Climate Truth versus US Government Climate Policy
There are two absolutes that need to be considered when talking about the Earth’s climate.
The first absolute is that science, by definition, can never be settled. If you ever hear anyone, including scientists, say that a scientific theory, such as manmade global warming, is settled, then you know he or she is not telling you the truth.
Scientific theories are just that, theories, which must over time be tested using scientific methods, repeatedly tested again and proven using facts – not emotion.
The simple fact is that the Earth’s climate is impacted primarily by our star – the Sun. Solar activity has been theorized and proven over time to be the best predictor of changes in our climate.
Leaders, in academia, the public and private sectors, must therefore look at proven climate science models when making short and long term policy decisions. Currently, policy makers are using the wrong (CO2 Theory) model rather than a proven (e.g. Relational Cycle Theory) model to predict future climates.
A failure to use the proven model (best science) could lead to bad policy and social disruption, wasted resources, and worst case, possibly international discord, if not conflict.
The second absolute is man cannot control the weather. This is common sense. If anyone tells you that man can control the weather (climate) by changing his behaviors you should at the very least be skeptical, or better, just walk away.
Fact: The Earth’s atmosphere is made up of 0.039% parts of carbon dioxide (CO2). The proponents of bad science (CO2 Theory) say that by reducing CO2 emissions, man can control (change) the Earth’s climate.
The fact is that there were times when there was significantly more CO2 in our atmosphere than today and yet the temperature was colder. CO2 emissions come primarily from water evaporation due to the Sun shining brightly on our vast oceans and seas.
Natural global processes cannot be changed and will produce exponentially more CO2 than mankind can ever emit from any of his activities or the use of Earth’s abundant resources, such as oil and natural gas.
It is prophetic that on Monday, March 10th, 2014, about 28 US Senators stayed up all night discussing climate change on the floor of the US Senate. The question is: Did they discuss and promote good climate science or bad climate science, and therefore good climate policy or bad climate policy? The answer is sadly no.
Dr. Lawrence W. Reed, President of the Foundation for Economic Education, wrote, “Sound policy requires that we consider long-run effects and all people, not simply short-run effects and a few people.”
Time will tell whether we have taken the ‘sound climate policy’ approach and headed down the road to redemption for all of mankind, or else decided to take the road to perdition.
RELATED VIDEO: Joe Miller reports, “Several hundred global warming activists converged on Washington, D.C. earlier this month, protesting the Keystone Pipeline and urging radical solutions to limit carbon emissions. Of course, those radical solutions did not include limiting their own personal carbon emissions. At least one honest interviewee, who flew from Colorado to the nation’s capital, admitted that he would not give up air travel, no matter how polluting. But some attendees were more committed to the cause, even signing petitions to lower the sun’s temperature.” Watch it all here:
[youtube]http://youtu.be/5w4VdgE9aEk[/youtube]
