Democrat/Progressive Lies about Global Warning: Their Inconvenient Truths.

I’m tired of being ridiculed as a “denier” by President Obama and the brainwashed minions of the Left. Let me be clear: climate change is real. It absolutely is.  It always has been.

There have been at least five major Ice Ages in the history of the planet, the last one ending just 10,000 years ago. The Sahara was once a lush savannah for crying out loud. Earth’s climate has changed repeatedly throughout the history of the world.

But, when climate change fanatics cyr out “denier” they have a little inconvenient truth of their own. If our current climate change is being caused in large part by human activity, what caused all those other events? They all occurred before human activity could have had an impact, and at least four of the Ice ages came and went before humans were even around.

I’m all for preventing pollution, and I’m willing to admit that mankind’s activity could be affecting the climate, at least to some degree. But drastically cutting our carbon emissions as called for by this Administration isn’t going to stop climate change unless all other nations worldwide do so, too. The fact is that the United States produces 15% of the world’s carbon emissions. That means 85% of carbon emissions are coming from other countries. China and India combined pump out about twice as much CO2 as we do. They and other developing nations aren’t expected to reduce their carbon emissions. So, if manmade climate change is really the imminent threat our leftist political leaders claim, shouldn’t all nations be reducing emissions as rapidly as possible?

Frankly it insults my intelligence to believe that the Democratic leadership doesn’t realize that their espoused strategy will not work unless it is a worldwide effort. Of course the “useful idiots” Lenin referred to might believe that, but the leadership? It defies common sense and isn’t consistent with their actions. That leaves the logical conclusion that something else is the driving force behind their crusade. The most charitable possibility would be that the left’s Green/socialist ideology leads them to propose their policies because it is the “right” thing to do even if it doesn’t have any real effect on global warming. Consider another inconvenient truth that while they consider some alternate energy sources good, others, like hydro-electric power and nuclear energy are discouraged even though neither produces CO2. That sure looks like that these Democrat leaders are lying when they call manmade climate change the greatest looming danger to the world. Otherwise they would not only be insisting all nations work to reduce carbon emissions immediately, but they would also be endorsing these alternate energy sources.

But instead they use questionable scientific theories to “prove” their position. These are the same people who predicted an impending Ice age in the ‘70’s, melting ice caps in the 90’s , and are now predicting a mini-Ice age by 2030. When predictions fail they resort to name calling, make excuses, and use scare tactics blaming everything from the Californian drought to shark attacks in South Carolina on climate change. If the real facts are on your side you demonstrate how your opponents’ facts are wrong.

There is a more sinister possibility as to why climate change proponents do what they do. Quite simply it’s profits and power. Trashing the U.S. economy by crippling the production and use of fossil fuels has undeniably made tons of money for favored Green industries that got and are still getting federal tax subsidies. Money means power. I haven’t noticed the proponents of Green energy; Al Gore comes to mind, working hard to reduce their own carbon footprints. Wouldn’t they if they really believed in what they are preaching?

It should be obvious that Left’s position on combating climate change is at best unrealistic and hypocritical, while at worst deliberately deceitful. Tell me why previous climate changes repeatedly occurred without human intervention, why all nations shouldn’t immediately reduce CO2 emissions if they are an imminent danger, and why nuclear and hydro-electric power aren’t viable alternatives. Finally, why, if they believe what they tell us is true, do they personally do little or nothing to reduce their own carbon footprints.