Saturday, January 23, 2010

Radical Environmentalism –The Dubious Results of Copenhagen (Part 12)

Last month, a host of environmentalists and politicians met in Copenhagen to save the world. Were they successful?

The United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP15) met in wintry Copenhagen, with the proclaimed goal to reverse so-called “climate change”. The premises that the conference assumes are that 1) climate change is occurring, 2) the change is bad, and 3) the change is due, in some large measure, to human activity. I have commented on all three of these topics in previous posts (here, here, and here) and it’s fairly obvious to me that anthropogenic global warming is no more than a dubious theory.

The Climategate scandal was no more than a month old – it was being revealed that much of the science behind global warming had been fabricated by people who have placed a social objective above factual study. In addition, it was revealed during the conference that the Climatic Research Unit (the same group that falsified data in the Climategate incident) was shown to be cherry-picking only the warmest temperature data coming out of Russian surface monitoring stations. In essence, the people who have been hired to provide governments with purely scientific data, with which they must make trillion-dollar decisions, are “putting their foot on the scale” in an effort to prove something that they know is not true. They are doing this, because, as their top official has pointed out, it would be a tragedy if we can’t prove that global warming is occurring. Yes, he really said that.

To me, the real tragedy here is the economic damage caused by such arrogance. Because they want global warming to be a result of man-made causes, they seek to limit the achievements that man can make with the resources that God has given us. Like many social causes, the facts have been lost in the stew of feel-good statements. I have pointed out that environmentalism has become a primary religion for many – and history shows that religious fervor often trumps practical actions. Hey, I’m not for burning down all of the rainforests (we should be good stewards of God’s gift of nature), but I also don’t approve of lying about scientific data to push a social agenda.

So, what was the result of this multi-million dollar conference attended by “concerned” heads of state (each of whom created a huge, hypocritical carbon footprint by jetting in and out for a few days)? A limited group of countries agreed to:

· Limit the global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius since “pre-industrial times”
· The United States agreed to give $30 billion to developing nations over the next three years ( to help “cope” with climate change)
· Undeveloped nations would agree to limit deforestation in exchange for cash from richer nations

That’s it. And get this – this agreement was not actually voted on and approved, but the delegates from the represented nations “approved a motion to take note of the Copenhagen accord”. And while the White House was announcing this accord, it was noted that many of the delegate nations had not yet had the chance to read it. Let’s face it – the whole thing is a sham, a desperate and weak political ploy by certain governments to show that they care and they are taking charge of the situation. But, in effect, nothing has happened.

And that is precisely the outcome I had hoped for. Because I believe that man cannot change the temperature of the planet even if he set out to do so on purpose. Our efforts are completely swamped out by the effects of sunspots, ocean currents, and the El Niño phenomena - effects of which God is in control. I am happy that, once again, politicians cannot meet to establish the damaging policies that they seek.

Do you think my opinion is one-sided and uncaring? Read here what the Washington Times had to say about President Obama, the conference, and the outcome. Wow.


Next in this series.......
Back to Part 1 of this series...

No comments: