By Alan Caruba
When
President Obama announced on March 31 that he intends to ensure that the U.S.
will slash its “greenhouse gas emissions” 26% below 2005 emissions levels by
2025 in order to keep pledges made to fulfill the U.N. Framework Convention on
Climate Change, he failed to mention that such levels would be comparable to
what they were in our Civil War era, 150 years ago.
He also
failed to mention that the U.S. has made no such pledges as regards the 1992
“Kyoto Treaty” which was resoundingly rejected by the U.S. Senate when then
Vice President Al Gore brought it back from the U.N. conference.
There is
no need, globally or nationally, to reduce such emissions. It would be a crime
against humanity, especially for the millions that would be denied electrical
power or would see its cost rise exponentially. “The President has no credible
evidence to back up his claims,” said H. Sterling Burnett, a Research Fellow
with the free market think tank, The Heartland Institute. “Obama’s climate
actions are likely to cause far more harm to people, especially the poor, than
any purported threats from global warming.”
“Global
warming” and “climate change” are attributed to the use of fossil fuels to manufacture
and transport ourselves and our goods, and to create electrical energy, despite
the fact that the Earth, its oceans and land areas naturally generate such gases.
There are,
for example, more than 1500 potentially active volcanoes and countless others
under the oceans. They produce billions of tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) and
other gases that are identified as “greenhouse gas emissions.” The human
contribution pales in comparison to natural sources such as the warming ocean
surface which releases CO2.
Even so, CO2
constitutes a mere 0.04% of the atmosphere. There is no evidence CO2 plays any
role in the Earth’s global temperature.
Do these
“greenhouse gas emissions” trap heat? Apparently not because the Earth has been
in a natural cooling cycle for the past eighteen years breaking and making
records for snow and ice. In the 1970s scientists were predicting a new Ice
Age. Ten years later they were predicting “global warming.”
Why then
is the President intent on slashing “greenhouse gas emissions” when (1) the
Earth is not a greenhouse and (2) doing so would harm our economy for decades
to come?
The answer
lies in his promise to “fundamentally transform” a nation that does not need
transformation except for the reduction of the size and scope of the federal
government. Its economic system is the best in the world. Its military is the
strongest. Its agriculture feeds Americans and is exported to other nations.
As David
Rothbard, the president and co-founder of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow
(CFACT), a free market think tank, noted in the wake of Obama’s announcement, “The
President will have to bypass the law-making process and use executive orders
and regulations” to achieve his goal of slashing emissions. “To do so requires
tortured readings of the Clean Air Act and other current laws.”
Significantly,
“the President offers no suitable replacement for the lost generating capacity
beyond pointing toward wind and solar which is not up to the task.” When Obama
took office, coal-fired plants provided 50% of U.S. electricity. It is now down
to 40% and headed lower if Obama has his way.
Rothbard
warns that “Global warming campaigners see this presidency and the Paris U.N.
Summit as the best chance they are likely to see to take control of American
energy. The ramifications are disastrous for American freedom and prosperity.”
This brings
us to the what John L. Casey, founder of the Space and Science Research Corporation, (SSRC), an independent scientific research
organization in Orlando, says about the forthcoming November 30 to December 15 U.N.
climate conference in Paris which he describes as “doomed” and that’s the good
news.
Its announced goal of imposing global limits on greenhouse gas emissions
will not be mandatory and “President Obama has effectively gutted any
meaningful agreement among the major industrialized nations, by having granted
to the planet’s largest CO2 producer, China, free license to build as many
coal power plants as they wish, and emit as many gigatons of greenhouse gases
as they wish until 2030.”
This
is, in fact, a global trend as many developing nations such as India do the
same thing. Nor will they suddenly shut down electricity production fifteen
years from now.
This
huge, international farce formerly known as the U.N. Framework Convention on
Climate Change, began as an international treaty created in 1992. The U.S.
Senate refused to ratify the Kyoto Treaty, but pledges to reduce greenhouse
gases were made by 33 out of 195 countries, called their “Intended National
Determined Contribution” are the main feature at the forthcoming Paris conference.
For
all the media attention the President will try to generate for this idiocy, Ken
Haapala, president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, says “It is
unlikely that the current Senate would approve a binding agreement.” Haapala notes that lawmakers that include the
Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK)m and
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), “have all insisted that the international agreement
the U.N. is working on is a treaty and cannot be enforced without Senate
approval.”
Sen.
McConnell warned, “Considering that two-thirds of the U.S. Federal government
hasn’t even signed off on the Clean Power Plan and 13 states have already
pledged to fight it, our international partners should proceed with caution
before entering into a binding, unattainable deal.”
While most Americans have concluded that “global warming” or “climate change” are low on their list of fears President Obama has elevated this hoax to the top of his agenda for his last two years in office, along with the deal that would give Iran the opportunity to build a nuclear arsenal of weapons.
He
doesn’t want to “transform” America. He wants to destroy it.
©
Alan Caruba, 2015
4 comments:
We're going to have some global warming today and tomorrow, it's called SPRING in Texas, accompanied by SPRING storms, with hail and high winds, a chance of a few isolated tornados...
SPRING in Texas, same as it's been for centuries...
ALWAYS insist on actual empirical evidence linking carbon dioxide to climate change - there is NONE.
Most scientists do not understand that simple concept, because they continue to refer to greenhouse gases, greenhouse effect, climate forcing and heat trapping.
NONE of those concepts exist in reality and have never ever been witnessed in the context of atmospheric carbon dioxide and specifically at the hands of the alleged 2-3% that human activities have added.
The entire global warming-climate change panic is UN driven via their Agenda 21 and has nothing at all to do with our emissions, that was just a convenient coincidence that was promoted to set a gravy-train of funding in motion that is now as good as impossible to stop.
I love my carbon dioxide and so should you - in every breath you exhale is 40,000ppmv of that life-giving gas.
Your article is absolutely true. Liberals have grabbed onto any fantasy that will advance their policies. Look at Greenpeace. It saved the whales, now it's attacking oil rigs! Obama has been trying to use climate change to institute huge carbon taxes, reduce the US economy, and make us more equal to the rest of the world!
Obama keeps on making these awkward moves towards more government control of everything, more expense for everything, and transforming the nation in various illegal, possibly treasonous ways. The Senate continues to refuse to contemplate impeachment. Why? What will it take for us to rid ourselves of this disastrous chief executive?
Post a Comment