While reading the New York Times this morning I came across a laughable editorial titled: "Practical Steps to Save the Polar Bear" by. . . Oh, wait, no author was listed.
Pop Culture, Politicians, and a various array of village idiots are continuing to be convinced that humanity is capable of affecting the weather patterns on this planet by spewing a minuscule amount of "greenhouse gases" into the atmosphere. People can be that way, I guess. Show them a few manipulated graphs, a handful of images of hurricanes and crashing waves, a piece of glacier falling into the sea, and a polar bear struggling to pull itself on a floating block of ice, and mass hysteria (devoid of true facts) is birthed.
The environmental lobby that is promoting Al Gore's fantastic facts of immense error proclaim that Global Warming is not a Republican Issue, and not a Democratic Issue - but instead our dying planet is an American Issue, and is becoming even more so a Global Issue that must be addressed by all humanity.
Agreement is awarded to the weasels for their "worldwide issue" argument - I agree, the entire citizenry of the entire world is equally gullible and sheeplike, and is more than willing to follow blindly an agenda-driven proclamation because deep down we care about the world around us and realize that we really should be good stewards of our planetary home.
Our good nature toward our environment makes us easy targets for scam artists and swindlers like Al Gore, and the environmental loonies.
The New York Times article cries out how even our meager efforts to slow down the damaging effects of mythical man-made global warming is not enough to protect the precious polar bear who's precarious existence is being even more endangered by exploratory drilling in the bear's territory.
Hence, the arrival of the true reason for the piece by "the author to be named later."
I wonder, as I review the article from The New York Times, if the piece is actually concerned with saving polar bears. The editorial reminds us that the dreaded Bush Administration listed the polar bear as threatened last May, so this must be a bi-partisan issue - and then the opinionated editorial begins to throw around false data like that the polar bear's habitat is melting away, and that three of the world's four major polar bear populations could be extinct by 2075. But the emphasis on the Clean Air Act, capping emissions worldwide, and stopping oil and gas exploration in the upper northern region of this planet tells me that the polar bear is simply a tool. Those fuzzy white bears floating on an ice chunk rubbing their tummies because they are hungry as a result of man's destructive energy explorations is simply a tactic to tug at your heartstrings so that you, too, may buy into the lies they are feeding you, and support increasing government control over energy, and the pursuit of clean air energy programs that are neither cost-efficient, nor reasonably good for the planet and humanity.
As for our struggling friends, the polar bears? Fact is in 1950 there were about 5,000 polar bears. Now there are 25,000. Twenty distinct polar bear populations are known to exist, and population patterns do not reveal a dive toward extinction, or even a temperature-linked decline in population. Only two of the distinct population groups (accounting for about 16.4 percent of the total population), in fact, are even decreasing. Ten populations (approximately 45.4 percent of the total number), are reported to be stable. Another two populations - about 13.6 percent of the total number of polar bears - are increasing. The status of the remaining six populations (whether they are stable, increasing or decreasing in size) is unknown.
The statistics hardly supports the hysteria Al Gore, and the current Disney film "Earth," are promoting.
The overall planetary temperature has been, in fact, dropping over the last decade. Less than 2/1,000 of all CO2 is produced by human activity. So even if we wiped out every car, power plant, jet liner, and human being from the face of the earth, there would be no noticeable effect on global CO2 levels. Besides, CO2 levels does not affect temperature. It is actually reversed. Changes in temperature affect the level of CO2 in our atmosphere. Sea levels are not rising, and even the IPCC notes that "No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected." We couldn't warm the planet with our puny amount of emissions if we wanted to, and we couldn't stop global temperature changes either. They are natural cycles that we have adjusted to as a species throughout history, just as the polar bear has adjusted as well.
Man-made Global Warming is not only a myth, but even science, or at least the few continuing to hang on to this fairy tale, realizes the holes in their argument. Yet, the leaders of the world continue to push for legislation to "save the planet," and save the polar bears. The hard truth is that they are doing this not to save the planet. Global Warming is the excuse. The aim is further control over private industries. Man-made global warming is a farce, and they know it.
Perhaps that is why no author was listed regarding the piece in the New York Times about saving the polar bears. Even the man-made global warming sheep are too embarrassed to leave their name on anything supporting the illogical myth.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Practical Steps to Save the Polar Bear - The New York Times
Global Warming: Myths and Reality - International Society for Individual Liberty
FAQ and Myths - Icecap
Polar bears in danger? Is this some kind of joke? - Times Online, James Delingpole
Polar Bears on Thin Ice, Not Really! - National Center for Policy Analysis, H. Sterling Burnett
No comments:
Post a Comment