« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Some Thoughts on Copenhagen and Climate Change

I’ve been reading up on the Copenhagen Conference lately and been listening to what the radio hosts have to say about it lately, and I came up with a few disturbing thoughts on these subjects that I’d like to share with you.

First of all, I’m sure we all know that many 2nd world and 3rd world countries have already walked away from the table, with China and India being among the most prominent ones to walk away. If any thing this should tell us one thing: any climate change agreement like Copenhagen will destroy economic prosperity. These countries are like marginal sellers or consumers in economics. They are the first ones to go when economic restrictions like those talked of at Copenhagen are on the table. While many of these countries may be unreliable allies to the US, they are generally reliable predictors of these sorts of things, especially a country as Machiavellian as China. Unlike the US with its do-gooders and would-be do-gooders at the helm, these countries will act in their own self interest. If an agreement will destroy their economy, they are gone (though, to be fair, the people at Copenhagen have coaxed some of the poor countries back).

The second thought I want to share with you covers much of the same subject matter as the first one. Since most of the countries negotiating this Copenhagen agreement are the developed countries, is it just me, or does this seem like like it is merely the elites trying to dictate what the world can and cannot have? It’s typical Leftism. We are to be subject to what a certain elite wants us to do, and if we don’t like it, tough.

I also want to point out that, regardless of whether climate change is real or not, the people meeting in Copenhagen are approaching the problem, if there even is one, from the wrong angle. The solution they will pound out there will inevitably involve more government controls over the economy and emissions. If these negotiators possessed even a modicum of introspection or honesty about oneself, they would realize that governments never manage these things properly, and the European countries, the vast majority of whom find themselves crippled by welfare states with those that aren’t have just emerged from the Iron Curtain, should especially be wary of this. The proper approach, if they truly wanted to reduce emissions, they would understand that the easiest approach would be through the freemarket. The fact that the U.S. is already almost halfway to the goals of the Kyoto Protocol despite being neither a signatory to it nor using government regulation should make this fact self-evident. Then again, since when have these abilities, or an ability to learn from history, been Liberal fortes?

The final thing I want point out concerns the Climategate scandal and how it affects the Copenhagen talks. If these people were honest with themselves, the info in the e-mails should be enough to grind these talks to a halt and render them irrelevant. Instead, unsurprisingly, they continue. Tony Blair, who while right in the War on Terror is as mistaken here as most other Liberals, even said:

It is said that the science around climate change is not as certain as its proponents allege. It doesn’t need to be. What is beyond debate, however, is that there is a huge amount of scientific support for the view that the climate is changing and as a result of human activity…Therefore, even purely as a matter of precaution, given the seriousness of the consequences if such a view is correct, and the time it will take for action to take effect, we should act. Not to do so would be grossly irresponsible.”

(The link inserted was my doing).

According to the Right Honorable Mr. Blair, we are, essentially, to press forward with these talks, despite the science behind global warming and climate change being uncertain. These words should be damning to the entire AGW movement. Tony Blair, whether inadvertently or not, has just pointed out that the climate change is not about the science. It is about emotion. It is about doing it because it “feels right”. It is about doing because anthropogenic global warming may be happening. The “it”‘s I mention are, of course, measures that would do untold damage to economies all across the world if implemented. These comments, and the numerous others like it, reveal the truth about the AGW movement: it is a religion, it is not scientific.

I think about these things and it seems painfully obvious to me just how big of a sham climate change and global warming are. They are merely more excuses for the government to control our lives. They tell us it is irresponsible to ignore the catastrophic effects of global warming, yet they go about pursuing so-called solutions to the problem in the most irresponsible manners. Science and common sense are disregarded. The only thing that matters to them is what meshes with their ideology. The hypocrisy is amazing.

Acta est fabula.

NOTE: This entry is cross posted from my new blog Jake Speaks.

Get Alerts