When The New York Times publishes a story, as it did on February 19, regarding the next step in the Obama administration’s intention to destroy the U.S. economy, it’s a very good idea to pay attention.

“E.P.A. Expected to Regulate Carbon Dioxide” was the headline of John M. Broder’s article. “The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to act for the first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet, according to top Obama administration officials.”

Those “top Obama administration officials” are unnamed and so too are the “scientists” claiming that the planet is “warming.” For the record, although you will never read this in The New York Times, the planet is NOT warming. It is COOLING. It has been cooling for a decade now and it is no secret to meteorologists who track the day to day temperatures or climatologists who study long term trends.

On March 8-10, more than 500 of those scientists who dispute the vast global warming hoax will meet in New York for a second international conference on climate change sponsored by The Heartland Institute, a non-profit, free market think tank.

Joining those scientists and others will be Vaclav Klaus, the president of the Czech Republic and current president of the European Union. Also participating will be American astronaut, Dr. Jack Schmitt, Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and other leading scientists who have led the effort to shed the light of truth on the global warming hoax.

You can be sure of one thing. They will all continue to be attacked as crazies denying the “consensus” that Al Gore is always braying about. Science is not about “consensus”, it is about reproducible facts. All the “facts” about melting glaciers, dramatically rising sea levels, and other claims by the GW crowd have been refuted.

The claims of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the basis for the Kyoto Protocols to limit carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been demolished repeatedly but the mainstream press refuses to report this, nor the fact that the IPCC is a political, not scientific, entity designed to advance the global warming hoax. Many of the scientists initially enticed to participate have since resigned. The vast bulk, easily 80% or more of those cited as IPCC members are not scientists who deal with issues of climate.

The IPCC’s claims have been based entirely on computer models. This in itself should have raised flags long ago. These models, as Hans Schreuder, an analytical chemist, has pointed out, “regard the earth as a flat disk bathed in a constant 24 hour haze of sunlight, without north and south poles, without clouds, and without any relationship to the real planet we live on.”

The claim that rising levels of carbon dioxide are responsible for a global warming that is not happening is entirely without scientific merit and, if for no other reason, should not be the basis for implementing EPA regulation of so-called “greenhouse gas” emissions under the Clean Air Act.

While it is true that there has been an increase in CO2 since the end of the last mini-ice age that lasted from 1500 to 1850, there is no research that demonstrates CO2 and an increase in the Earth’s temperature has any relationship. What warming occurred was entirely natural. Indeed, CO2, at less than 400 parts per million by volume, cannot influence atmospheric temperature or climate in any measurable way.

CO2 represents just 0.038% of the Earth’s atmosphere. The dominant factors in the Earth overall temperature are the Sun, the oceans, and even clouds.

If the U.S. weather service climate models are unable to predict changes in the weather by more than a week’s time, why would anyone believe that the IPCC’s models could predict it twenty, fifty or a hundred years from now?

Despite this, the EPA is tasked to impose regulations on CO2 emissions that would wreck the economy by requiring a “cap-and-trade” of “carbon credits” that would impact every single business and industrial activity. The European Union tried this and it has proved a massive failure and a huge drag on its economy.

Carbon dioxide is not a “pollutant” as the Supreme Court has ruled. How can the Earth’s second most vital gas, other than oxygen, be a pollutant? Not one single piece of vegetation on Earth could exist without CO2. Without vegetation, no animal life including our own could exist on Earth.

The notion that the EPA would regulate it is preposterous. It is absurd. It is criminal. It is immoral. It has no basis whatever in the actual science of the world’s climate. It is based on a massive, global hoax masterminded by the United Nations and carried out by charlatans such as Al Gore and NASA’s James Hansen.

It is, however, the vehicle for the political control of the world’s economy that would fulfill the United Nation’s global government schemes and, if enacted here in America, would mark the destruction of an economy that is the engine of the world’s economy, despite its current difficulties.

