed to take on the Electrocoat Clinic as well. If you have questions for Lyle, you can contact him via e-mail at electrocoat@pfonline.com. |
