Environ-mess

I am a global warming skeptic for more reasons than one. First, today, an average person has no reliable source of information that can referred to because the scientific community has piled up literature 10 storeys high – a tactic used by corporate lawyers to smother their opponents. They say, and we accept under fear of future punishment. Sounds like religion to me. And second, as always politicians and governments are being lobbied. And I know politicians. Most of them get their ideas from the toilet bowl and don’t see beyond the next election. So they will go ahead and force their countries to commit mass economic suicide for questionable future gains. If politicians believe something, you can be dead certain that it is wrong.

The Emperor’s New Clothes is being replayed all over again. People are afraid to take a stand because they don’t want to look stupid. However, looking stupid is a small price to pay if you don’t want governments worldwide to take drastic measures all in the name of protecting the environment. The way things are going, we might soon be forced to pay taxes in order to be allowed to breathe out carbon dioxide. Meteorologist John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel, calls global warming the greatest scam in history (Global Warming is a Scam). And this is what he says in Global Warming and the Price of a Gallon of Gas

I have dug through thousands of pages of research papers, including the voluminous documents published by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I have worked my way through complicated math and complex theories. Here’s the bottom line: the entire global warming scientific case is based on the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the use of fossil fuels. They don’t have any other issue. Carbon Dioxide, that’s it.

Hello Al Gore; Hello UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Your science is flawed; your hypothesis is wrong; your data is manipulated. And, may I add, your scare tactics are deplorable. The Earth does not have a fever. Carbon dioxide does not cause significant global warming.

In The Global Warming Frenzy, he produces the following two charts (labels mine) –
The Hockey Stick
The Hockey Stick
The Vikings
The Vikings
and says that “mathematician Steven McIntyre and economist Ross McKitrick have proven to my satisfaction that the Mann Hockey Stick chart is not a valid display of long term global temperatures”. A paper he presented (pdf) at the International Conference on Climate Change, and his past blog posts (pdf) on the issue. You can follow him at Coleman’s Corner, but KUSI’s website does not do a good job of preserving posts (they exist but don’t get listed on the page).

The tide, I am afraid, turned irreversibly against economics and level-headedness the day the Nobel Committee decided that the Nobel Peace Prize will go to Gore and the IPCC – you simply cannot beat a Nobel Prize winner more so when he is a media darling. Forced emission cuts and imposition of stringent standards are going to wreak havoc on GDPs worldwide. We have already seen one effect of the alarmism – the impact of bio-fuels on food prices. I don’t mind people growing cash crops instead of foodgrains – it is after all their prerogative. But this happened because an artificial market was created and to top it all, subsidies were and are being offered to “eco-friendly” alternatives.

In 2002, Swaminathan Anklesaria Aiyar had this to say in one of his Swaminomics columns

The world has many serious environmental problems. Polluted water is by far the biggest, causing millions of deaths and illnesses. Polluted air is the second biggest hazard. Smoke from indoor cooking causes more havoc through respiratory diseases (not to mention burns and house fires) than factory smoke or auto smoke. Industrial pollution has wrecked rivers and canals, and toxified acres. Overfishing has wrecked fish stocks, overfelling and overgrazing have wrecked forests.

These problems cry out for priority, especially in developing countries. Yet so firmly have green imperialists of the west hijacked the global agenda that the focus has shifted to global warming and genetically modified crops.

The Kyoto Treaty on global warming seeks to cap carbon emissions by rich countries. Much rhetoric at Johannesburg was on how the USA had stabbed the Treaty in the back.

Now, I too dislike US unilateralism., but Kyoto is scarcely an important example of it. All serious environmentalists need to emphasise that global warming is a dubious issue, and Kyoto a dubious solution.

The Earth has been here for billions of years before humans set foot on it. And it will remain here billions of years after we have killed each other. So it is patently stupid to think that we are putting it in peril. Worst come worst, human over-exploitation of the planet will only hasten our own demise. That is a different matter altogether, but even these cases can be prevented if markets are allowed to function. To know how, read another of Swami’s columns. The last section of the article provides examples that together fall under what is called the tragedy of the commons. Unfortunately, for all the intelligence that humans are supposed to possess, we are simply not willing to consider the privatization of some natural resources.

When I started writing this post, I actually wanted to talk about things like alternative energy and nonsensical concepts like carbon footprints. But since the foundation itself has taken up a whole post, that topic will have to wait.

Advertisements
Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

Comments

  • merikilpikonna  On July 14, 2008 at 6:33 pm

    “So it is patently stupid to think that we are putting it in peril.”
    Have you thought about your grandgrandgrandgrandchildren who will feel the extinction process taking place? And have you thought about all the species we are taking down with us.
    Your view is ignorant, selfish and immature.

    Also it does not need global warming to welcome all its “solutions”:
    -being less dependent on oil e.g. means less conflict and less war.
    -eating local food increases local economy and reduces traffic jam
    -traffic jams create smog which harm humans and animals
    the list goes on and on…

  • aristotlethegeek  On July 14, 2008 at 11:17 pm

    Yes, whether you are pro or anti GW Theory, the alternative “solutions” are something that need to be considered. While pollution is one reason, there is a bigger reason as far as most western countries and India are concerned – geopolitics. These are some issues that I will be covering in part 2.

    Regarding my “ignorant, selfish and immature” views, I won’t contest the selfish part. As for the other adjectives, let readers make their own judgment. I am not holding my breath, though. When I talked about the “peril” part, what I was referring to is the theory that humans are killing the planet (species and all). Environments are never static, and humans are not the culprits every time. Forests regenerate over time, things change. If we over exploit resources, in whatever manner, we will play the price. Lets not have a God complex and assume that we make or break nature. As Ian Malcolm says in Jurassic Park (the book), “life will always find a way.”

    Sometimes, pointing people towards articles written by good writers is better than ruining the point by bad articulation, which is what I seem to be doing. So read Nature is the Cruellest Killer and Tsunami: The road to extinction, and maybe you will get my drift.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s