by: Takia Hollowell (Originally posted at www.kiradavis.net)
It is often argued that Conservatives and Libertarians do not believe in science since we overwhelmingly reject the theory of Global Warming. Progressives and Democrats have labeled the right as “Deniers” and have even extended the vitriolic rhetoric by equating them with Holocaust Deniers as well. Of course this does nothing but make Conservatives out to be the bogeyman and obfuscate the fact that man-made Global Warming is one big tyrannical redistribution hoax.
According to Al Gore and friends, the level of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere causes a trapping of the suns’ heat; thus warming up the planet (i.e. Greenhouse effect). The Natural Resources Defense Council reports that coal burning plants are the number one contributor to the problem as they produce 2.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The second biggest contributor would be automobiles as they are heavily reliant on fossil fuels (i.e. gasoline) which release 1.5 billions of CO2 per year. If Global Warming is true, human behavior must be curtailed to save the planet from eventually burning to a crisp. So the solution is simple, right?
Since voluntary efforts to reduce CO2 have been subpar according to environmentalists, law must be enacted to save our planet. From the Lieberman-Warner bill to the Markey-Waxman bill (Cap and Trade), politicians have made attempts to pass legislation that would reduce the amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. With coal burning plants being the biggest “problem”; coal itself is quite naturally the enemy. Steven Chu, Obama’s Energy Secretary, has gone on record stating that, “Coal is my worst nightmare.” Should it be any surprise to anyone that this very line of thinking has motivated President Obama to cap carbon emissions as well? “Under my plan of a Cap and Trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even…regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I’m capping greenhouse gases.” (President Barack Obama)
The second “enemy” is also under attack – fossil fuel burning automobiles. We will see how radical environmentalists WANT gasoline prices to rise so that consumers would be forced to use alternative modes of transportation? In this video, an Obama supporter said, “I’m kinda happy that gas prices are going up in one sense. It’ll force us to think about the culture, to create more emphasis on mass transportation from the local on up to the federal level.” Do you want to know what’s even more bizarre? The audience clapped to this statement! Are you clapping at the gas pump when you shell out a cool Benjamin for a full tank of gas? Remember our coal-hating Steven Chu friend? We can’t forget his other infamous Wall Street Journal quote: “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels of Europe.” Now why would he say something like this? Europe averages $9 per gallon. It’s obvious that he wishes to discourage driving, thus lowering the amount of carbon emissions released. Mr. Chu has also gone on record stating that it is NOT this administration’s goal to reduce gas prices. Don’t believe it? Watch below for yourself.
Such brutal honesty is not so politically expedient with this being an election year; so of course Obama’s Energy Secretary back peddled on his own comment and is now stating that he doesn’t want to see gas prices go up to Europe’s level.
THE HOAX REVEALED
The theory of Global Warming sounds very plausible and believable on the surface. The problem is that there is no hard evidence to prove that man-made activity causes these weather changes. In fact, as there have been periods of cooling the name of the theory has been changed to “Climate Change”. What an embarrassment. To add injury to insult, the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was caught red-handed falsifying over a decade of Climate Change data as their private emails were made public in November 2009. Then there’s that little problem of these theorists contradicting themselves. In the 1970’s, activists were warning of a coming Ice Age. Fast forward to 2006, activists are now warning that the earth will overheat.
The embarrassment doesn’t stop there as one of their own scientists (Professor Jones) of the CRU admitted that there has been no global warming for the last 15 years. Of course, he’s toast now as an admission of such magnitude is deemed unacceptable to Global Warming propagandists. In fact, any scientist going against the grain is demagogued and discredited as being paid out by corporations. How convenient for them to make such a claim as their hoax becomes unveiled. How does anyone explain that the founder of the Weather Channel along with 30,000 scientists, are now suing Al Gore for this fake phenomenon? Yes….you read that right….the founder of the Weather Channel. At the heart of this hoax is an admission that blows this whole theory out of the water. A leading member of the United Nations Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change admitted that global warming is about wealth redistribution.
“We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.”
The admission goes on: (OTTMAR EDENHOFER, UN IPCC OFFICIAL):
“That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there. This will have enormous implications for development policy. And it will raise the question if these countries can deal responsibly with so much money at all.”
This UN Climate Change official’s admission is no anomaly as President Obama’s very own handpicked Regulatory Czar also wrote: “In a variety of ways, subtle and less subtle, the public and private actions have made it most difficult for socialism to have any traction in the United States. It is even possible that desirable redistribution is more likely to occur through climate change policy.” (Cass Sunstein, The Second Bill of Rights) Under the guise of “science”, man-made Global Warming proponents have found yet another way to increase the power and scope of the government.
If these Marxists and even some liberal/moderate Republicans get their way, the cars you desire, the types of light bulbs you purchase and the amount of electricity you use are no longer determined by the individual. The government now determines what’s best for the “common good.” The canard of money redistribution is consistent with a socialists’ narrative that money creates wealth, when in fact it is production that creates wealth. Climate Change policy will only inhibit production. Companies that have the resources to move to other countries where there is less regulation will do so—sending more jobs overseas. Additionally, the desire of radical leftists will come to pass as the price of gasoline and electricity will skyrocket. How do these policies help the “middle class” if they will be the ones to bear the burden of job loss and inflation? Climate Change policy is driven by ideology and theory–not science. Anyone wanting to write off a skeptic has buried their heads in the sand to these radicals own admissions of what Climate Change really is.