In real science, when something is discovered that is not
understood real scientists set in motion to seek out an explanation. Unlike real scientists, environmental
extremists create an agenda driven cause and then diligently seek out a problem
to tie it to, no matter how scientifically unsupported it might be.
So is the case with Global Warming a cause that was set ablaze back in 2007 when the prediction was made by the now infamous climate scientist Wieslaw Maslowski and echoed by Al Gore during his 2007 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech where he stated that, due to global warming, the arctic ice would melt by 2013. Of course this did not happen and as a result Maslowski’s team revised their model which then predicted that the arctic ice would be gone by 2016. This despite the fact that the in 2013 the summer ice in the arctic increased from the year prior. But a little extra ice can’t stop the environmental whack jobs who cling to any modicum of scientific data that they can force fit into their argument while at the same time eagerly discard any real science that contradicts their claim.
Certainly our mother earth is being inundated by the use of fossil fuels, nobody denies this but this does not mean the end of the world as we know.
The doomsday scenario of global warming, constantly being projected by environmental extremists, is without scientific merit. This however, does not stop these environmental loons from flooding their misinformation throughout social media and main stream platforms. There hope in doing so is to gain the attention of any like minded zealot willing to ignore facts and help perpetuate their fiction. While environmental activists are quick to claim human caused CO2 as the source of global warming they repeatedly fail to provide verifiable scientific proof as to the effect human caused CO2 is actually having on the environment, if any.
The hypocrisy behind the global warming claim is astounding. Typically, the argument against Republicans is that they are driven by greed {let us not forget that the left constantly claims that the right starts wars over oil}. So why is this not the case with global warming? If driven by greed then why are Republicans not taking a ride on the global warming bandwagon that would yield them billions upon billions of dollars by pushing green energy technologies, technologies that come without the hassles and the astronomical cost of fighting the mountains of environmental regulation and legal challenges that fossil fuels face? The answer is simple, doing so would be irresponsible.
If you want to get down to the science of it all, which the global warming extremists do not, the earth’s atmosphere has been in a cycle of heating and cooling for millions and millions of years. These cycles are largely driven by the earth’s volcanic activity and is currently at the peak of one of its cooling cycles. With roughly 150 volcanoes currently active on earth, the natural occurring CO2 emissions are at a very low cycle. Tens of thousands of years from now the earth’s volcanic activity may be 3 or 4 or maybe 100 times greater than it is today and the natural occurring CO2 emissions will increase just has it has thousands of times before, to a level I might add that will be exponentially higher than that of our current human CO2 emissions activity. When this happens the atmosphere will warm up ever so slightly, as it has thousands of times before, but life on earth will not come to an end nor will the ice caps melt and flood the lands. If history repeats itself, as it has like clockwork for millions of years, what will happen is that the volcanic activity on earth will again subside, the natural occurring CO2 emissions will go down and the planet will go into another cooling cycle just as it has thousands of times before. Of course, none of this really matters if you are buying votes through the sale of snake oil and vowing to derail the apocalyptic end of life as we know it by terminating the use of fossil fuels.
The global warming scheme serves two purposes for the left. It of course gives them a platform by which they can demonize rational thinking Republicans and second, it ensures them the vote of the majority of environmentalist who selfishly pledge their allegiance to any candidate that sides with their cause while ignoring ever other significant national issue as well as the qualifications of the person they are backing.
Doomsdayers, such as Maslowski and our friend Al Gore, have been proven wrong in there extremist claims while the more realistic environmental scientist state that the overall negative effects on the environment, as a result of human interaction, are difficult to quantify. The current environmental changes are fractionally small and are effected by so many naturally occurring factors, not just human interaction alone.
This by no means gives us a free pass to continue to spew toxic poisons into our earth’s atmosphere but it does mean that a more responsible and cautious approach should be taken, one driven by scientific fact rather than by extremist hoo-ha that the left leverages for political gain.
So is the case with Global Warming a cause that was set ablaze back in 2007 when the prediction was made by the now infamous climate scientist Wieslaw Maslowski and echoed by Al Gore during his 2007 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech where he stated that, due to global warming, the arctic ice would melt by 2013. Of course this did not happen and as a result Maslowski’s team revised their model which then predicted that the arctic ice would be gone by 2016. This despite the fact that the in 2013 the summer ice in the arctic increased from the year prior. But a little extra ice can’t stop the environmental whack jobs who cling to any modicum of scientific data that they can force fit into their argument while at the same time eagerly discard any real science that contradicts their claim.
Certainly our mother earth is being inundated by the use of fossil fuels, nobody denies this but this does not mean the end of the world as we know.
The doomsday scenario of global warming, constantly being projected by environmental extremists, is without scientific merit. This however, does not stop these environmental loons from flooding their misinformation throughout social media and main stream platforms. There hope in doing so is to gain the attention of any like minded zealot willing to ignore facts and help perpetuate their fiction. While environmental activists are quick to claim human caused CO2 as the source of global warming they repeatedly fail to provide verifiable scientific proof as to the effect human caused CO2 is actually having on the environment, if any.
The hypocrisy behind the global warming claim is astounding. Typically, the argument against Republicans is that they are driven by greed {let us not forget that the left constantly claims that the right starts wars over oil}. So why is this not the case with global warming? If driven by greed then why are Republicans not taking a ride on the global warming bandwagon that would yield them billions upon billions of dollars by pushing green energy technologies, technologies that come without the hassles and the astronomical cost of fighting the mountains of environmental regulation and legal challenges that fossil fuels face? The answer is simple, doing so would be irresponsible.
If you want to get down to the science of it all, which the global warming extremists do not, the earth’s atmosphere has been in a cycle of heating and cooling for millions and millions of years. These cycles are largely driven by the earth’s volcanic activity and is currently at the peak of one of its cooling cycles. With roughly 150 volcanoes currently active on earth, the natural occurring CO2 emissions are at a very low cycle. Tens of thousands of years from now the earth’s volcanic activity may be 3 or 4 or maybe 100 times greater than it is today and the natural occurring CO2 emissions will increase just has it has thousands of times before, to a level I might add that will be exponentially higher than that of our current human CO2 emissions activity. When this happens the atmosphere will warm up ever so slightly, as it has thousands of times before, but life on earth will not come to an end nor will the ice caps melt and flood the lands. If history repeats itself, as it has like clockwork for millions of years, what will happen is that the volcanic activity on earth will again subside, the natural occurring CO2 emissions will go down and the planet will go into another cooling cycle just as it has thousands of times before. Of course, none of this really matters if you are buying votes through the sale of snake oil and vowing to derail the apocalyptic end of life as we know it by terminating the use of fossil fuels.
The global warming scheme serves two purposes for the left. It of course gives them a platform by which they can demonize rational thinking Republicans and second, it ensures them the vote of the majority of environmentalist who selfishly pledge their allegiance to any candidate that sides with their cause while ignoring ever other significant national issue as well as the qualifications of the person they are backing.
Doomsdayers, such as Maslowski and our friend Al Gore, have been proven wrong in there extremist claims while the more realistic environmental scientist state that the overall negative effects on the environment, as a result of human interaction, are difficult to quantify. The current environmental changes are fractionally small and are effected by so many naturally occurring factors, not just human interaction alone.
This by no means gives us a free pass to continue to spew toxic poisons into our earth’s atmosphere but it does mean that a more responsible and cautious approach should be taken, one driven by scientific fact rather than by extremist hoo-ha that the left leverages for political gain.
The global warming rhetoric being spewed by the large
activist groups and supported by the vote seeking agenda of the political left
remains to have little scientific merit.
Until there is solid proof otherwise, the responsible development of
clean burning fossil fuels is the most efficient and cost effective way to meet
the global energy challenges of today.
No comments:
Post a Comment