There is no excuse for not finding out the truth on many issues. The World Wide Web is a great resource for legitimate scientific conclusions but it is also a great source for spreading hysteria and hoaxes.
I've come to believe that providence has spared us from being total saps by making Donald Trump president and the more I've seen of Al Gore, I'm sure we've dodged another bullet.
Watching Chris Wallace's interview this week with the man who almost became our president, I wonder how many Americans realize that this man is either a complete fool or a superb con man.
But what does that say about the rest of the country who swears that climate change is not only more dangerous than Islamic jihadists but that disaster is imminent? Have we really become an idiocracy of fools believing whatever talking heads and celebrities spout about doom and gloom without finding out the truth for ourselves?
It seems we have abdicated our ability to think rationally or to question whatever claims these pseudo scientists make about planet earth. It is extremely unsettling that anyone questioning the flawed data given by these charlatans is deemed a denier and dangerous skeptic.
All scientific research requires debate and honest questioning rather than wholesale swallowing data from individuals who may have agendas based on funding from environmentalists hostile to our way of life.
Even if one does not have a scientific background, one can reasonably question why someone like Al Gore who is not a scientist can become a billionaire selling carbon credits. This snake oil venture allowed environmental activists to continue their wasteful abuse of resources by buying a carbon credit permitting them to emit a certain amount of greenhouse gas. The funds would then be paid to projects that absorb these gases like planting trees, etc.
This is, of course, an oversimplification but actually reading the details of this scam is mind boggling. Naturally Hollywood celebrities went for it hook, line and sinker.
The Grand Wizard Gore won an Oscar and other awards for his film, An Inconvenient Truth and a new sequel is due soon.
The film was mandated to be shown in public schools so that our young could be indoctrinated with fake science data. All the data shown has been debunked but no matter.
If academia has swallowed false information, our children will one day have to be deprogrammed.
I am not a scientist either but I do know how to think rationally and here is what I've learned about climate change. It is real and has been happening to this planet for eternity. Since we've only kept records for a few hundred years, it's folly to think that these records can be considered a reliable barometer for what will occur on this earth for the next hundred years. Just not possible.
I've also learned that 90% of the earth's ice is in Antarctica-90%. The rest of the glaciers are in the Greenland cap. Alarmists will shout that the ice is melting and that means that the seas levels will rise and drown all the big cities like those depicted in the movie 2012.
The inconvenient truth is that only a fraction of that ice is melting. The rest of the ice mass is growing and this actually reduces sea levels.
Don't take my word for it. NASA satellites show that the glaciers are growing. According to an article in the scientific journal Principia Scientific International, "A new NASA study, released on Friday, admits that ice is accumulating in Antarctica. Satellite measurements show an 82-112 gigaton-a-year net ice gain. That's 82-112 billion tons per year! Nine zeroes! In other words that is 112,000,000,000 tons. Per year."
Who to believe --- a divinity school dropout, who has no scientific background, a man who came up with a way to make billions from the gullible or real NASA satellite data?
Did you cry watching those poor starving polar bears in his movie? According to Dr. Judith Crockford, a professor of zoology in B.C. and one of the leading polar bear experts, "This is the truth the world needs to hear: the experts were wrong. Polar bears have not been driven to the brink of extinction by climate change, they are thriving."
The whole global warming, climate change brouhaha is not the first time that fake science panic has seized the world's intellectuals and celebrities. It is actually the third and hopefully will not be as devastating as the previous ones because the truth is out there for us to uncover and decipher.
In the appendix of his excellent and thoroughly researched novel State of Fear, Michael Crichton warns why politicized science is dangerous. He wrote, "Imagine that there is a new scientific theory that warns of an impending crisis, and points to a way out. This theory quickly draws support from leading scientists, politicians and celebrities from around the world. Research is funded by distinguished philanthropies and carried out at prestigious universities. The crisis is reported frequently in the media. The science is taught in college and high school classrooms. I don't mean global warming. I'm talking about another theory, which rose to prominence a century ago."
He goes on to name the prominent individuals who supported this â€˜scientific' theory which included, Theodore Roosevelt Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, H.G. Wells, Alexander Graham Bell and even Nobel Prize winners. This theory had no scientific proof behind it and was pseudoscience. The crisis it claimed was non existent and ultimately led to millions of deaths.
The history of this well accepted popular theory is so heinous that it is rarely discussed today but is carried on in the legacy of another well known supporter-Margaret Sanger. That theory was eugenics which the Germans adopted in their reign of terror in the concentration camps.
The second pseudoscience theory that created havoc is not as well known because it mostly affected Russia after Joseph Stalin fell for the pseudo science of Trofim Denisovich Lysenko. Lysenko claimed to have discovered a new way of fertilizing the fields without fertilizer or minerals. This procedure was called vernalization and became the basis of Russian agricultural biology. The result was famine that killed millions and purges that sent any scientist dissenters to gulags or firing squads.
While there is no similarity between global warming and these other catastrophic scientific miscalculations, there is now the same danger in mixing science with politics and ideology and only with unfettered scientific research can we avoid disaster. We need to ask who is benefitting from the green industry? Why are corporations pulling for the Paris Accord even if it hurts American taxpayers? Were they planning to make money selling our technological advances? Isn't it really all about money and not the planet?
President Trump is not a scientist but thank the Lord, he can think rationally and for that we should be eternally grateful.