BrookfieldNOW.com
search all things local
     
Blog Home |  Email Author  |  About this Blog       Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join

Practically Speaking

Kyle and her husband moved to Brookfield in 1986. She became active in local politics and started blogging in 2004. Her focus is primarily on local issues but often includes state and national topics, too. Kyle looks at things from the taxpayers’ perspective in a creative, yet down to earth way, addressing them from a practical point of view.

Fastest growing new religion gains one more convert

By Kyle Prast
Monday, Apr 14 2008, 07:52 PM

You may have thought this post was going to be about the rapidly spreading religion of Islam, but it is not.

This fastest growing religion I am referring to is the religion of Global Warming, and its most recent, prominent convert is the President of the United States.

I call Global Warming a religion, and rightly so, because in its present form, it is not science.

Religious beliefs require faith: faith in something not seen or provable.

Science is defined by Encarta as: "the system of advancing knowledge by formulating a question, collecting data about it through observation and experiment, and testing a hypothetical answer." "Science, limits itself to what can be observed, measured and verified." Scientists use the Scientific Method to "explain the events of nature in a reproducible way."  In other words, you test the theory and if it is repeatable, then the theory moves ahead to be considered true science.

Over 19,000 American scientists have signed a petition rejecting the idea that man made greenhouse gases cause Global Warming, but we don't hear much about that! The website ICECAP does an excellent job of presenting a different view of Global Warming.

At best, when scientists first observed a warming trend, Global Warming could have been called a theory. But in recent years, people have bypassed the theory adjective and jumped toward embracing Global Warming as an undebatable fact. This transition from theory to fact was done without any scientific proof. Those who promote Global Warming no longer even refer to it as a theory.

As more and more data is collected, most of the Global Warming alarmist predictions are not proving to point to the doom and gloom that the planet is warming. In fact, temperatures this past year point to something else: a cooling of the planet.  

It seems however, that no matter how much counter Global Warming evidence is presented, the faithful and most politicians are still blindly chanting the mantra that the planet is doomed to heat up unless we do something to control CO2 emissions soon. 

According to an article in the Washington Post today, our President is now chanting the mantra too--Bush prepares global warming initiative: (Emphasis added)

"This is an attempt to move the administration and the party closer to the center on global warming. With these steps, it is hoped that the debate over this is over, and it is time to do something," said an administration source close to the White House who is familiar with the planning and who said to expect an announcement this week...

...Still, Republican members of Congress who were briefed last week let top administration officials know that they think the White House if making a mistake, according to congressional sources and others familiar wit the discussions. Opponents said Mr. Bush could be setting off runaway legislation, particularly with Democrats in control of Congress.

One of the things we are doing at present is jumping on the ethanol bandwagon to reduce our carbon footprint. In fact reducing the carbon footprint is one of the cornerstones of this new religion.

Like another religion in bygone years, this Global Warming religion also provides the opportunity to purchase Indulgences to atone for breaking the rules. In our new Global Warming religion, we call these Indulgences, Carbon Credits. 

All 3 of our Presidential candidates favor the practice of using Indulgences for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Of course, they do not call them as such, they call them, "a cap-and-trade system, such as the Europeans have. The system sets an overall limit on carbon emissions and allows polluters to buy credits from companies that stay below their carbon targets."

"..Congressional and administration sources said it's not clear whether Mr. Bush will go that far this week." So we don't know how deep President Bush's conversion is.

Brian Kennedy, spokesman for the Institute for Energy Research stated the US is already ahead of Europe:

"US taxpayers are already spending more than $40 billion a year to address climate change, and to date we're achieving better results than the Europeans... ...That should be kept in mind before any rash--or political--decisions are made inside the White House. Excessive regulations would come with significant economic consequences and additional costs for consumers." 

Considering fuel and food prices are already through the roof, our economy does not need the further encumbrance of mandates and extra fees.

Thankfully, not all politicians are being indoctrinated into the new religion, but because there is so much political pressure to jump on the bandwagon (become a believer), resisting is difficult. Our Congressman James Sensenbrenner and Illinois Congressman John Shimkus "told the White House it was making a mistake" to call for congressional action on this.

You may wish to drop Congressman Sensenbrenner an email or give him a phone call, (262) 784-1111, to encourage him in his fight against global warming initiatives. Or, tell Congressman Sensenbrenner in person. He will be hosting a Town Hall meeting on Sunday, April 27th at 1pm at the Brookfield Safety Building.

