Is anything sacred to these jerks?
By Jack E. Lohman
I can’t believe that I have no strong opinion about climate change.
It’s not that I don’t want one, because I do.
It seems that at least “some” climate change is going on, but I can’t trust my politicians to give me an honest answer.
Did we cause it? Is it harmful? Can we change it? Should we change it? What are the effects on my grandchildren if we do nothing? Or if we do something???
I’d like an honest answer, Dammit, and I can’t get one.
Half of our politicians are being paid by the bad-guy industries to accept studies performed by scientists that also are paid by industry to keep the monkey off their back. The other half is being paid by the bribers on the other side of the issue, who are poised to reap billions when congress lays out its demand for new Green technologies, whether needed or not.
Another group owns stock in one industry or the other, and this whole politician thingy, well, it’s just temporary for them anyway.
Of course I would prefer that my politicians were not taking cash bribes from industry, and they instead ran the country in the best interest of the public. That’s what they should be doing.
But they aren’t. We have a political system driven by special interest bribes that controls our nation to the detriment of its taxpayers. We have congress members poised to share in a piece of the action if the vote goes their way, and in some cases they win no matter which way it goes.
Surely new jobs may be created by new green technologies, but so will other make-work efforts by differently-corrupted politicians. But will those new jobs be in the US or in China and India? And if we force Cap & Trade unnecessarily, how many jobs will leave our country nonetheless?
Like all matters important to society, congress must recuse itself and turn this over to an unbiased panel of independent scientists, paid for by the taxpayers and working for the taxpayers. (And wow, if we can’t trust politicians on climate change, health care, Afghanistan, and “all matters important to society,” just where can we trust them?)
That’s an issue we must address in 2010.
In the meantime I see from www.GlobalResearch.ca
“Much of the people in the world have been riled up with predictions of a catastrophic end to mankind and the world unless we don’t do something about so-called “man-made” climate change. Ironically enough, our refusal to adapt to a changing world, and instead a determination to fight it with our efforts to “go green” and “carbon neutral” may, in fact, cause the catastrophic end of our civilization. And sadly, in this instance, it would undeniably be a man-made disaster.”
And here’s Al Gore exposed by congress
Why can’t my congress… my country’s esteemed board of directors… hire an unbiased, non-conflicted, non-partisan team of scientists to get to the bottom of it? Do they not understand the concept of uncorrupted analysis?
— See “What’s The Worst That Could Happen: A rational response to the climate change debate” by Greg Craven (gregcraven.org) — Excellent youtube videos, or buy his DVD. He doesn’t push his point of view — he pushes the idea that we ought to think carefully about the risks that we are wrong, no matter what we believe about the science.
— The argument is “the costs of ignoring something that is direly needed, versus doing something that is not needed.” Overkill.
— Of course nothing is as simple as a yes or no; I still wish I could trust our politicians to shed the special interest money on both sides of the issue and find a non-biased answer.
— What would happen if our astute special interests started pumping something into the air to counter the CO2, only to find out that they went too far or shouldn’t have done it in the first place?