Climate Change Catastrophe Gore is right. Climate change catastrophe is imminent!
I've been a long-time skeptic of global warming/climate change alarmism. I've written many times about the folly of the IPCC/Gore claim that human emissions of CO2 will bring about "catastrophic" change for human society. Well, I now freely admit I was wrong - but not for the reasons most often cited by alarmists.
I've been having an interesting exchange on a CO2 alarmists' blog about the dangers human emissions of CO2 pose for future climate. While the exchange has generally been cordial and it has certainly been interesting while providing great insight into the rationale most alarmists subscribe to, I have yet to find the proverbial "smoking gun" that actually makes their case.
Nevertheless, I do have to agree with them about one thing. The danger and cost to human society from climate change will be catastrophic and, in this political climate, is unavoidable.
But ironically, while the catastrophe to which I refer is unquestionably human-caused, it really is completely avoidable. Therein lies the rub.
The danger is not from a catastrophe arising from soaring temperatures and human misery that alarmists claim will follow (a highly debatable proposition). The catastrophe that seems unstoppable is the human misery that will unquestionably arise from the massive costs of soaring imprudent government regulation of CO2 emissions in the form of Gore-enriching "cap and trade" schemes that will, in the end, provide no discernable impact on global climate.
Indeed, it would be quite proper to term our Imperial Congress's pursuit of CO2 emission schemes nothing short of "insane." Congressional insanity is nothing new, but its costs this time will be catastrophic to the economy and well-being of every citizen of the US. No matter. They've all imbibed the "Cool-Aid" of human-caused "global warming" in Washington (despite the recent global cooling climate trend). Even the normally rational Newt Gingrich has flipped out over global warming. Evidently, the slick multi-million dollar campaign of the alarmists, added to the pervasive media bias, has made this propaganda campaign the greatest success since Nazi Germany's use of the tool in the 1930s. We can all rest assured that the cost to humans of this propaganda campaign will be equally devastating as was the cost to deal with Nazi Germany. The difference today is that too many people either do not understand the truth, or if they do, they do not seem to have the will to put up a fight.
A further irony is that in the coming November elections, the once last bastion of a voice of sanity in Washington, the Republican Party, will be led by a scientiically-challenged John McCain whose views of global warming and CO2 emissions are as childish as the prattle that Al Gore puts forth. Sadly, McCain knows that his friends in the national media outlets would crucify him (as if they won't anyway) if he adopted anything less than the idiocy that has emerged as his "climate change" policy.
It is likely that the American voter, bombarded with this massive media blitz of disinformation about climate change, will elect solidly Democrat (Socialist) majorities in both houses of our Imperial Congress. Regardless of whether McCain can survive this tidal wave of voter ignorance, the new socialist Democrat majority will ram through whatever legislation they want with veto-proof majorities. Consequently, even in "victory", the Republican Party will find it pyrrhic. Whether or not McCain endorses the Democrat plan or Democrats endorse the McCain plan or, in the unlikely event McCain vetoes the Democrat plan (it will be overridden), McCain's (and the Republican Party's) legacy will be that it was the GOP who was in the White House when the US committed economic suicide. Because that is exactly what these trillion-dollar schemes for reducing CO2 emissions amount to. It is small consolation to those few voices of reason that these massive costs and the enormous human suffering they will bring about will produce no discernible impact on climate.
A further irony of the pending economic catastrophe that will be brought about by climate change legislation is that there is a strong likelihood that the next 20-30 years could see dramatic cooling brought about by climate forces that, up until now, the IPCC/Gore alarmists have claimed were not major climate change forces. The reason why the IPCC has been blind-sided by this act of nature (global cooling) is simple. They simply do not understand enough about climate science and climate change forces to come to any rational conclusions. But that has not stopped them from issuing dire warnings based on irresponsible use of inadequate computer simulations based on incomplete data for climate models that do not reflect a sufficient understanding of climate science!
This UN effort (the IPCC is a creation of the UN) appears to be the most successful effort ever launched at destroying the US economic system (capitalism) that is routinely taught as the cause of all evil, even in the US university system. You have to give the Left credit for their tenacity. They make up with perseverance what they lack in common sense.
