Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
This is an excellent article appearing today February 5, 2007 in the Canada Free Press, written by Timothy Ball.
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide
"Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. 'Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg.' For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why." Read on.
Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide
"Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. 'Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg.' For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why." Read on.
posted by HeavyHanded at
9:13 PM
1 Comments:
Declaring that global warming is not being caused by mankind flies directly in the face of the Liberal mindset. That mindset follows the same chronology as the scientific method of which Dr. Ball speaks and so may be presented as consistent with it. In fact, it is the exact opposite. Instead of developing a theory which is then tested by observable fact before accepting it as true, the Liberal mindset develops a theory which is acceptred as true because it is based on Liberal ideology and only those facts consistent with it are then acknowledged as observed.
As has often been remarked, Liberals have a very low opinion of mankind and place their trust in human institutions. People are individually incompetent or evil and the former need government to overcome the challenges in life presented by the latter. The goal is not the liberty to pursue opportunity equally but constraints on liberty to achieve equality of outcome.
In the matter of environmentalism, the Liberal mindset views mankind as the great despoiler of nature. One has only to look at their terminology. To Liberals, the only acceptable state of nature is ‘pristine’, i.e.
1. having its original purity; uncorrupted or unsullied.
2. of or pertaining to the earliest period or state; primitive.
Synonyms 1. undefiled, unpolluted, untouched.
From whose touch cometh the impurity, corruption, sullying, defilement and pollution? Why, from that of mankind of course. Liberal environmentalism, then, seeks to negate the touch of mankind upon nature.
Starting with mankind being the great despoiler of nature and acknoiwledging that mankind produces carbon dioxide which, in sufficient quanity in the atmosphere, can cause global warming, it is clear to Liberals that any observed global warming is the fault of mankind.
Liberals respond so harshly to any who do not accept their theory that global warming is being caused by mankind because, to them, it means that those others do not accept their premise that mankind is either incompetent or evil which premise comprises the entire justification for Liberalism itself.
Liberals seek to protect the environment from mankind where Conservatives would seek to protect the environment for mankind. The operative difference is that the Liberal view requires no consideration as to the cost to mankind while that cost is inherent in the Conservative view.
By
Anonymous, at 12:42 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home