Global Warming Follies
Briefing | By Emily Ham | May 28, 2008
When
it comes to the issue of global warming, it seems that there are three
different types of people in the world: those who want to do something
to put an end to it, those who don’t believe in it at all and those who
really don’t care what happens.
But what do you get when a country’s government finds itself in the
process of passing legislation on a topic recent studies have proven to
be a myth?
One in the U.S. Senate, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, and the Boxer Substitute Amendment on the side, may do just that.
According to Andrew Wheeler,
director of the Senate’s Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Congress will be opening its floor to the discussion of the
Lieberman-Warner Act and Boxer Substitute Amendment on June 2 to
discuss the additions to the Act and the Act itself.
The objective of the Act is to introduce measures that will help
protect the environment from what many scientists and politicians
believe are harmful greenhouse gases—i.e.,
carbon dioxide and hydrocarbons—through methods such as “deploying
advanced
technologies and practices for reducing emissions” and “protecting
low-and-middle-income Americans from higher energy cost.”
The opening lines of the act read, “The bill will establish the core of
a federal program to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions substantially
enough between 2008 and 2050 to avert catastrophic global warming. It
will accomplish that purpose without harming America’s economy or
imposing hardship on its citizens.”
According to the Heritage Foundation, the Lieberman-Warner bill will
produce “very little change in global temperature,” perhaps even less
than .07 degrees Celsius.
However, if passed, the amendment to the original bill could harm American citizens financially, said Wheeler.
“The Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act calls for the largest tax
increase in American political history and, arguably, is the largest
re-distribution of wealth ever,” Wheeler said.
In a U.S. Senate Committee of Environment and Public Works (EPW) press release issued on May 20, Ranking Minority Member Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said the Lieberman-Warner bill doesn’t, in any way, stay out
of American’s pocketbooks. “Lieberman-Warner will redistribute over
$5.6 trillion from American consumers to pet congressional projects.
Despite paying for the trillions of dollars mandated by this
cap-and-trade scheme, American families and workers will only receive
back $800 billion in consumer tax relief—$7 paid for every $1
returned,” Inhofe said.
“No matter how many revisions this bill undergoes, it remains a massive
redistribution of wealth, the largest new tax and spend program in our
Nation’s history,” Inhofe added.
Yet, while Congress waits to pass or veto acts such as
Lieberman-Warner, which many believe will affect the lives of Americans
negatively, a study released by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) in 2007 concludes after its 12 pages of charts and calculations that there is no such thing as global warming.
According to the OSIM study, “there are no experimental data to support
the hypothesis that increases in human hydrocarbon use of in
atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing or
can be expected to cause unfavorable changes in global temperatures,
weather or landscape.”
After releasing the 12-page study of charts, graphs and findings to the
public, some 31,000 scientists from across the United States read,
researched, and accepted this report to be as close to truth as
scientifically possible.
In turn, all 31,000 have signed a petition “urging the US government to
reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in
December 1997, and any other similar proposals,” according to the Petition Project’s website.
The petition also states “there is substantial scientific evidence that
increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects
upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”
OISM co-founder Arthur Robinson said the response of 31,000 degree-holding scientists, which include
some 9,000 PhDs within the area of physical science, shows there is
clearly not a consensus amongst professionals in the field where global
warming is concerned.
“The idea that a committee can decide scientific truths is unprecedented,” Robinson said.
“The claim that the point is settled is just not true. There is no
consensus on the issue, therefore, the science must be examined,” he
added.
“We have a political movement that wants to [restrict] 85% of our energy because of a committee,” Robinson said.
Indeed, Congressional acts such as Lieberman-Warner Climate Security
Act entail cutting energy sources over time, and according to Robinson
these restrictions will have profound effects on the people of the
world.
“The currency of technological progress is energy,” he said. “When you
deprive the world of energy, you deprive the world of technology, and
if you deprive the world of technology, people will die.”
This is why Robinson said he and his team and many other scientific
teams across the world who are conducting research on the issue of
global warming continue their plight to prove the conventional
knowledge false.
Yet, their reports and findings seem to not come into the consideration
of politicians as elected officials draft legislation that would affect
not only our nation, but the world as well.
And it’s this fact that leaves some wondering: why would Congress try
to pass a bill that would harm the lives of its people when the harm
the bill is designed to alleviate may not even exist?
Emily Ham is an intern at the American Journalism Center, a training program run by Accuracy in Media and Accuracy in Academia.
8 Comments | Post a Comment
The deceit of “humans’ is far more proven and documented in history than any theory on climate change.
There could not be a worse time than now, while the perfect storm gathers, to put the final straw on the back of the camel, or should I say to slay the golden goose who has been saving and can still save the world. Our economy is stretched thin in attempting to stave off those who would destroy freedom and vow to kill anyone who doesn’t believe their way. Lieberman-Warner will add trillions in taxes and reduce the jobs that bring taxes along with what remains of the US economy.
