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.
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
No comments:
Post a Comment