Global Warming Debate Takes Nasty Turnwww.alainsnewsletter.com
Perhaps a more sensible approach to reducing CO2 would be to take all the bailout money — TARP, the stimulus package, the takeover of General Motors — and use these trillions to build 100 new atomic energy plants.
E. Ralph Hostetter
The global warming debate within certain minority groups of the far left has become confrontational. Now circulating is such shocking language as, "At what point do we jail or execute global warming deniers? Shouldn't we start punishing them now?" These words came from Talking Point Memo, an agenda-setting website of the far left.
Others have picked up the drumbeat against those whose scientific background and physical observations of the planet accept that the rising changes in temperatures are well within the historical range of natural climate variability. Typical is this email disclosed by Senator James M. Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee. The email threatens to destroy the career of climate-skeptic Mario Lewis, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. “Mario: You have been proven wrong…. The entire world has proven you wrong. You are the last guy on earth to get it. Take this warning from me, Mario. It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar. If you produce one more editorial against climate change, I will launch a campaign against your professional integrity. I will call you a liar and a charlatan to the Harvard community of which you and I are members. I will call you out as a man who has been bought by corporate America. Go ahead, guy. Take me on.” [Signed] Michael T. Eckhart, President, American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE).
Warm temperatures have been proven to advance agricultural production and add to the economy. Cool temperatures, such as occurred in Europe during the Little Ice Age from the mid-14th Century to the 19th Century, led to shorter seasons, crop failures and in some instances famine and starvation. Disease epidemics of flu and pneumonia claimed the lives of millions across Europe during the Little Ice Age period.
It is understandable why such zealots as former Vice President Al Gore have staked their careers on man-made global warming. They have made millions trading on the fears of the general public. But the fact remains that mass deaths in human populations have not developed during warming periods — not even the warming period of 1000 to 1300 AD, when European temperatures were as warm, possibly warmer, than they are now.
State climatologists, promoters of science-based climate change, have been hit the hardest by the man-made global warming crusade. Most are under the political control of state governors. Of those attacked, perhaps the most renowned climatologist is Pat Michaels, state climatologist for Virginia. Michaels has argued that the climate is becoming warmer and that the consequences will not be as dire as others have predicted. Virginia Governor Timothy M. Kaine warned Michaels not to speak in public on the issue. Michaels said he resigned as state climatologist "because I was told that I could not speak in public on my area of expertise, global warming, as state climatologist…. It was impossible to maintain academic freedom with this speech restriction."
State climatologists are also, for the most part, professors of climatology in colleges. Reports from colleges and universities across America bring the same message that state climatologists are forced to cease teaching climatology, thus denying their students the benefit of their knowledge.
In London, the UK Daily Express reported that British scientist David Bellamy, a respected botanist, author of 35 books and presenter of some 400 TV programs, has been shunned by the bosses of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). His crime: He doesn't believe in man-made global warming.
The debate on climate change will continue and for the most part is a healthy exercise for those who are inclined to debate. However, today the issue is used in a manner designed to create fear of catastrophic weather and climatic conditions which will threaten life as we know it.
Politicians are quick to seize this opportunity to save you and your family, thereby promoting their own careers and the power of the state. Programs are being developed, supposedly to save the planet:
1. Cap and trade, which will not significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions but will increase energy costs and the costs of many other necessities.
2. Alternative fuels, where your food supply is converted to fuel for your car, thus making foods such as corn more expensive.
3. Sequestering of carbon dioxide.
4. Burying sequestered carbon dioxide in the bottom of the ocean.
All the programs have one thing in common: They will cost trillions of dollars and eventually will cause massive unemployment. If mankind is responsible for global warming, all the efforts in this country to fight it will be of little or no use for this simple reason: developing nations, especially China and India, have either refused or are unable to participate in greenhouse gas reduction.
Perhaps a more sensible approach to reducing CO2 would be to take all the bailout money — TARP, the stimulus package, the takeover of General Motors — and use these trillions to build 100 new atomic energy plants. Millions of real jobs would be created, as would new sources of cheap energy.
America should get on with the job.
E. Ralph Hostetter, a prominent businessman and publisher, also is an award-winning columnist and Vice Chairman of the Free Congress Foundation Board of Directors. He welcomes e-mail comments at firstname.lastname@example.org.