Before the War Between the States American central government was carefully defined, limited and of little threat to our citizens. Most powers “reserved to the States” gave the people close control of political interests and limited their damage.
Since then a massive, now out-of-control, central government has become imperialistic and vastly more powerful than intended. Domestically it threatens our liberties, our economic well being and our property if we don’t submit to its often arbitrary authority.
Thus, we have come to irreconcilable divisions in our historical views of government–and disunity in our society— resulting in frustration, confusion, anger and resentment among our people. We know something is wrong; even evil, but we don’t know why it happened or how it can be corrected. Nor do we see any action by our elected officials to stop it. Federal laws, regulations, self-serving agencies and powerful crony forces interfere with and subvert our pursuits of “happiness.” Dissatisfaction, suspicion and unrest now drive our national political process.
One example of this is the “global warming” debate taking place. Many of us believe that a huge atmospheric hoax initiated by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) threatens the well-being and prosperity of people throughout the world. These government agents are on a mission to shut down the use of plentiful, affordable fossil fuels that provide more healthful, comfortable and prosperous lifestyles for billions of people worldwide. Nothing available today can replace them.
Our own president peddles this hoax around the world and uses his government agencies to destroy American energy industries, for example using the EPA to wage his War on Coal and all of us who depend on that vital resource.
Legitimate climate scientists (and others) who are skeptical or disagree with the political views and dare to confront promoters of the issue, or offer natural-cause theories to explain changing climate, are rejected, scorned or vilified. We who agree with them are called “deniers”— in the sense of being heretics to an environmental religious faith.
But a group of scientists in the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) have examined the issue in a forthcoming three-volume “Climate Change Reconsidered II” series. It will contain 3,000 pages and report the findings of more than 4,000 peer-reviewed articles.
This work and more to follow comes from scientists and scholars interested in understanding the “causes and consequences” of changing climate (very little is known of these phenomena). The reports are published by the Heartland Institute. (Link below)
The NIPCC “has no formal attachment to or sponsorship from any government or government agency.” (The United Nations IPCC is government-sponsored and politically motivated.) NIPCC receives no corporate funding.
This is not just some obscure academic issue. The overall welfare of people depends on who prevails in this “debate.” The people at NIPCC describe what is at stake. “Billions of dollars have been spent in the name of preventing global warming or mitigating the (assumed) human impact on Earth’s climate. Governments are negotiating treaties that would require trillions of dollars more to be spent in the years ahead.” How much more economic damage will we allow in the name of an unproven theory that is not in agreement with real science?
Barak Obama and government agencies claim that “97 percent of scientists agree that climate change is both man-made and dangerous.” But that is a lie. There are no surveys or studies about a “consensus” on that claim. True science does not operate on consensus—it is based on theories tested by evidence, not mathematical modeling.
Further there is considerable, credible scientific agreement that the science is far from “settled” before “the hypothesis of dangerous man-made global warming can be validated (or rejected),” according to a reference titled, “Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming”—a report by the NIPCC based on a chapter from the book cited above.
This is not new, but to many casual or uninterested people political activists and the mainstream press have promoted the theories and claims of global warmers’ agenda creating the myth that they are not challengeable. Reporters have shown little interest in proper journalism: reporting opposing views in the controversy.
The NIPCC reports and books are valuable for anyone with objective interest in this subject. They provide evidence that shows the disagreements and reasons why many credible scientists are suspicious of the claims about climate change.
Clearly this issue shows why it is important for responsible citizens to be skeptical and suspicious about government claims and schemes—and to deny it power at every opportunity.