'Mr. Governor: Tear down this warming-alarmist operation' (Posted Feb. 22, 2010)
‘Mr. Governor: Tear down
this warming-alarmist operation!’
Judging from Kentucky’s snowy winter, it appears Punxsutawney Phil does a much better job of climate prediction than the environmental wackos intent on threatening our lifestyle and destroying the commonwealth’s economy.
When Phil emerged on Feb. 2 from his temporary home on Gobbler’s Knob, east of Punxsutawney, Pa., he saw his shadow and returned to his hole. That means six more weeks of winter.
But Kentucky hasn’t just had winter since then. It’s had record snowfalls and freezing temperatures.
• Bowling Green has had its “snowiest winter” since 1985 and “30th all-time.” – WKU Meteorology
• Northern Kentucky “got another boatload of snow” on Feb. 15, “breaking the region’s record for February, according to the National Weather Service.” – Cincinnati Enquirer
• Eastern Kentucky also experienced average temperatures that were 3 to 5 degrees below normal and ranked among the top-ten coldest for January. – The Kentucky Climate Center
Still, Gov. Steve Beshear has followed the lead of governors in several other states – even some conservative ones – and allowed the Kentucky Climate Action Plan Council, a front group for the Center for Climate Strategies, a Washington-based warming-alarmist group, to set up shop in Frankfort.
Here’s how this scam works: The cabal presents itself as dispassionate technical experts who will offer “prefab anti-global-warming advice” in the form of recommendations on how, among other moves, the governor could issue executive orders that “ raise energy prices and diminish consumer freedom,” wrote Paul Chesser, a special correspondent for The Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based free market think tank, in a recent New York Post op-ed. In an e-mail to the Bluegrass Institute, Chesser warned that the only “plan” this council has is in figuring out “how to raise the costs of electricity and gasoline so people won’t burn fossil fuels anymore.”
Uh-oh.
We don’t need to remind the commonwealth’s citizens what such “executive orders” could do to Kentucky’s coal industry, which supplies 90 percent of the commonwealth’s electricity, 30 percent of the nation’s aluminum and keeps 15,000 miners and related workers employed, do we? We shouldn’t have to advise the governor – who will have to answer to those miners in the next election – to “tear down this operation” and send it on its way more than once, will we?
Contact the Bluegrass Institute, Kentucky's free-market think tank, at (270) 782-2140. Read past Shine the Light articles at www.bipps.org.
|
Comments
Virgil L Kleinhelter - 25 February 2010 10:48- I've always said this wasn't about Global warming it's about how much money you can get. In Historical geology, through ice core samples we have learned that the highest levels of Co2 were during the Ice Ages. That makes me tend to believe that Co2 is not a green house gas. The best solution to the Co2 problem, if you believe there is one, is to plant trees. That is a much better solution than ''Cap & Trade''. By the way Co2 makes plants grow faster and larger. Let these corporations plant forest in America instead of sending our money to other countries. So far millions of dollars of the stimulus money for green jobs have gone to Spain, Italy and China to name a few.
Global warming is a lie! When these so-called scientist can tell us when, in the history of the world, the climate has NOT changed....then maybe we'll listen to their claims. Until then, we cannot allow our government to use one penny of our tax dollars for ''green'' initiatives that will ''necessarily cause energy costs to skyrocket''. NO THANK YOU!
I am always suspicious of those that draw conclusions before all the data has been collected, especially when these conclusions coincide so neatly with their political and ideological belief structure. The global warming mantra has suffered some lately because of unseasonable weather trends that suggest a cooling rather than heating of our ecosphere. Well, which is it? If we intend to do something about it (a beautiful example of anthropocentric hubris) we really need to know what is really taking place. Why? Because the treatment is very different for addressing cooling as opposed to warming. In the first case we might need to increase the level of greenhouse gasses while in the latter they, supposedly, need to be reduced. Clearly if we are going to ''do something'' we need to have a clear idea of what problem we are trying to solve.
Application of the scientific method (a concept that is apparently ignored completely in law school) could come to the rescue but unlike the Hippocratic oath taken by all physicians, first do no harm, there is no such imposed fidelity to objectivity for scientists. All to often science is driven by the axiom ''Follow the Money'' and if you want your pet research program to get funding you must pay homage to the current political gods.
The data is still inconclusive, at least to my satisfaction. So if we are going to embark on a massive politically driven effort to change the composition of our atmosphere it might be a good idea to know what really needs to be done, assuming that we know enough to do anything at all.
Nikhil Rao - 22 February 2010 16:32- Set aside your introduction, you are talking about a natural resource that will eventually become more and more scarce. The U.S. is less than 2% of the world but uses more than 20% of the world's energy resources, yet Chesser is complaining about consumer freedom. An increase in prices of coal which according to you is 90% of our electricity, would just result in more income for those miners and related workers which you are concerned about. It would also increase our export revenue.
This article really goes from one subject to another. Global warming isn't sudden, it is extremely gradual. It may be 100 years or more before people are truly affected, but at that point it will be unpreventable and potentially catastrophic. Consider your great grand-children, perhaps?
Add new comment: