A Double Blow to Global Warming Alarmism
NASA models show that the amount of heat being let out of earth’s atmosphere is far greater than what alarmist climate scientists have been predicting. This means carbon-dioxide is having far less of an impact on our planet than we thought. Additionally, the biologist who wrenched the collective heart of humanity with his reports on polar bears drowning due to a melting ice shelf has had his scientific credentials stripped and is under investigation for scientific misconduct. No doubt, this dual blow must be hard for global warming alarmists to swallow.
It has been entertaining if not chilling to watch people associate seemingly erratic weather with global warming fears. It’s a bit like giving someone a rabbit’s foot and telling them it’s lucky. Every time something good happens to them they will instinctively attribute it to the rabbit’s foot. Unfortunately, a large group of people are preying upon this human trait.
Some of them have constructed entire schemes to get rich off of the hysteria. Al Gore managed to establish a carbon-offset trading company in between his various paid speaking arrangements. Perhaps he came up with the idea while flying to an environmental conference on his private jet? Many other businesspeople have large stakes in alternative energy companies or hope stronger regulations will push out their smaller competitors.
Others don’t stand to make millions, but their careers rely on people being scared of climate change. Let’s face it: without global warming, climate science is not terribly exciting. The only way for climatologists to ensure hundreds of millions of dollars in government grants is to scare the populace until they demand the government fund research to combat this threat. No scientist would dare come up with anything but alarmist results. The scientist who says, “Everything is pretty good actually,” is not going to get any grants and will be shunned by his peers for threatening their livelihoods.
Next come the politicians. They pay the scientists large grants to come up with alarmist results in order to justify the carbon tax or cap and trade. Generally, politicians just want to get their hands on more of your money with which they can buy more votes. Additionally, a global crisis paves the way for global regulation of carbon. Since businesses produce so much carbon, this primarily means global regulation of business. It also gives Western governments an excuse to condemn the growth of new competitors like India and China.
It’s not a conspiracy theory… okay it kind of is. But it isn’t that outlandish. Certain global warming promoters have bet a lot of money on cap and trade and alternative energy, climatologists want to increase their research grants (and their paychecks), and opportunistic politicians see a way to increase their power.
This Business-Climatologist Complex will be difficult to unravel. Many people have staked their livelihoods on continued fear over global warming. As Upton Sinclair said:
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.”
The sad thing is that real environmental threats get pushed off to the side when so much attention is focused upon global warming. In an attempt to protect and improve their livelihoods, the members of the Business-Climatologist Complex have forgotten their original mission: protecting nature and human health
There are pollutants which harm the earth and harm people. Milton Friedman, the greatest 20th Century proponent of the free-market, proposed taxing these toxins in order to encourage businesses to innovate away from them. Every tax we add will hurt the economy. If we don’t have a carbon tax, we will be able to afford discouraging companies from producing toxins that are empirically shown to be harmful. While this idea may make conservatives flinch, we must remember that one of the primary roles of government is to prevent people from harming one another, specifically without the victim’s consent. A tax is much better than a mandate, regulation, or subsidy as it incentivizes ingenuity while minimizing the risk of politicization (subsidies going to politicians’ friends, regulations designed to protect monopolies of certain companies, etc.).
Panic is often harmful, but rarely because the supposed doom actually comes true. More often than not, it is the response to a panic that causes the harm. Orson Welles’ radio broadcast of The War of the Worlds caused mass panic. There was no “alien invasion,” but several people were killed and property damaged as Americans tried to escape it. We can only hope America escapes from the theater before it’s too late.