While we have not built a coalfired energy plant in decades, China continues to build several every week. If the full benefit of the Lieberman-Warner Bill occurs as promised, we cannot hope to keep up with the damage that China alone will continue to wreak. Better yet for them, we will destroy our economy in preparation for their world domination by spending more than we have left in an attempt to stop the natural cycle of ice ages and warming periods that the earth has had for a billion years. We are just coming out of an ice age now, and warming causes carbon, not the reverse. This media and liberal politician love fest is destroying our country to the tune of both Democrats and Republican politics for power at all costs. How stupid are people that they cannot remember history and see mirror images of the political situations that exist today? In the gathering perfect storm of terrorism and liberal appeasement of openly intended use nuclear weapons by fanatics, America will bury her head until it is too late. If this bill passes and the impending extreme liberal takeover of our country occurs, we may never have a political chance to recover.Freedom will be gone and so will the United States within a faster time than anyone could predict.
If we were to drill where we could instead of letting China and India drill off our coasts without competition, we could survive the oil prices. If liberals would allow us to build coal plants like China while we bring our safe nuclear energy up to speed and develop even better forms of energy, Oil would be obsolete. Obsolete before we used even a portion of our resources instead of competing with China and India and others for the oil we could produce ourselves.
If our nation stood strong against aggressors again, instead of promising to talk to them, we would not be talking to them again when we get attacked. How many Neville Chamberlands or Hitlers or Carters must we endure before we believe the lessons of history? If this bill passes and the most liberal politician that ever ran for our presidency gets a 60% majority in the congress and then appoints supreme court justices like Hillary Clinton for life, we will never legally be able to recover with an election. They will have it all and they will be free to lay our country down in appeasement for those that will be on our doorstep. We have until November to wake up and claim our remaining chance to save our country. The fight will not be over then. Even the Republican running is more liberal than anyone elected since Carter who almost took us down a one-way road before Ronald Reagan saved us. No politician since has done anything for the country without appeasing the opposition while trying to keep votes for power. 70% of Americans want the border shut down and want immigration returned to legality like every other country on the planet. But not one politician will listen to us. It is time to throw out any politician that votes with the Lieberman-Warner bill and vote in people who care more about America and our grandchildren than their own temporary power.
There are priorities. And yes, we all want to treat the earth better and improve it. Just like no one wants war, least of which are the brave soldiers that fight it for our country. But the survival of our country as the only shining beacon that can keep the tide from rolling over the world is the only chance humanity has left.
If we prioritize the survival of humanity and logical, affordable progress and adjustment for the future, we can make it. But this bill and the November election is the point of no return.
I don’t believe in global warming! Humanity investigates the climate not so long about 150 years . Maybe current situation is usual for global climate changing. I don’t see the reason for panic.
I was a bit rambling in that original piece, but it is all related and critical. The real bottom line is that the congress and presidents have not allowed us to drill or build nuclear plants for over 20 years. Their promises to make us energy self-sufficient have been lies as they bowed to the increasing lies in each whim of the environmentalists and the pseudo-science they presented. Why stop if no politician would ever even ask if what they said was true. Their exaggerations got worse and now Al Gore is making millions of dollars with his company’s “Carbon Credits” that do not do one thing to change the natural global warming (or cooling) and threaten to take even more of our tax dollars. ONLY WE can vote for anyone from any party that will drill everywhere we can at Space-Race priority. Build Nuclear Plants at space race priority and at the same time search for every VALID form of efficient energy we can. We can be Energy self-sufficient in five years and stop sending 3/4 of a trillion dollars each year to finance our enemies in their attacks on us. Destroying our economy is the only way we can be defeated and they are using their oil and our dependence on them to do it. DRILL NOW and DUMP Pelosi NOW. She is one person few of us voted for from the San Francisco liberal area that has blocked our country from what it has to do. DRILL NOW and BUILD NUCLEAR PLANTS NOW, POLITICIANS - or WE will send you home. Stand in our country’s way to energy self-sufficiency and you will get run over.
The only thing that is going to change is when the environment gets too bad. Greed from both angles work hand and hand. The government only makes changes and actually starts caring when its going to be life or death for mankind in the next couple years.
June 1 at 8:28 pm | #1 | Link
Dearest Emily,
You wrote:
“But what do you get when a country’s government finds itself in the process of passing legislation on a topic recent studies have proven to be a myth?”
Science always questions its findings, and continues to collect data. The only myth is that science has absolute answers.
Your article is based on the assumption that there are studies that can prove that humans have no impact on their environment.
I hate to tell you but you have been impacting your environment since the day you were conceived in the womb.
I would ask that before you write, you first read. And whatever study you cite that proves humans have no impact on their environment could only be found in the fiction or opinion section of the library.
Sorry you were mislead by these corporate interests.