[ad_1]

How odd that someone would make a moral case against global warming. The trend is to promote it as a just cause. Global warming is presented as a problem that we should be doing all we can to fix or life as we know it will be no more. The so called “science” that supporters of global warming use to justify their position is anything but settled. New evidence is constantly being discovered that puts bigger and bigger holes in global warming theories–not laws, theories. The most ridiculous of these theories being that global warming–if it is indeed happening–is caused by human beings.

The objective here is not to go over the science that casts an overwhelming shadow of doubt on the accuracy of global warming theories but, it would be a waste not to share it. Not enough people are aware of this information as it is.

It is probably safe to say that there is no life on the other planets in our solar system. Most places are either too hot, too cold, or lacking an atmosphere like ours. Chances are, no aliens are driving carbon producing SUVs on our neighboring planets. It just so happens that Pluto is experiencing warming. There was a storm on Jupiter that scientists believe is due to climate change. Our closest neighbor, Mars, has been experiencing rising temperatures and as a result: melting. Either our horrible carbon footprints are so gigantic that it is affecting the entire solar system or it’s the sun.

Al Gore’s claim to Hollywood trophies and a Nobel Peace Prize is entirely due to An Inconvenient Truth–conveniently, it has few truths. Gore’s biggest case to link human activity to global warming is the theory that carbon dioxide levels are directly responsible for increases in temperature. His graphs and animations certainly looked sharp and gave an aura of authority. However, CO2 and rising temperatures are not related in the fashion Gore suggests. He would have you think that temperatures rise as a result of increased CO2 levels. Statistically, the warmer periods in Earth’s history came about 800 years before an increase in CO2; that means CO2 levels increased after temperatures increased. In other words, adjusting our “carbon emissions” may not affect global temperatures.

It would also be wise to look back at grade school science. We know that plant life thrive in high CO2 environments. The more green on earth the better. Increased plant life will lead to an increase in wildlife and the problem of starving nations could be more easily solved; the more places for agriculture, the more food we can produce.

That is some of the science and it has been known for years. Global warming fanatics have disregarded it and the public has blindly accepted their false science. Why? Because we are morally good. We want to do what is right and presenting global warming as a result of human activity puts the moral responsibility in our hands. Inconveniently for the global warming fear mongers, the war against global warming is largely immoral and chances are, human activity is not the cause of global warming.

Amongst the most immoral propositions in the war against global warming is the limit of carbon emissions from developing nations. People there do not have access to electricity, clean running water, or any of the luxuries we take for granted. Who are we in the developed world to tell these nations that they must adhere to “green” practices when we have built our lives on a carbon emitting system? It is immoral to forcibly keep people in poverty because of scientific theories. We have no right as a person or as a nation to tell any other person or nation how to live or run their own country.

The great ethanol lie is another derivative of global warming. One third of our corn crop in the United States this year will be consumed by ethanol production. Sounds like a lot except it will account for 3 percent of our total fuel usage while driving up the price of other grains and food. This reduces the amount of food we send over to those who are starving. And if you didn’t already know, it takes more fuel to produce and transport ethanol than ethanol can provide. A gigantic losing strategy that only makes it harder for Americans to buy food and reduces the supply of food to the starving and needy.

This war on global warming is largely a means to steal more money from ordinary folk. The government regulations and subsidies that have sprouted from this war such as carbon taxes and subsidized initiatives like corn-based ethanol are going to make us all poorer. The carbon tax is touted as a great idea so that the evil car drivers can pay for their crimes against the planet. The income tax was also sold to us as a means to tax those evil rich people and the last I checked, the IRS robs all of us every two weeks. These taxes are merely a means for one group to steal money from another group for their own agenda. A carbon tax is not backed by scientific fact and is going to be most destructive to regular people who rely on their car to make a living.

Absolutely no legislation or government regulation as a result of global warming is going to solve the “problem” or make any of us better off. Supporting government global warming initiatives is equivalent to starving and robbing other people. The war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war on anything is another way to ensure the problem will never be solved. The war on drugs has not reduced drug use but has instead put enormous amounts of people in jail for non-aggressive crimes and has created a black market where the truly bad are benefiting.

If all those who preach the gospel of global warming are really humanitarians, they would stop using government to do their bidding. The fact of the matter is that more people are going to be worse off and perhaps die due to our policies regarding an unproven scientific theory. Those who believe global warming is a crisis can act without using government force. Automakers have responded with hybrid vehicles, better gas mileage, and even all electric vehicles. No party is worse off because of these improvements and actions. That is the moral way to deal with global warming.

[ad_2]

Source by Tommy Leung