Global Warming

With the coming and going of any human tragedy, there are always the slimy little vermin that crawl out from under the parts of the earth where nobody wants to look. In the case of Katrina, it is the global warming crowd. I already pointed out these goofs could not even get their own stories straight: one liberal misquotes another who admits global warming has little or nothing to do with the current hurricane cycle. I will comment later on "chain lies" ... a slight takeoff of the "tell the same lie over and over until it becomes the truth" ploy currently employed by liberals ... but for now I want to stay focused on global warming.

Truth be told ... the one thing missing from all of the inflamed rhetoric of the global warming discussion is common sense on either side. On the right : the denial that certain parts of the earth are getting warmer is just goofy ... we can measure these things and plot the measurements over time. I believe this to be true despite the demonstrable fact that the biased environmentalist "researchers" (who reap great rewards for the loudest, most dire predictions) are clearly cheating on the measurements.

On the other hand, the leftie notion that man is somehow causing the problem (on a global scale) is sooooo arrogant and stupid that it defies any logic ... of course lack of common sense never stopped a liberal with a cause. There is much "counter evidence" to refute the idea of global warming, despite what looney Algore and his media friends would tell you. Again, refuting global warming does NOT say that some parts of the earth are not getting warmer, indeed they are; just that it is not happening on a global scale. It is saying that human's part in this is controversial at best, and even if man is doing something the effect is negligible. On a planetary scale, even relatively minor global and solar events, not to mention well-documented planetary cycles, have many orders of magnitude more effect on the environment and specific weather phenomena than could all the polution man can ever produce.

The truth about the leftie attempts to regulate man-made global warming is that it is less about science than it is about socialist redistribution of wealth: specifically moving as much wealth and power out of the US as is possible. One needs no more evidence than to look at the very first criteria of most leftie driven environmental remedies: exemptions for just about everybody but the US, including exemptions for India and China. The negotiated remedies usually have "rich" nations paying off "poor" nations. In addition, the plans always completely ignore any measures of "polution" but instead focus on energy used ... so called "BTU taxes". In this system, all efforts to clean up emissions are worthless, and we only avoid the penalties by shutting down production or moving it to the third world. The proposals always end up with the US paying billions of dollars just to stay where we are at today; and generally puts the money in the same hands that did such a fine job managing the Iraqi Oil-for-food program, or tiny little dictators and despots. Funny how this little tidbit gets overlooked in all the media coverage in a time where we have a shining example of how impotent and corrupt the UN is, eh?

Regardless, even the most optimistic predictions indicate that such efforts as Kyoto will amount to less than a 5% effect on the overall change in global temperatures (like I said, man has nothing to do with global warming). Even if man did have more than a negligible impact, over the next decade as China and India ramp-up and US ramps down (due to continued competition driven efforts to lower emissions and conserve fuel), overall global polution will escalate but ONLY the US will be penalized. It cannot even be argued that Kyoto is a "start" since (for reasons stated above) it has nothing to do with reducing emissions and everything to do with redistributing wealth.

So, then ... what do we do about "global warming"? The point is that "global efforts" to try to stop or slow down warming, given that man has very little to do with it, is like trying to throw a glass of ice water on a volcano. What we can do is to take proactive measures to prevent the possible problems that "local" warming may lead to. For instance, if measurements show that the Gulf of Mexico is getting warmer and we know that this will make for more powerful storms, then not strengthening the defenses against stronger storms is just plain stupid.

This strategy works perfectly for conservatives ... it leads to economic growth (results in creating jobs, improving useful technology, etc), takes away the momentum of the lunatic fringe (you can cry all you want, we are solving the real problems), and taps into the "can-do" spirit of The American that naturally opposes the fatalistic doom-n-gloom whinings of liberalism. It also keeps the money home where it belongs.