Friday, December 18, 2009

My take on climate change.

Daily Express | UK News :: Climate change is natural: 100 reasons why

"2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history."

This alone should be proof enough. It's like dropping a single drip of oil in the ocean and saying that all living things in it will die in a week.

What's MY take on climate change? Simple. It's nature and there's nothing we can do about it. We could all leave our cars running forever and it still wouldn't make a difference. That's because the earth has a way of balancing itself out. According to Blue Planet there are enough trees in Northern Europe alone to clean 1/3 of the entire planet's air annually. And what about all that tree harvesting in the rain forests? We could cut down trees at twice the rate and still take hundreds of years to wipe trees off the planet! There are more trees in Canada and Russia than we know what to do with.

Climate Change in politics?  Too easy.  We all know that politicians are liars.  What does Al Gore gain from his climate claims?  Do you think he's doing it for the planet?  For the children of the world?  For poor nations around the planet?  No.  He's doing it for money and fame.  He got the Nobel Peace Prize for his "film" An Inconvenient Truth and with that came a truckload of money.  Now he's seen as the global expert on climate change.  He gets to travel the world in his private jet, charge huge sums of money to lecture and ignore people's questions that try to point out his flaws.

Hilary Clinton wants to the US to help give 100 BILLION dollars "to address the climate change needs of developing countries".  Apparently this includes China as a developing country.  China?  Really?  Aren't they communist?  Don't they have plenty of money? And if they didn't, wouldn't a communist government simple take what it needs from it's people?  Why doesn't she donate a couple of million of her own to help out instead of wasting taxpayer dollars?

This also begs the question "what gives us (the United States) the right to demand any other country to do what we say?"  We don't own the planet.  We don't own the air.  We don't own the oceans.  We don't own Guam.  How can we demand that Guam cut it's carbon emissions when we don't own Guam OR the air they are polluting?  Do you think the people of Liberia are really concerned with air pollution?  Do you think they would rather have food and medical supplies?

This also comes down to money.  Let's say that the major countries decide to put a "global law" into effect that would force all countries to limit amount of carbon emissions.  What are the penalties for going above the limit?  I'm willing to bet that there is a monetary fee for such a transgression.  So who gets the money?  The US?  The UN?

I think in the end it's all about power.  Why is the US Govt trying SO hard to push the need to this "crisis" on the world?  What do they have to gain?  They have more power to gain.  And power is all that matters to them.  Find something that gets people's emotions involved, exploit that and cash in.  It doesn't matter about facts and research to them.  It's all about getting the glory and power no matter how you get it or who you have to step on to get it.  I'm sure it's easy for a "world leader" such as President Obama to not really think of Guam or Liberia as places of importance.  But to the people that live I bet it's very important.

So I suggest we stop lying to ourselves that we are the cause of climate change and focus on spending "global money" on things that we can actually make a difference about.  How about we find a cure for cancer, help 3rd world countries get food and medical supplies, stop funding governments that treat their people like dogs, focus on local issues, stop throwing money away at NASA who's trying to find water on planets light years away and countless other issues.