Isn’t It Strange That The Planet Is Still Here (And Functional)?

What, you didn’t hear?  That’s odd, it was reported widely.  Oh, wait, no it wasn’t:

The sky fell on Hawaii last month, all because carbon dioxide levels peeped above the much-hyped 400 ppm hurdle. Chicken Littles all over the world squawked into their friendly media megaphones about numerous imminent global warming disasters. One warned: “the fate of the world hangs in the balance.” (Similar alarms were rung when the 350 ppm level was passed).

But nobody else noticed anything scary.

Four pieces of well-established evidence say that 400 ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is not a concern.

Firstly, there has been no increase in global temperatures since 1998 despite 16 years of rising carbon dioxide levels and heavy usage of carbon fuels. Clearly, CO2 is not the main driver of global temperatures.

Secondly, the ice core records show clearly, with no exceptions, that all recent ice ages have commenced when the atmosphere contained relatively high levels of carbon dioxide. …

Thirdly, current levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide are not extreme or unusual. …

Finally, current carbon dioxide levels are just above starvation levels for plants. All vegetation would grow stronger, faster, and be more drought resistant and heat resistant if carbon dioxide levels trebled to 1,200 ppm. Such levels are no threat to humans – US submarines operate at up to 8,000 ppm for cruises of 90 days. …

There is a lot of great information and more links on this article, so be sure to check it out.  The point is, climate change is still nothing more than a politically driven hoax.  Exhibit A is the High Priest of the Church of Green, Al Gore, who is still sounding the false alarm bells:

In the struggle to solve the climate crisis, a powerful, largely unnoticed shift is taking place. The forward journey for human civilization will be difficult and dangerous, but it is now clear that we will ultimately prevail. The only question is how quickly we can accelerate and complete the transition to a low-carbon civilization. There will be many times in the decades ahead when we will have to take care to guard against despair, lest it become another form of denial, paralyzing action. It is true that we have waited too long to avoid some serious damage to the planetary ecosystem – some of it, unfortunately, irreversible. Yet the truly catastrophic damages that have the potential for ending civilization as we know it can still – almost certainly – be avoided. Moreover, the pace of the changes already set in motion can still be moderated significantly.

Blah blah blah.  It’s hard to take these words seriously coming from a guy who owns multiple palatial estates that gobble up roughly 30 times the monthly energy consumption of the average American household, and who flits from one crisis-is-coming speech to the next on a fleet of private jets.  Oh, and speaking of Gore’s credibility, there’s always this and this:

He’s been saying we have 5 years left since roughly 2006.  Then he changed it to seven years, then he just kept recycling the same speech but continued moving the goalposts by setting a new 5-7 year mark with each speech.  Or, basically, he has proven over and over and over again that the tripe he’s peddling is completely false.

Speaking of false, here’s a list of just a wee handful of things that have been supposedly caused by climate change.  For a much, much bigger list — including dozens of diametrically opposed phenomena — check this out.  Basically, global warming causes everything.

While we’re still speaking of falseness, did you know that NOAA recently changed the hottest month on record from 2012 to 1936?  With absolutely no fanfare whatsoever, too.  Hm.  Turns out that the pesky empirical data isn’t playing nicely with the computer models that are based on bias and conjecture.  Dammit.  Well, not to be deterred, the liberals will continue to insist we do irreparable damage to the American economy by destroying the coal industry and implementing a severe new carbon tax that causes the loss of hundreds of thousands of high-paying American jobs (and, for the record, the IRS is late to the record-destroying party…the EPA has been doing that for years!).

By the way, I don’t know that I’ve gone into detail on whey a carbon tax is a terrible idea before, so here’s a quick primer:

Former treasury secretary Henry Paulson is calling for a “fundamentally conservative” carbon tax to address the risks of a climate bubble. …

Let’s set the record straight on Paulson’s climate assertions. First, sea level is increasing, but accelerating sea-level rises is not what the data tell us. Second, all sea ice around the world is actually above average and, for this time of year, it is at its highest level in 30 years, which is the third-highest on record. Third, climate models haven’t been so great at projecting what a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will actually do to global temperatures. The models didn’t get the past 17 years right, who’s to think they can accurately project 100 years out? Fourth, even if the purported sea level rise Paulson speaks of is accurate, it will occur over centuries, leaving ample time to adjust as necessary. …

But let’s pretend Paulson isn’t wrong on the problem. His purported solution of a carbon tax would be an enormously high, regressive energy tax that would needlessly destroy jobs and economic growth for no noticeable impact on global temperatures. A carbon tax is not going to mitigate warming and won’t make a lick of difference when it comes to natural disasters. Further, an assumption exists that if the United States takes the lead, other developing nations will follow suit. But if we play follow the leader, we’re going to turn around and find no one there.

Paulson claims that without a carbon tax, we’ll all be paying for the damage of climate change “many times over” and that we’re going to leave the world in a worse state for our grandchildren. But in fact, a carbon tax would hurt our grandchildren. More than 80 percent of America’s energy needs are met through carbon-emitting conventional fuels. If we have less access to those fuels, our economy will suffer.

It’s not rocket science, but it is political football.  That’s why we cannot be bullied into accepting terrible policies like a carbon tax, which will have disastrous effects in real ways on real people…but no effect on the climate whatsoever.

So, while we can all get on board with the celebration of the fact that our planet is still here, let’s stop and think a bit before we destroy our ability to live comfortably and freely on it, shall we?

There’s my two cents.


I'm a gun-owning, Bible-thumping, bitter clinger conservative in the heartland. You can disagree with me if you want (you do, after all, have a right to be wrong)...just don't be rude or stupid and we'll get along just fine! :)

Posted in Energy, Environment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow me on Twitter

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 95 other followers

%d bloggers like this: