by Jaxhawk


[2] There is no one who has lived or visited Los Angeles, Mexico City, Bakersfield, Dallas, New York, Pittsburgh or Cleveland, who will argue that there is a problem with the quality of the air we all have to breath to sustain our lives. You can see it, you can smell it and in some cities I have visited, you can even taste the air pollution!

But it is a serious breach of the truth and of scientific investigative results to jump from the dangers of pollution of the air we breath to the assumption that this phenomenon is causing "global warming".

The consensus among scientists, it is said, is that the planet's temperature is rising, the cause of the rise is the use of fossil fuels, and disastrous climate changes are looming unless drastic changes are made. The media likewise tend to take it as a given that the experts are in accord on global warming. So do too many politicians. The evidence of global warming keeps piling up, says Vice President Al Gore, who has made the issue a personal crusade,( AND A MONEY MAKING ENDEAVOR) month after month, week after week. So if the scientists are all in agreement, who said this? We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto. ... The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing (or will in the foreseeable future cause) catastrophic heating of the earth's atmosphere and disruption of the earth's climate. Moreover, 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.

It is a petition signed by nearly 17,000 US scientists, half of whom are trained in the fields of physics, geophysics, climate science, meteorology, oceanography, chemistry, biology, or biochemistry.

The statement was circulated by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine along with an eight-page abstract of the latest research on climate change. The abstract - written for scientists but comprehensible by laymen - concludes that there is no basis for believing (1) that atmospheric CO2 is causing a dangerous climb in global temperatures, (2) that greater concentrations of CO2 would be harmful, or (3) that human activity leads to global warming in the first place.

This was reported in the Boston Globe, 11/05/98 by Jeff Jacoby. But the beat still goes on. A relentless assault on scientific truth by those who would see the destruction of the Capitalist system and our way of life, so they can substitute a "One World" Socialist, secularist government. A world where the "special people, performing artists, political leaders and the mega-wealthy(aka Sorros), can tell us how we shall live with the full force of the World Government behind them!

With global warming, however, greenhouse "gasbags" can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems. National sovereignty? Democracy? Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before.

For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in too many ways. It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales! But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to give the sinister prize they want most of all: total control of American politics, economic activity, and even individual behavior.

The oil industry is just one example of how much influence and damage to our economy and way of life can be caused by Environmental zealots. Throughout the 1990s, the oil industry spent nearly 25 percent of capital investment -- more than $100 billion -- to comply with environmental regulations, and reduce air pollutants.

Oil refiner Premcor shut two Illinois oil refineries because it could not afford required upgrades; modifications in one refinery alone would have cost $70 million. Gas prices have also been affected by the government. In order to fulfill various air pollution reduction plans, gasoline sold in the United States has been fractionated into about 17 different boutique fuels. With three grades of gasoline, refiners produce more than 50 separate blends. This is expensive, as each blend must be transported separately, which limits pipeline and storage capacity. Moreover, it is difficult to replace supplies when there are disruptions and when refining capacity is taken off-line to clean tanks and pipelines when switching between winter and summer blends. Unfortunately, these and other government mandates lead to a loss of $1 trillion in economic output and up to 5 million workers unemployed. Absent government intervention in the market, prompted by environmental pressure groups, refinery capacity would be expected to expand, reducing consumer prices. More economical and secure energy supplies are available if government gets out of the way. Source: H. Sterling Burnett, "New oil refineries needed," Washington Times, November 26, 2007

And to top it all. Now President Bush has apparently caved in to the Global Warming scam. Look out America!

From The Opinion Wiki, a Wikia wiki.

From The Opinion Wiki, a Wikia wiki.