To The Daily Sun,
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel." — Patrick Henry (1778).
That statement by this esteemed statesman accurately identifies what is going on with this whole climate change agenda by the progressive left. I say again, it has nothing to do with having a cleaner environment or saving us from "global warming end times". It is about destroying capitalism, or as Mark Alexander puts it, "the climate hype is not about the weather, but about a political strategy to subjugate free enterprise under statist regulation." In other words, socialism by central-planning Democrats to save us from ourselves. For Third World countries, that would be tantamount to telling poor families how much energy they will be allowed to use and what standard of living they will be allowed to have.
I will bet you dollars to doughnuts that our buddy James Veverka knows that as clearly as he knows how to play the game of distraction, diversion and obfuscation as the patron saint of patronizing those who wish to have a real debate with him. Hence, he attempts to confuse the debate with lots of articles that don't address the question of where to accurately frame the science on global climate change. More precisely, not if the weather is varying, but just why is it varying, using satellite instrumentation rather than manipulated climate models.
It is the same alarmists who in the 1970s were telling us to beware the "coming ice age" and that "we are all doomed because fossil fuels will be all used up in 20 years, who are now telling us the earth is melting and us with it. Please, if you will, follow the bouncing semantic ball of progressive climate change: global cooling to global warming to climate change to climate disruption to climate catastrophe. Run for your life and try not to exhale while doing so.
Charles Krauthammer attempts to bring reality back into focus thusly: "We have reduced our carbon dioxide emissions since 1996 more than any other country in the world, and, yet, world emissions have risen. Why? We don't control the other 96 percent of humanity." All the cold showers, bicycle riding and candle-light reading in this country will not affect global emissions unless China and India decide to suddenly give up their desire for economic prosperity.
Perhaps Mr. Veverka thinks he can talk them into doing that given his level of self-indulgent pomposity. NOAA, which James seems to love like family, has come under increased scrutiny for its "cherry picked" statistics. The Obama administration uses their claim of a global temperature rise of 1.3 to 1.9 degrees since 1895. Why that date you may ask? Well, it just so happens that 1890 is recognized as the end of the 300 year "Little Ice Age" global cooling period, according to Mark Alexander.
George Will reminds us that scientists are not saints in laboratory smocks. They are influenced by tenured positions in academia so they won't question the reigning orthodoxy on climate change. They will go along to get along because they don't want the money spigot for research projects to dry up. And let's not forget the awesome beast that is peer pressure from the green lobby. Sadly, most journalists and media outlets have also hitched their wagon to this climate change movement, journalistic objectivity and integrity be damned.
Columnist Terence Jeffrey sums it up nicely. "Ultimately, it will not matter if people in government cynically promote the theory that human activity is destroying the global climate as a means of taking control of your life, or if they take control of your life because they sincerely believe human activity is destroying the global climate. Either way, government will control your life." From the Fabian socialists of yore to the modern day liberal progressives, that is the real goal of this "climate change chicanery." Right Mr. Veverka?