Swinging a Big Bat

Global Warming theorists carry a big bat around in order to effectively beat anyone who disagrees with them.  It sometimes seems that they feel that their agenda is so important that no discussion is needed or desired, anything that supports the Global Warming agenda is good in its own right, and needs no other justification.  Take Evan Almighty (please) for example.  Here we have a movie that purports itself to be a comedy with two of the most popular stars in America today, Morgan Freeman and Steve Carell.  When I saw this movie, I was left with the impression that the director and writers felt all they had to do was include an ‘Earth friendly’ global warming theme, and people would be forced to like it.  The movie was ghastly.  I expect a comedy to have decent writing, and be funny.  This bomb had neither of the two.  It’s as if proponents of global warming think it is a ‘pretty puppy dog’ that everyone is just going to like and accept because of its inherent goodness.

This expectation of acceptance of all things green is nothing new however, Global Warning scientists have approached the whole issue with a sense of entitlement since the beginning, and I for one, am growing exceedingly tired of it.

Have you ever known a guy who was so immersed in his own ideology, surrounded by sycophants that agree with every thing he says, that he eventually loses touch with reality.  These people see no boundaries of logic, reason or propriety except for the cause that they endorse.  PETA’s Ingrid Newkirk is a great example.  PETA repeatedly makes calls for the most irrational solutions to animal issues.  They do not care about the people they damage, be it emotionally, physically or mentally, on the way to getting their desired result.  The more shocking the statement or commercial, the better they like it, and the press is only too willing to give them free air time depending on the outrageousness of the statement.

I don’t agree with or like these people, but I’ll say one thing in their defense, at least most of their funding is driven by the private sector (or at least I hope it is).  The same cannot be said for Dr. James Hansen.  This nut is also known as the ‘Father of Global Warming,’ and he works for NASA.  This means that you and I are paying for this nut to say the stupid things that he says.

I have addressed the disturbing ‘this science is settled’ mantra that comes out of the Global Warming camp in past posts.  The basic idea of this statement flies in the face of the modern scientific method.  It is egregious for any person who calls himself a scientist to get away with saying ‘science is settled.’

This guy, being the psychopath surrounded by sycophants that he is, has no boundaries in his speech.  In a recent speech, he says that “CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are aware of the long-term consequences of continued business as usual.  In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.”  It would be hard to quantify the hyperbolic nature of such a statement, but suffice it to say I think he is exaggerating a little in this statement.  First of all, as a paid employee of the US government, he places himself in the odd position of calling for some Nuremburg-like trial founded on wholly fabricated charges against some of the top executives in the world who simply disagree with his science.  And, we…are paying this guys salary?  I work for the government, and I can assure you I am not allowed to go to the press and say anything, much less something as irresponsible as this, but this is the climate that we have allowed to be created.  The holy war, crusade, political agenda, religion- whatever you want to call it- that has become the Global Warming agenda has no boundaries. 

Up to this point, anyone who has dared to question their gospel, has been dismissed and ridiculed.  Some have even lost their jobs, and now, we have the first suggestion that people who do not agree with them may actually have committed a crime.  Amazing…, talk about thought police.  Don’t these liberals know what kind of fire they are playing with here?  Are they willing to sacrifice all of the freedoms that they so easily take credit for achieving for power and control? Absolutely they are.

He also says, “Special interests have blocked the transition to our renewable energy future….”  Really, is he talking about Democrats like Hillary Clinton who repeatedly block votes to expand the use of nuclear energy, the safest, cleanest and most efficient form of energy available?  No. 

I find it odd and disingenuous that these types continue to spew their drivel using phrases like “renewable energy,” but rarely dealing with the real issue- the fact that a bunch of backward-assed ex-hippies are blocking the only practical, domestic solution for dealing with high energy costs, nuclear energy.

But to make sure that we are all in lock-step (I hate Nazi analogies, but when in Rome…), he says, “Methods are sophisticated, including funding to help shape school textbook discussions of global warming,…”  Really.  I suppose we should burn the old ones.  No, that would cause more carbon emissions.  We had better compost them.

He later states, “To cut emissions, coal-fired power plants that don’t capture carbon dioxide emissions shouldn’t be used in the United States after 2025, and should be eliminated in the rest of the world by 2030.” And that, “carbon-capture technology is still being developed and not yet cost efficient for power plants.”  So now this guy has set himself up as the arbiter of technological innovation.  It’s OK to investigate unproven and highly ineffective means of producing energy such as solar, but he immediately dismisses carbon capture coal-based technologies on the same basis.  The reason is that his motivations are social and political, not scientific or altruistic. 

It is time to start paying attention to what these people are saying, if only to put their feet to the fire.  Every day they come out with more outrageous predictions based on models that have more and more baseless starting suppositions.  The world has to hold them to their own ‘science.’  If he makes predictions like, “Earth’s atmosphere can only stay this loaded with man-made carbon dioxide for a couple more decades without changes such as mass extinction, ecosystem collapse and dramatic sea level rises,” then we must hold him to it.  When it does not happen, then we consign him to the dustbin of history as simply another false prophet and a liar.  Of s course, Global Warming theorists do not want to wait to be proven right, and we do not want to have to listen to him for the next two decades before he is proven wrong.