Links to counter Global Warming articles. There is still very much room for debate:

ICECAP A great source for alternative views  

2008 Climate Debate: "Over the past few years, more than 19,000 American scientists have signed a dissenting petition coauthored by Dr. Frederick Seitz, renowned physicist and former president of the National Academy of Sciences, and Dr. Arthur Robinson, president of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (www.oism.org/pproject)". The petition urges political leaders to "reject the Gore-supported Kyoto Protocol or other similar proposals that would mandate draconian tax and regulatory measures aimed at virtually all human economic activity"...

..."As the NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel of Climate Change) report, Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate, points out, the hard data from satellites and weather balloons shows the exact opposite of the predictions of the IPCC and the climate alarmist choir: a slight cooling with altitude in the troposphere and slight warming on the surface."

Hurricane expert reconsiders global warming's impact 

Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming 'Greatest Scam in History' 

Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

NOAA: Coolest Winter Since 2001 for US, Globe 

Recent cold snap helping Arctic sea ice, scientists find

Surprise! There's an active volcano under Antarctic ice 


Links:

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield
Vicki Mckenna

 

Comments

contrarian   

Nonsense.

Rarely has there been a scientist more completely discredited than Frederick Seitz.  He spend much of his career managing tobacco interest research money trying to prove the safety of tobacco at a a time when the tobacco industry knew itself that smoking kills.  He is indirectly responsible for the death of millions of smokers.

Want to be a scientist?  You too can go to his website and print a document, sign it, and self-report your scientific affiliation.  Do you really think there are 19000 scientists who have enough knowledge to present a viable opinion?  This weak argument should not cast doubt on the large body of peer-reviewed, credible research on global warming.  If Frederick Seitz is the best argument against global warming, then there is no argument at all.

There is some middle ground here--Seitz was an advocate of nuclear power, and even the green community is giving that source a second look.  You are also correct that Ethanol is a agri-corporate boondoogle.  

Finally, if you still aren't sure about global warming, you must surely recognize that the war on terror is in part a war over oil.  We fund both sides of this war with our dollars.  If we were energy independent, we could stop pretending, as the Bush administration and family does, that the Saudis are our friends.  Energy imports are a huge driver of our imbalance in trade.

Make no mistake, the oil companies have their best interests at heart, not ours. Choose to save the planet, or choose to save our economy, or choose to save our soldiers.  In any case, we must choose to use less energy.

Kyle's reply:

Check out the ICECAP if you are still thinking there is no room for debate. 

There is no doubt that protecting US interests in middle east oil is a top priority. I would love to be energy independent; I just define it differently. My idea of energy independence is not plowing up farm land to produce ethanol producing crops, which cause food prices to rise, but rather to drill for oil in our own energy rich country. Producing our own oil while researching cleaner and more efficient ways to utilize that fuel makes the most sense to me.  

 

April 15, 2008 7:48 AM

Santa's Elf   

Here's a short blurb on what may be the best readily available alternate fuel technology using vertical 'algae farms'. It is estimated [elsewhere] that this technology could replace oil in supplying the nation's energy needs using a non-farmable area equivalent to ten percent of Arizona. The 'burnable fuel' here is hydrogen!

         e85.whipnet.net/.../algae.html

We will have a lot more peace in this world as soon as we reduce our  interest in the middle east to that of obtaining a supply of sand for the kiddies sand boxes!

Kyle's reply: Yes, I saw the algae oil too. It looks very interesting. Best part about it is that we aren't using farm land and food sources to produce it!
 

April 15, 2008 12:24 PM

My Two Cents   

Ok, so we shouldn't believe Fredrick Seitz, but we should believe Al Gore?  Where were the masses of people responsible for the melting glaciers?  The earth has a natural cycle of warming and cooling.  Wouldn't it be nice if man was so powerful to control the earth?  Then we could stop hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis and global warming.  Let's just agree to be good stewards of our resources.  Now the starving masses are rioting because we are turning corn into fuel, not food.  That makes a lot of sense. It's the same people who don't want us to drill for oil in our own country, want to turn food crops into fuel, and blame the U.S. for fluctuations in climate.


April 15, 2008 8:24 PM

Jeff B   

Energy independence starts with drilling at home. There is PLENTY of domestic untapped oil under our soil. If anything we need to let our representatives know that we support drilling in ANWR or anywhere else there are pockets of oil in the US that its economically reasonable to exhume. On a side note i would even support the govt. selling a portion of its strategic reserves. The vast majority of it was purchase at pre silly prices and the govt. could make a pretty penny on it to be used for other endeavors.

Kyle's reply: Amen to drilling our own! 

April 16, 2008 10:21 AM

Practically Speaking   

Congressman Sensenbrenner brought up Senate bill S. 2191, the Lieberman/Warner "America's Climate

April 28, 2008 10:02 PM

Leave a Comment

Please Sign In to post comment.

Posts

Tags

How the other half lives

Search the Blogs