The Earth has existed for 4.5 billion years. The assertion that human beings and/or industrial activity have any effect on its atmosphere is an instrument of fascism.

Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.

Share This

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

About the author

Alan Caruba
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Alan Caruba writes a weekly column, "Warning Signs", posted on the Internet site of The National Anxiety Center. His book, "Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy", is published by Merrill Press.

10 Comments for Stop the CO2 Madness!

TK

Re: Statement from the article;

“The Earth has existed for 4.5 billion years. The assertion that human beings and/or industrial activity have any effect on its atmosphere is an instrument of fascism.”

It seems specious to assert that human beings and industrial development have absolutely NO effect on the atmosphere whatsoever – and the “instrument of facism” thing sounds REALLY ridiculous!

MAE

Weather modification and the sun-blocking aerosol program, needs to cease, period.

skygrl

We won’t forget the deep hemispheric freeze this winter! The experimental sun dimming cost us dearly in heating costs!

David Goodis

Correction: AIM is an instrument of fascism. Nuff said.

David Goodis

Two things should be pointed out. One of them imperils the article; the other sinks it.

1. Information from the Heartland Institute, a “free market think tank,” is obviously biased.

2. This isn’t just Al Gore’s idea. Presenting it that way is only to construct a straw man. Every major scientific association on this planet accepts the narrative of climate change.

“Global cooling” was an idea advanced for a while in the 1970s. It actually competed with other studies claiming the exact opposite. But the “cooling” argument only considered a few aberrant temperatures and attempted to extract a trend from this. It turned out to be wrong. George Will just published an article refuting climate change, and he cites these kinds of incorrect measurements (he actually points to these very 1970s figures). His essay was justly refuted in the press.

The thing that always amuses me is the idea that global warming is some kind of conspiracy. The only problem with claiming this is that SOMEONE MUST BENEFIT IN A CONSPIRACY. So who benefits? Who are the Green fascists? What is is their ultimate plan? What power bases are they attempting to construct? What political alliances do they observe? Answer these questions and you might have an argument.

It makes more sense to claim that there are people willing to fund an effort to keep us from making these changes, since they overturn all our current constellations of power. If we made all the appropriate changes over to an alternative source of power, well, there are a few things we’d have to do. We’d have to extract ourselves from the Middle East, we’d have to get our troops out of Afghanistan, we’d have to convert miles and miles of industry over to the new sources, we’d have to . . .

TK

Re: MAE, Post 2;

Would you also go along with a statutory prohibition of all Indian Rain Dances, also?

P.S.

I believe David Goodis, in Post 5, has it right.

Manny Can

Great article!  It is of dire concern that not only the cap and trade is stopped dead, but that pressure is put on these agencies to repeal the existing obstructive laws citing global warming as the cause.

The greens are using other routes, the Endangered Species Act, recently the lead paint alarm to ban use of motor powered recreational motorcycles atv’s etc. 

The country must come to its senses, energy is the heartbeat of our economy ,  Great job AIM.  I produce a webseries site – Manny Can effort that works to expose more of the greens assault on energy production and call this AGW issue what it is, a big fat lie.

CS Goldstein

Last week, it was reported that even Al Gore has had to backdown from these claims when a professor confronted him with facts.It was headlined at Drudgereport. I’m sorry, I cannot remember the
citation.Possibly, at WND.com,or pjm.In today’s WSJ, there is a piece online about taxing mileage that
refers to this Carbon Tax as the centerpiece of the Budget.

BT

here’s that nasa scientist in all his exaggerated glory:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,501064,00.html

funny how they put on a global warming demonstration in the aftermath of a snowstorm.

Best Web Host Reseller

“the basis for the Kyoto Protocols to limit carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been demolished repeatedly but the mainstream press refuses to report this…”

But this whole article and AIM itself is so bias and refuses to report anything but what they believe… how Accurate is that?