|The environmental alarmist have used scare tactics and misinformation to
advance their socialist desires for the last few decades with success. At least as far as
convincing most Americans that there is a need for the government to
control any action on the part of individuals that might upset the
globe's idyllic balance. Of course the definition of just what that balance should be is
based on their return-to-the-caves vision.
Dire announcements of the state of the earth's atmosphere made by the spokesman of any of these whacko groups is trumpeted and reinforced by the fear-mongering media. Brought to the classroom by PC teachers in the form of "environmental awareness" studies, we now have a generation of the populous that doesn't even question the ridiculous claims made about the dangers of hair spray, back-yard barbecues, and bovine flatulence. Any attempt to counter these claims is greeted with total disbelief and the messenger is deemed a despoiler.
This is mainly the result of the willing media's failure early on to view these claims with a jaundiced eye and investigate and verify the facts. Why should they? After all, the target of the early rhetoric was big business and capitalism in general - no friend of the social engineering minded within the news media. Now we've reached the point where any claim of hazard made against both individual or corporate activities is swallowed whole.
Perhaps the mother of scares is global warming. The allegation that in the not-to-distant future mankind's modern lifestyle will have altered the atmosphere to such an extent ... it won't take much they remind us ... to cause the ice caps to melt and sun-bathing to be a hazardous activity.
Heck, we've outlawed Freon, the inexpensive refrigerant that was responsible for allowing the safe preservation of food stuffs and fragile pharmaceuticals like insulin. Just the sort of thing emerging peoples and developing nations need to prevent mass starvation and the spread of deadly disease. Saving lives is far less important to these folks than advancing their "hole in the ozone" theories.
The New York Times blamed global warming for the unusual heat wave that claimed hundreds of lives in Chicago in 1995. (I wonder if the availability of cheap air conditioning would have helped.) Then a year later blamed the same warming for the snowstorms that covered the city and much of the Northeast. A Times headline read: "Blame global warming for the blizzard." It ran a story by William Stevens reporting that 1995 had been the "hottest year on record." However, it seems Stevens was relying on faulty data. Final data for 1995 showed it to be an average year! According to the Earth System Science Lab at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, which tracks global temperatures for NASA, 1995 was just 0.05 degrees warmer than normal. It was cooler than 1991, 1990, 1988, 1987, 1983, 1981, and 1980. Surely, if the Times really gave a darn, they could have checked the average temperatures for such recent years. But why bother? The alarmist headline and story fit their activist agenda just fine, thank you.
Oh, and the mild year-end temperatures in the U.S. in '96, actually 0.09 degrees below the world-wide average.
According to Dr. John Christie of Huntsville, there really isn't any story at all in the temperature trends of the last twenty years. (Unless you choose to fabricate one.) Re-analysis of global temperature data from NASA satellites over the last 18 years since they've been aloft, debunks the green-house warming theories. "There is no evidence of global warming in the revised data," says Dr. Christie. "The temperature trend for that time is a cooling [emphasis mine] of 0.035 degrees Celsius per decade."
Don't expect to read about this in the Times or any other "mainstream" publication. Forget about hearing it from Peter Jennings. The brain-washing of our students and the public will continue unabated. Only you, by getting informed and learning the facts and then countering the lies at your every opportunity, can bring reality back into the discussion on the use and abuse of our environment.
- based, in part, on facts reported in the National Review - 24 March 97
For a comprehensive examination of climatic trends and the methodology being used to make the dire environmental predictions affecting government policy visit Greenhouse Warming: Fact, Hypothesis, or Myth?