The Politics of the Polar Bear
Bennet Rawicki
Issue date: 4/18/07 Section: Commentary
- Page 1 of 1
Newsstand covers proclaim "A Threat Graver than Terrorism is Upon Us." This threat guzzles carbon dioxide, has it out for the polar bear, and has told Al Gore that it plans to raise sea levels 20 feet. You guessed it, the much discussed and little understood, global warming.
The science behind the issue is not "as certain as gravity" like Gore claims. The prominent theses claiming human-caused climate change do not account for Nature's temperature control: rain. If the Earth's temperature rises, more evaporation occurs creating more clouds and precipitation, which cools the Earth. Without this mitigating factor included in climate change models, results are skewed to the extreme. This is merely one of many disputes in the scientific community, and it seems as if every study (including the U.N. study) has scientists lining up on the other side to disprove the results. There is no consensus.
Nature also shows no consensus. The Antarctic ice sheets are melting, but Science magazine reported that the loss of Greenland's ice sheets has suddenly reversed. Also, between 1940 and 1970 emissions increased, but temperature peculiarly decreased. When faced with uncertainty, instead of finding undisputed results, it has been much easier to disregard the objections, simply claim that the results are unequivocal, and then prosecute global warming deniers like Holocaust deniers (happens in Europe).
This issue has been excluded from the laboratory and thrust into politics for partisan gain. Democrats are now debating whether to enact global warming legislation this term or wait until after 2008 so they can use the issue to win more votes in the election. Gore has made millions off of his movie and from the workshops he gives for scientists to teach them about the issue. But I can't blame him, he needs the money to pay for his $30,000 electric bill, his private jet flights, and the carbon footprints to cover his tracks.
The worst part about global warming is that our rights are already being taken away. The Supreme Court recently ruled that the EPA was forced to regulate carbon dioxide emissions in Massachusetts to stop global warming. Last week Gore proposed that Congress ban the incandescent light bulb and reduce emissions by 90%. These "solutions" will do little to stop rising carbon dioxide levels, as they will not touch China or India, but will increase government control over business and our personal lives.
A crippled economy and an overbearing government is too great a price to pay to not solve the inconclusive threat allegedly going to raise sea levels a miscalculated eight to seventeen inches.
The science behind the issue is not "as certain as gravity" like Gore claims. The prominent theses claiming human-caused climate change do not account for Nature's temperature control: rain. If the Earth's temperature rises, more evaporation occurs creating more clouds and precipitation, which cools the Earth. Without this mitigating factor included in climate change models, results are skewed to the extreme. This is merely one of many disputes in the scientific community, and it seems as if every study (including the U.N. study) has scientists lining up on the other side to disprove the results. There is no consensus.
Nature also shows no consensus. The Antarctic ice sheets are melting, but Science magazine reported that the loss of Greenland's ice sheets has suddenly reversed. Also, between 1940 and 1970 emissions increased, but temperature peculiarly decreased. When faced with uncertainty, instead of finding undisputed results, it has been much easier to disregard the objections, simply claim that the results are unequivocal, and then prosecute global warming deniers like Holocaust deniers (happens in Europe).
This issue has been excluded from the laboratory and thrust into politics for partisan gain. Democrats are now debating whether to enact global warming legislation this term or wait until after 2008 so they can use the issue to win more votes in the election. Gore has made millions off of his movie and from the workshops he gives for scientists to teach them about the issue. But I can't blame him, he needs the money to pay for his $30,000 electric bill, his private jet flights, and the carbon footprints to cover his tracks.
The worst part about global warming is that our rights are already being taken away. The Supreme Court recently ruled that the EPA was forced to regulate carbon dioxide emissions in Massachusetts to stop global warming. Last week Gore proposed that Congress ban the incandescent light bulb and reduce emissions by 90%. These "solutions" will do little to stop rising carbon dioxide levels, as they will not touch China or India, but will increase government control over business and our personal lives.
A crippled economy and an overbearing government is too great a price to pay to not solve the inconclusive threat allegedly going to raise sea levels a miscalculated eight to seventeen inches.
Be the first to comment on this story