The annual baloney festival, a.k.a., "Earth Day," will be observed April 22. Once more the pseudo-science of anthropogenic global warming "consensus" will be touted much as the annual gathering of the "Flat Earth Society" will celebrate their view that the Earth is really ... flat.
I doubt that most people have any idea how vast the effort is to convince people around the world that the Earth is in peril due to industrialization and the human population in general. The amazing thing is how bogus the claims are, but when repeated endlessly, they become a “truth” simply from repetition.
For years, the Left has been carefully nurturing the notion that anthropogenic global warming (global climate warming due to activities of humans, e.g., fossil fuel burning, converting forests to farmland, etc.) threatens the very existence of life on Earth. They have fittingly chosen April 22, the birthdate of Lenin, father of Communism, to celebrate their fictional view of reality.
Like lemmings marching relentlessly to the sea, duped journalists, teachers, and politicians dutifully do the work of those whose real objective is to do as much harm as possible to the capitalist United States. Consequently, part of every celebration of "Earth Day" includes the obligatory capitalist-bashing of die-hard communists posing as "environmentalists."
Caruba also accurately observes:
The Network still claims—falsely—that, “scientists around the world have come to a near consensus on the climate change problem facing our planet. Weather patterns and temperatures are shifting, animals on land and in our oceans are dying, and food and water supplies are threatened.”
Just as "Flat Earth Society" members fear falling off the edge of the Earth, proponents of the theory of significant anthropogenic global warming wring their collective hands while trembling in fear of devastating consequences to life as we know it ... all because humanity, thanks to capitalism, has used its ingenuity to improve the quality and quantity of human life on Earth.
By endlessly parroting the claim that "scientists" have a "consensus" that human-induced climate change is real and significant, these "Earth Day" champions of anthropogenic global warming continue to perpetuate a false picture in various news media, classrooms, and legislative bodies. What these claims fail to disclose is that the "scientists" to which they refer are generally NOT either climatologists or meteorologists. Consequently, the reference to "scientists" carries little weight of validity to any conclusion about climate change that might be drawn from any such "consensus." It is akin to attempting to legitimize a claim that a cancer cure has been found based on a "consensus" of opinion of all doctors. In truth, only a relatively small subset of doctors (oncologists) actually have significant professional involvement with cancer. The only consensus that might be worthy of consideration would be that of those whose active professional careers specialize in the treatment of cancer. Even then, consensus doesn't convey legitimacy ... it's still just an opinion.
The "consensus" among career climatologists and meteorologists does not exist that would support the global warming hysteria of "Earth Day" advocates and their dutiful dupes in the media (notably Time magazine, whose annual issue dealing with "global warming" parades the most ludicrous of claims as though they were settled science), professors and teachers in classrooms, and federal and state legislators.
Here are just a few of the facts conveniently ignored by the anthropogenic global warming crowd:
Climate is always changing. It's either warming or cooling. So "global warming" and "global cooling" cycles are perfectly natural and have occured countless times over the millenia.
Solar radiation is not the constant we all thought it was. It has been only recently that scientists who specialize in solar studies have come to realize that our sun is more variable than we had realized. We have seen a variation in solar radiation that has coincided with recent warming.
Humans have never known Earth's typical climate. The entirety of known human existence has been deeply embedded in what can reasonably be expected to be the final stages of a global ice era that began 60 million years ago. Not even climatologists understand what causes ice eras to begin or end, yet there are seven well-documented ice eras in Earth's climate history. Earth's typical climate when the planet is not locked in an ice era features no persistent ice cover, even at the poles, except on the highest mountain peaks.
Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant as so widely claimed by the "Chicken Little" crowd celebrating "Earth Day" with claims of draconian warming that will destroy the planet. In fact, carbon dioxide is an essential nutrient for all plant life on Earth. Too much carbon dioxide would be bad. But too much oxygen would also be bad. Remember the sage advice ... "moderation in everything."
The vast majority of annual production of carbon dioxide is from natural forces outside the control of humans. The Earth has natural processes for absorbing carbon dioxide (plant growth, for one). The natural balance of carbon dioxide production and absorption has cycled naturally long before humans had a glimmer of something called the "Industrial Revolution" and its fossil-fueled engines. Natural carbion dioxide levels have been known to get far out of balance due to forces over which humans have no control. Yet even in those instances, balance always returned to typical levels. The amount of carbon dioxide produced by human industry is relatively small compared to that produced by natural processes.
Climate change involves far more complex processes than merely changing the relative amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
The "greenhouse effect" is far more complex than simply claiming the Earth will warm if carbon dioxide levels increase.
An intelligent position of global climate change and it's influences and causes cannot be advanced until solar scientists, climatologists and meteorologists better understand, for starters: the complex science of climate change, atmospheric balance and what causes change, the influence of solar radiation change on the greenhouse effect, and what causes ice eras to begin and end.
Until the science is better understood by those whose specialty concentrates on atmospheric and solar sciences, any conclusions are likely to be based on either unfounded fear, political posturing, or a desire to benefit from significant increases in financial grants for more research.
Meanwhile, the annual observance of Lenin's birthday in the form of "Earth Day" will remain just so much baloney.
Author of "Looking Out the Window", an evidence-based examination of the "climate change" issue, Bob Webster, is a 12th-generation descendent of both the Darte family (Connecticut, 1630s) and the Webster family (Massachusetts, 1630s). He is a descendant of Daniel Webster's father, Revolutionary War patriot Ebenezer Webster, who served with General Washington. Bob has always had a strong interest in early American history, our Constitution, U.S. politics, and law. Politically he is a constitutional republican with objectivist and libertarian roots. He has faith in the ultimate triumph of truth and reason over deception and emotion. He is a strong believer in our Constitution as written and views the abandonment of constitutional restraint by the regressive Progressive movement as a great danger to our Republic. His favorite novel is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and believes it should be required reading for all high school students so they can appreciate the cost of tolerating the growth of unconstitutional crushingly powerful central government. He strongly believes, as our Constitution enshrines, that the interests of the individual should be held superior to the interests of the state.
A lifelong interest in meteorology and climatology spurred his strong interest in science. Bob earned his degree in Mathematics at Virginia Tech, graduating in 1964.