by Henry Lamb
January 24, 2005
Green activists have given "environmentalism" a bad name. Tsunami waters had barely receded, before Tony Juniper, spokesman for Friends of the Earth, told the press that the tragedy was "...consistent with climate change predictions." Hogwash! Climate change predictions are all over the yard, and all are based on computer models. None are supported by the actual scientific record. What is known is that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by about 100 parts per million during the last century, some of which is likely to be the result of using fossil fuel.
The BBC is touting a 2001 study by English scientist, Gerry Stanhill, which says the sun’s radiation reaching the earth is diminishing, as a result of particulate matter in fossil fuel emissions. Does this mean that fossil fuel emissions may actually cause the earth to cool? Or does this mean that the earth would be warming much faster, were it not for the particulates?
The article goes on to say that "during the ice age, a similar rise in CO2 led to a temperature rise of six degrees Celsius."
What was that? a similar rise in carbon dioxide during the ice age? How can that be? There were no SUVs. There were no factories or power plants belching out columns of pollution. There weren’t even any people around to breath out.
The fact is that science cannot predict the weather accurately more than a few days in advance. any prediction of what the climate may be 100 years from now is, at best, a SWaG (the "S" is for sophisticated, the rest you know).
Of course, facts rarely matter to green activists. Was it not the Natural Resources Defense Council that produced a "scientific" study on which CBS based its now infamous alar report which claimed the chemical was a deadly toxin? Well after the report had aired, real scientists revealed that to match the dosage of alar fed to rats in the study, a human would have to eat 28,000 pounds of apples, each day, for 70 years. and that, when fed the equivalent of only 14,000 pounds of apples per day, the rats developed no tumors at all.
Louis J. Guillette told a Congressional Committee that "There is not a man in this room that is half the man his grandfather was," because a study conducted by Theo Colburn, a scientist for the World Wide Fund for Nature, said that man-made chlorine caused alligator penises to shrink.
To green activists, science is nothing more than a way to give credence to what otherwise would be ignored as an outlandish claim. If the science does not support the claim, they have no reluctance to fudge, or alter the science. Consider the case of the federal employees who wanted to lock up portions of the Northwest so badly that they planted lynx hairs in a study area so the area would be designated as critical habitat.
In their quest to abuse science, green activists regularly demean and ridicule scientists whose work produces results that disagree with the outcome desired by the activists. Their ridicule, through willing media, has produced a chilling effect among scientists who would prefer to stay out of the negative spotlight.
These antics have become so numerous over such a long period of time, that the word "environmentalist" has taken on a negative connotation. Focus groups conducted by expensive public relations firms have led to recommendations that environmental organizations abandon the use of the word, and to use the word "conservationist" instead.
Green activists created environmental organizations to increase the effectiveness of their efforts to clean up the environment. They did good work--in the beginning. The organizations, however, have long ago forgotten their original mission, and are now dedicated to building their financial and political empires. Having achieved most of their original goals, of cleaning up rivers and streams, reducing air pollution, and the like, they needed bigger goals, and scarier scenarios, to keep people digging deeper and deeper into their pockets to fund the ever-expanding bureaucracies of the environmental organizations.
Global warming is the granddaddy of all scary scenarios. It cannot be proved, nor disproved, so whatever symptom a green activist chooses to blame on global warming is fair game. Whether it’s a tsunami in Sumatra, a mudslide in California, 19-feet of snow in Tahoe, or a heat wave in Europe--all of it is said to be caused by global warming. and everyone knows that humans--especially american humans--cause global warming. Such is the logic of green activists.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement