Unsettling Science, Part 2
Two weeks ago we discussed the recently revealed emails from the Climate Research Unit in East Anglia – one of the premiere climatology research centers in the world. The alarming content of these emails has eroded the credibility of theories that suggest global warming is man-made, and the climate research industry has yet to offer a satisfying explanation.
This taciturn posture is self-defeating. The deafening silence of the researchers in question will cool public opinion on global warming, leading to a decrease in federal funding for future climate research.
If the issue is so pressing, one thinks they would be eager to clear the air. Instead, the Copenhagen crowd ignores the public calls for elucidation, and pretends that the CRU emails are merely a hiccup – an annoyance best ignored and soon to be forgotten. This is a grave mistake.
In 2001, a Gallop poll showed that 66% of Americans thought theories of man-made global warming were accurate or under-estimated, while 30% thought they were exaggerated. As of March of this year, the numbers have shifted to 57% for, 41% against.
Clearly, even before the CRU exposé, the credulity of the American people began to wane. This is understandable. For thirty years we have endured daily warnings that the ozone is being depleted, fossil fuels are poison, and we have only moments left before we turn the corner toward Armageddon. Americans are tiring of the game.
In a bit of slight of hand most people missed, the EPA ruled earlier this month that carbon dioxide is “endangering people’s health and must be regulated”. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson assured us that “The science has been thoroughly evaluated.”
Thoroughly? Then why the sudden onset of lockjaw in the climate research community? More importantly, how can we accept the claim that the by-product of human exhalation is a dangerous pollutant when the scientific foundations supporting it have been thrown into question?
It is widely agreed that regulating carbon output, the obvious goal of this maneuvering, would cost every American family thousands of dollars annually. Early last year, in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, then-Senator Obama stated candidly: “Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” The only question is whether or not such costs are warranted.
While most Americans simply do not have the time or inclination to comprehend all of the science behind global warming, we do know that there is wide disagreement across the industry, and there are credible voices on both sides. Until the debate is resolved, any efforts to regulate carbon emissions are premature.
Which begs the question – why the rush? If theories of global warming are still unconfirmed, why are there so many researchers, senators, and schoolteachers who embrace it as gospel?
In short, it fits. The belief that mankind (especially the West) faces demise from its own hand, that the oceans boil and mountains crumble due to our misdeeds, and that the only solution is to hand over the reigns of private industry to the federal government dovetails perfectly with the leftist agenda of centralization.
In a stroke, the Left can blame first-world imperialism, corporate greed, and Western decadence for the impending destruction of the entire planet. This narrative is too compelling, and the opportunity too great, to be unseated by mere facts.
During times of plenty, Americans generously lend Congress enough leash to amuse themselves with the disaster du jour. Now, as our nation faces double digit unemployment, mounting taxes, and a weakening dollar, our primary concern should not be the well being of polar bears or a .03 degree increase in mean temperatures over the next century. It should be paying our mortgages.
Adding layers of regulation to the private sector during the worst depression since Black Friday, based on scientific theories that are still being scrutinized, may be the greatest potential calamity since the reunification of Germany.
In the end, ignorance is our enemy. Ignorance breeds fear, and a fearful population will invest much treasure in building a fortress against the unknown. Conversely, the more we understand the limits of the global warming threat, and judge the merits of both sides of the argument, the more sensible will be our decisions, and the proxies we charge with their management.
Loosely translated: throw the bums out.
I issued a warning to the climate research industry in my previous column: ignoring sensible requests from the American people for an explanation of the CRU emails endangers future federal funding for climate research.
I now put forward a similar warning to our representatives in Congress: forcing through legislation founded on these unproven theories will be detrimental to your continued career as an elected official.