At least bring common sense to the table
The current naivety ISSUE
Published on March 14, 2007 By BoobzTwo In Republican
Common sense can take you a long way through life, if you will just stop being blinded by political issues. Unfortunately, it seems that common sense is headed the way of the Dodo Bird. I don’t think anyone is capable of convincing the political diehards of either party that there is even the POSSIBILITY of an error in their thinking, so I won’t even try as I am not known for my patience or tolerance particularly where abject stupidity is involved.
Personally, I refuse to allow myself to have MY OPINIONS dictated to me by someone else, especially disillusioned malcontents with extreme political bias, dubious agendas, very questionable ethics and of doubtful firsthand knowledge … sort of like Al Gore (Igor for short), for instance. We would be much better served if we would leave science to the scientists and keep it out of the political arena. Wouldn’t it be a good idea if we FORCED the politicians to actually take care of the country and We The People … sort of like they promised to do BEFORE they were elected.
I have heard the inappropriate term “scientific consensus” used in conjunction with GW too often. There are other consensuses one can have … but not a scientific one. This is almost always a political term. What … 30% in favor, 20% against and 50% no vote and you are willing to call that a scientific consensus … hogwash. What do you think this implies about the scientific community, you know, the community that has allowed us to become the freest, richest and most powerful country the world has ever seen, through their dedication and wisdom (things which politicians are mostly lacking in)? Well let’s see … we have 30% that are good and smart and always correct on one side of the argument (take your pick which side), 20% that are bad and stupid and never right on the other, with 50% somewhere in the middle, but they didn’t vote so they don’t count anyway (because they were INTELLIGENT enough to steer clear of all the political brouhaha). My oh my!
I was a nuclear engineer, not a climatologist, but here are a few things that fall into the COMMON SENSE category that you might want to think about (or not if you are one of the gloom and doom crowd)?
 As best I can determine, the polar caps HAVE NEVER EVER MELTED completely and Earth has experienced many cycles of GW and Ice Ages, none of which were inspired by human kind. Instead of jumping on the political bandwagon whenever it serves your purpose, why don’t you look into what really did inspire those extreme global climactic changes. The information is readily available but rarely sought after! Most are just too busy rocking and rolling on their bandwagons.
 More species of animal life have gone extinct due to extreme weather or living conditions than presently exist on the face of the Earth. The polar bear is only ‘endangered’ by the GW’ists and the environmental kooks. There is not a country in the world that agrees. I like the bears, but believe me, as cute and cuddly as they seem, you don’t want to be out on the ice with one, at least not without a bazooka anyway. Where is your sympathy for the millions upon millions of animals that have actually gone extinct (By the way, very few of them met their demise through the intervention of Man)?
 The deterioration of the polar ice caps on Mars proportionately coincides to that which is taking place on Earth and is NOT being caused by invisible HUMMERS or the OIL INDUSTRY polluting the neighborhood there.
 It seems to me that the North and South polar caps will somewhat neutralize the effects on water levels. But believe me; you have a lot more to worry about than rising water levels WHEN things progress that far (and it will happen no matter how we try to interfere with the natural process)! Little things like starvation (starting mostly in Northern Europe and Asia … go figure huh!) and the cessation of the world economy, just for starters. Also, it seems logical that a fair amount of the runoff of the water will end up on land due to natural evaporation/rain cycle.
 The pro GW gloom and doom crowd would have us believe that every down side effect will take the most disastrous form possible which is improbable to the point of being virtually impossible. Life as we know it is intermingled with good things and bad things, NEVER all good or all bad.
 We are completely incapable of predicting LOCAL weather conditions for next week … and you think we are competent to predict the imminent destruction of the Earth many years into the future all the while we are supposed to be tottering on the point of no return … I think not.
 The course of ‘Mother Nature’ is beyond our ability to control no matter how smart and capable you believe us to be. When we learn to control some of the more minor aspects of Nature (like lightning, earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, and volcanic eruptions, to mention just a few), we may be able to work out something actually constructive.
 Did you ever wonder why the liberal left and the conservative right are at loggerheads over this issue? Can you really be naïve enough to believe that this is anything other than politics as usual? The problem here is that in their push for a social system (to fit into the [under]developing social world), the liberal side has adopted a deceptive policy to mask their real agenda. They would have us give up most of what keeps us free and ahead of every other country. While the conservative side is just resisting their ploy because there in ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that the world is coming to an end due to the actions of mankind.
 It just doesn’t take a rocket scientist to read between the lines. All you need is a thirst for the truth and some very basic investigatory skills. That is unless it is in your intention is to mislead and misinform people for purely partisan political reasons.
In an upcoming article, I will go into the specific POLITICAL aspect of GW … who plans to benefit from the scare tactics and the reasons behind them … and of course it is we the people of the free world that will ultimately suffer irreparable damage to our culture and our free way of life if we close our minds and unwittingly allow it to transpire. If we don’t protect our hard won freedoms we will surely lose them.

Comments
on Mar 15, 2007
I have no idea what this blog is about because the formatting is so bad it makes my head hurt just looking at it. Please find the strength to break your thoughts into indented paragraphs with some space between.
on Mar 15, 2007
I had the same reaction. In a brief scan I picked up this...

I was a nuclear engineer, not a climatologist,


...
on Mar 15, 2007
A very spirited rant.
on Mar 15, 2007
I'm with you some of the way. A good article but disjointed. You could have planned your layout a lot better.

My biggest problem with global warming, the energy crisis and the degradation of the planet is that is OK for developed countries to become aware/take action as per "The Green Revolution" et al, but what are people going to do about Africa, India and other under-developed areas? Are the First World countries so naive as to think that going to "energy-saver" mode will solve the problems of the planet. Take Britain for example: We're alright mate, doing our bit! Don't they realise that the millions of smoke fires in Africa every day will invade their air too? This is a global problem and instead of the EU going hyper on energy saving light bulbs, they should be preaching to the Africans and their like. Just tell an Ethiopian man not to cook his chicken over an open fire then you'll realise what your up against.
on Mar 19, 2007
This is a global problem and instead of the EU going hyper on energy saving light bulbs, they should be preaching to the Africans and their like. Just tell an Ethiopian man not to cook his chicken over an open fire then you'll realise what your up against.


you contradict yourself.. you say that they should go to preach to africans, even if it's impossible?

they try to save energy because it's about the only thing they can do : stop energy use. They can't go into other countries and tell them to do things they don't have the ressources for..