Old Scenario Played on an Arctic StageBy Floy Lilley, J.D. Because "the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed," as H.L. Mencken first observed, anecdotes, slick brochures and captured media are the order of all wannabe rulers. The scientific method, reason and truthful discourse are trashed down the memory hole. For ten thousand years of human history two alarms have served the intellectual, ambitious elite well in getting the populace to clamor to be led to the safety of their coercive plans.
Nothing has changed. The poor, who will always exist because "poor" is a relative term, are still being told that the rich have too much. The "poor" are told the rich have too much wealth that they created by too much industry that generated too much carbon intensity that has attacked the Arctic and is resulting in a melt down disaster. No one would clamor to be led to safety if they sanely gathered evidence from the sources that are not anecdotal weather witnesses, nor slick brochures, nor controlled media. Before you stop breathing out in order to save a polar bear, read at least one honest article like the one that responded to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment when it was first released this past November 2004: Climate experts respond to Arctic Climate Impact Assessment The history of the Arctic and its ecosystems remains complex, a fact too often perceived by reporters under deadline or extremists as irrelevant nuance. Ecosystems and humans survived the warming at the beginning of the 20th century, as they survived the warmth from A.D. 900 to 1200, when Thule people migrated from Alaska across the Arctic while Vikings farmed in Greenland soil now permafrost, and sailed in Arctic waters now permanent pack ice. They survived the warming of the last 15,000 years as earth emerged from the last glacial period, whose termination produced much more radical temperature shocks than those observed in the last several decades. As Professor Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and IPCC author concluded in testimony: "The question of where do we go from here is an obvious and important one. From my provincial perspective, an important priority should be given to figuring out how to support and encourage science (and basic science underlying climate in particular) while removing incentives to promote alarmism. The benefits of leaving future generations a better understanding of nature would far outweigh the benefits (if any) of ill thought out attempts to regulate nature in the absence of such understanding." But, remember that removing incentives to promote alarmism is NOT practical politics. So, do not forget to tell the rich that there are simply too many people and their sheer numbers are melting the Arctic. Tell the rich that population is a strong emissions driver. Tell the rich that in South Africa population growth is by far the biggest contributor to emissions growth. CO2 from land-use change and several GHGs other than CO2 are contributing more than 40 percent of overall emissions. In most industrialized countries, land-use change results in a net absorption of CO2. Tell the rich that all but eight of the largest emitters are among the 25 most populous nations, with China the largest. Collectively, the major emitters represent 71 percent of the global population. China and India together represent 38 percent of global population. Tell the rich that the United States and the EU together represent only 12.2 percent of global population. The largest relative growth in emissions is forecast for Mexico (124 percent), and for China (118 percent), which is projected to surpass the United States as the world's largest emitter. Thus, yet again practical politics produces proof that the rich have too much and that there are just too many people. Get ready to be led to safety - the safety of the serf's prison. Or, trust your mind's judgment and try liberty. |
Copyright © 2004 Freedom.org, All rights reserved