Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Back Printer Friendly Version

Tuesday, August 2, 2005

Global Warming Baloney

Reject outright the vision of a Socialist World Government

by StFerdIII

The United Nations, excepting some areas of refugee and poverty relief, is a failed experiment in international socialist governance. If you want to alleviate environmental damage and poverty, you need to improve international security, trade and economic freedom. The UNO is useless in all these areas. The poorest countries happen to be the dirtiest and most corrupt. Transferring monies from rich, over-regulated northern lands to poorer nations, to reward them for illiberal, despotic and corrupt behavior, is an exercise in Orwellian fantasy. Kyoto and Global warming theories are about politics not science and much like ‘debt forgiveness’ are counter productive and immoral.

Politicians support the non-scientific theory of global warming to buy votes. They also supported the nonsensical theory of global cooling in the 70s and 80s. Twenty years from now they will support global frosting or global melting or global molding or global baloney, whatever the world government scare de jour is at the time. Politicians will embrace any asinine theory that allows weeping faces for TV with hands clutching hearts while they issue compassionate statements about the need to generate more taxes, regulations, and government control and to instigate current economic disaster, to save the planet for our grandchildren. Embarrassingly energy businesses also ogle global warming to access public subsidies and fatten pay packages for politically connected executives. Global warming is just one large nauseating, non-scientific, Marxist generated litany of nonsense.

For the EU-nuch lands implementing accords on global cooling, warming, melting or defrosting, allows Europe to decrease the energy cost disadvantage with the US. Energy costs are far higher in Europe than the US, due to a host of non-economic and politically inspired taxes and regulations. The EU-nuchs also have an outdated and technologically inferior energy infrastructure, thanks to socialist planning, than the Americans. Reforming such a mélange of Marxist governmentalism is too simple. Forcing the gun-toting, shoeless Americans to increase their energy costs is nuanced, sophisticated and very European. Better to keep the rigid socialist state in high gear than countenance any reforms.

Global warming accords, regulations and theories are thinly veiled attempts by the UNO and the Canada-EU axis, to set up the beginnings of a world government. Smarmy global warming activists would love to join environmental control with legal control. We already have the International Court of Justice [ICJ] in the Hague which is of course, doing nothing intelligent. Criminals like Milosovic lounge around on vacation in Holland, while the Court issues threatening noises about detaining US or Israeli politicians or military leaders, while of course saying nothing about Islamic terror. Kyoto and Global warming have about as much relevance to world socio-economic affairs as the ICJ does with international legal matters. The US was right in not signing on to such an ignominious circus as the ICJ, it was also correct in flatly rejecting Kyoto. It should be more forthright and reject any and all attempts at coercion to support non-scientific theories of global warming.

The science underlying Kyoto has been destroyed many times. [ Articles on this web site on Kyoto nonsense ]. Scientific facts do not support the idea of Global Warming. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia and former director of the US Weather Satellite Service, who worked on parts of the Kyoto protocol has stated, "The UN-IPCC [International Panel on Climate Control] science panel, which is most often sited by supporters of this proposal, based its conclusions on three major claims. And although widely publicized, none of them pass muster. They have been or are being disproved by actual data." Singer lists some examples:

-The IPCC claims the 20th century was the warmest in the past 1,000 years. This is based entirely on a manhandling of the available data. Two Canadian scientists have just published a detailed audit that exposes a shocking set of errors; it permits anyone to independently verify their counter-claim.

-The IPCC claims the climate is currently warming. This is based solely on surface thermometer data. It is contradicted not only by superior observations from weather satellites, but also by independent data from radiosondes carried on weather balloons. In addition, proxy data from tree rings, ice cores, etc. confirm that there is no current significant warming.

-The IPCC claims climate models, which incorporate the observed increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases, can accurately reproduce the temperature record of the past 100 years. That assertion is inaccurate. True, the models employ enough adjustable parameters to mimic the global average temperature, but once the record is deconstructed according to latitude and altitude, any agreement with model results disappears.

If the earth is warming, and some parts of it might be, it has little to do with mankind’s activity. CO2 and methane are the evil greenhouse gases that will inflict disaster upon the globe. Yet 95 % of CO2 emissions are from natural biomass and much needed for plant life to survive. If you wiped out mankind you would only affect 5 % of such emissions. Climate patterns have more to do with the earth’s relationship to the Sun than anything else. Yet the entire Kyoto-IPCC analysis makes no reference whatsoever to this basic fact. It is a porridge of scientific mush that if implemented would have no impact on average global temperatures.

Kyoto protocols would not affect the climate but they would decrease a rich country’s GDP’s by about 2 %. As many economists have stated it makes no sense to impose economic burdens on today's generation in order to raise the welfare of people alive in 100 years who will be significantly wealthier, and far less likely to be affected by the vicissitudes of climate than we are today. Not only is the argument morally bankrupt, but the underlying economic analysis is completely invalid. As noted by Ross McKitrick, an economist at the University of Guelph in Ontario, "The problem with Kyoto-type emission reduction plans is that the marginal costs rise exponentially and the benefits, if there even are any, rise linearly. So no matter which angle you look at it carbon dioxide restrictions on even a modest scale use up more social resources than any benefits they generate."

Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist, makes the same point. Lomborg states that the worldwide cost of implementing the Kyoto Protocol would be about $350 billion per year beginning in 2010. Beginning in 2050, the cost rises to $900 billion per year. The cost of predicted global warming, if climate models are to be believed, would be about $900 billion in 2100. But even if fully implemented, Kyoto would only delay the predicted amount of warming by a mere six years. The US Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration analysis reiterates Lomberg’s claim. The USDEEIA estimates that the cost of Kyoto to the U.S. alone would be about $300 billion per year or 2 .5 % of GDP. This loss of GDP over a 10 year period would be triple the loss experienced during the Great Depression, which saw a drop in GDP of about 10 percent.

Kyoto is socialist politics at its worst. Bad science, weeping for the environment, hand wringing over rich country guilt and immature politicians gushing about our children’s future makes for a fantasy land of poor policy. Rejecting outright any attempt to infringe on national sovereignty and national prosperity by overzealous and corrupt international organizations is a primary responsibility of adult governments in the richer countries. Reject the childish fantasy of global warming, and say good riddance to world socialist government – and equal poverty for all.

http://www.globalwarming.org/index.php
CraigRead.com ©