ETHICS IN POLITICS? HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL…
Democrats in Washington (specifically Chuck Schumer (NY) and Tom Udall (NM) have introduced a proposal to amend our Constitution to permit government regulation of freedom of speech (but not limit freedom of the press). Ethics in politics? Well, since “the press” is overwhelmingly liberal (if not Progressive), that should come as no surprise… Ethics in politics? How far will Progressives go to geld Republicans? And what do they hope to accomplish? Well, for starters:
Continuing to use biased models based on the assumption that fossil fuels are the source of ‘global warming’ and ignoring the fact that their previous warnings did not materialize (and show no tendency for doing so—details below), a new government report continues to project panic about the devastating effects of ‘climate change’. George Will puts it into perspective: “Scientists are not saints…They’ve got interests like everybody else. If you want a tenured position in academia, don’t question the reigning orthodoxy on climate change. If you want money from the biggest source of direct research in this country, the federal government, don’t question its orthodoxy. If you want to get along with your peers, conform to peer pressure. This is what’s happening.”
And indeed it is. And it will continue to happen as long as ‘the press’ mouths the bias of the liberal establishment and ignores the more measured opinions of real (non-establishment) scientists. And it will get worse if opposing positions are stifled by the ability of the rest of us to speak out.
GLOBAL WARMING IS A POLITICAL CREATION, NOT A SCIENTIFIC ONE. CLIMATE CHANGE IS A NATURAL PHENOMENON, NOT A POLITICAL ONE. Then why has it become so politicized?
The facts continue to be that Earth’s climate changes naturally because of the natural tendency toward stability of the biosphere, atmosphere and lithosphere as natural changes occur over time. It’s been going on for millions of years and will continue without political intervention.
If you would appreciate scientific perspective, go to the numerous blogs on ‘global warming’ and climate change at this site: www.extremeethics.org . We have no dog in the fight, choosing instead to provide alternate scientific explanations of the natural progression of things…
In 1970, a Republican president (Nixon) was warned (by influential Democrats including Daniel Patrick Moynihan) that by the year 2000, unless immediate steps were taken to curb carbon emissions, ‘global warming’ would raise Earth’s temperature by 7°, and parts of the country would be under water as a result of a ten-foot rise in sea level. It is now 2014…
In fact, EVERY GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PANIC OF THE LAST 60-YEARS (ever since ‘environmentalists’ became politically fashionable) HAS PROVEN TO BE GROSSLY EXAGGERATED. The threats of ‘acid rain’, the ‘hole in the ozone layer’, killer pesticides, killer bees, depletion of water supplies, worldwide explosion of population (and mass decimation of the world’s population by disease), depletion of fossil fuels, mass flooding by rising sea levels, and more, have failed to materialize. Nor will they. In fact, the world is better off at this point than it has been at any time during recent history.
There’s nothing wrong with debating the issues, but creating artificial crises has no place in rational behavior. We have enough real problems without trying to set fire to straw men.