Those of you who suffered through Tom Brokaw’s fanciful tour of global warming last night and rushed to Google for more info will hopefully stumble upon us. We are happy to tell you what you need to know about global warming, a story not often told by the mainstream media.
What you need to know is that there is no consensus about global warming, contrary to the oft-repeated canard that there is.
What you need to know is that last night’s show didn’t rely on a single one of the hundreds of scientists who don’t subscribe to the theory of global warming. Some 60 scientists alone signed a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, urging him to get more facts before subscribing to the theory’s shaky tenets. None of them were interviewed for the show. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?
What you need to know is that in some areas, the ice is getting thicker, but you won’t hear much about that.
What you need to know is that only 30 short years ago (remember the earth is some 4.5 billion years old), both Time and Newsweek ran cover stories heralding global cooling and the coming ice age. That scare is so yesterday.
What you need to know is that Tom Brokaw isn’t exactly impartial on this issue. His wife is Vice Chair of an environmental group that subscribes to this theory. It is a theory after all, remember. He’s certainly entitled to his opinion, as long as everyone understands it’s an opinion, nothing more.
What you need to know is that the famed “hockey stick” theory that supposedly shows global temperatures soaring has been debunked over and over again. Here’s an article from the Wall Street Journal just a few days ago about a recent white paper casting doubt on the “hockey stick” claim.
What you need to know is that the US decision not to sign on tho the Kyoto accords was ratified during the Clinton Administration by a vote of 98-0. China and India, among others, are not signatory to that accord.
What you need to know is that if environmentalists were really concerned about the global environment, they would want as much development as possible done in the US, because we have some of the strictest environmental controls in the world. By forcing development into third world countries, it will be done with virtually no environmental safeguards whatsoever, leaving the global environment much worse off.
What you need to know is that this is the latest media hysteria, and that people who push this theory often have a very distinct political agenda outside the mainstream of public opinion.
We now re-join our regularly scheduled programming….
Latest posts by NAM (see all)
- Manufacturers Win Several Website Design Awards - June 15, 2011
- China Makes Commitments on Trade, Intellectual Property - December 16, 2010
- ITC Details Widespread Theft of Intellectual Property in China - December 14, 2010