Now, if you doubt my forecast of the economic catastrophe that is about to clobber us all, look to other countries whose policies have been driven by the same alarmism that currently motivates the US Imperial Congress to action. Here is a sample of headlines (and links to the articles where available) about the realization of what is about to befall that arises from allowing climate change alarmism to go forward unchecked:
From Benny Peiser's (UK) CCNet newsletter (CCNet is a scholarly electronic network edited by Benny Peiser. To subscribe, send an e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org Subject & body: "subscribe cambridge-conference".):
"The British economy faces the real risk of falling into recession, the Governor of the Bank of England has admitted. Mervyn King warned families to brace themselves for a further "squeeze" on household finances as rising energy bills and food prices continue to rise. Mr King said that inflation was set to increase sharply to about 3.7 per cent - almost double the official target. As a result most British people will feel poorer this year as pay rises fail to keep pace with rising costs." -- Robert Winnett, The Daily Telegraph, 15 May 2008, POOR BRITANNIA: GREEN FOLLIES COMING HOME TO ROOST
"Consumers face a 5% rise in electricity bills by the end of the decade to help meet government targets on renewable energy, an official report says. The National Audit Office (NAO) report says that renewable energy is a relatively expensive way for Britain to cut emissions of greenhouse gases. The government hopes to generate 10% of the country's energy by renewable sources within five years." --CCNet, 11 February 2005
"A conservative estimate of the cost of meeting the Kyoto target is £150 billion. Britain's bills will be disproportionately high, since Mr Blair has decreed that Britain shall exceed the target by cutting carbon emissions by 20 per cent by 2010 and 60 per cent by 2050. Kyoto will not "save the planet". Even if the US signed up and Kyoto were implemented in full by the 39 industrialised countries on which the burden has been laid, the Earth would barely notice the difference. But what it will undoubtedly do is take a chunk off the GDPs of industrialised nations." --Rosemary Righter, The Times, 15 February 2005
"New research published today by the International Council for Capital Formation (ICCF) reveals the broad and significant economic repercussions of adopting Kyoto for the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain - and specifically its impact for each nation on energy prices, economic growth and jobs. The research revealed that if the four countries meet their Kyoto emission reduction targets in 2010 they face an average increase in electricity prices of 26% and an average increase of 41% of natural gas prices by 2010. The ICCF research concludes that these consequences would severely damage economic growth and adversely affect standards of living across Europe." --CCNet, 7 November 2005
"Whether we like it or not, the flow of oil, food and raw materials will shift increasingly towards China and India, rather than towards America and Europe. Life will become more expensive and more difficult for Europeans and Americans. As capital moves east, so will the jobs that service capital; the process is already under way in the expanding financial centres in the Gulf. The relocation of service jobs has begun and it will probably accelerate as banks and financial institutions, battered by the recent credit crisis, look for new opportunities and cheaper ways of doing business." --Carl Mortished, The Times, 14 May 2008
"Here in the department of the painfully obvious we're pleased to announce that polls suggest people are strongly in favour of paying carbon taxes, until they actually have to pay them. Then ... not so much." --Lorrie Goldstein, Edmonton Sun, 14 May 2008
Are Americans really willing to sacrifice their standard of living to support massive spending for dubious ends? If so, then perhaps we have a new definition for insanity.
Recently I've begun referring to Congress as the "Imperial Congress". I do so because the US Congress has, over the past hundred years, abandoned any notion of constitutional restraint. Congress passes laws based on one, and only one, yardstick. How likely is the legislation going to help their re-election chances? They have no other measure of how to cast a vote. Partisan bickering and petty silliness are all too common among such politicians. Given their complete ignorance and total rejection of constitutional restraint (i.e., taking action that is specifically authorized under the supreme law of the US, our Constitution) in favor of self-serving empire building, it is clear that these little potentates are more interested in serving their own empires than the interests of the nation as a whole. Consequently, the term "Imperial Congress."
Biography - Bob Webster
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.