As I noted the other day, more and more people seem to be noticing the reasons behind the “climate change” movement, something I’ve been blogging about for years. When people ask why I concentrate on the political aspects (and insanity): because that’s what it is. It’s not science. Here’s a letter to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
I have to wonder what type of evidence would convince climate alarmists that they are wrong. We have global and Antarctic sea ice areas that are at near-record highs for the date. We’ve had no global warming for almost two decades. Remember the predictions of increased severe weather? They just haven’t come true; in fact, Obama’s presidency has had the fewest hurricanes of any presidency. We’ve gone nine years without a major (category 3-5) hurricane strike, which is the longest period on record. Northern Hemisphere winter snow cover over the past 10 years was the highest of any decade on record. These are all easily verifiable facts. Perhaps by “climate change,” global warming scientists meant that we’d actually see colder weather, more snowfall and fewer hurricanes?
Wake up and smell the coffee. Climate change is about justifying bigger government and more intrusion into your lives, something progressives (formerly know as liberals) have wanted since the turn of the last century. If it really was about saving the planet, the scientists would admit that 95 percent of their climate models and dire predictions have been wrong over the past several decades. They’d also be willing to consider that there may be other factors beyond our control that have a much greater impact on our climate. I don’t know, could it be the sun? Could it be that the earth has gone through global warming and global cooling cycles for millions of years (even before we started burning fossil fuels)?
Facts are pesky things to Warmists. And Jim Craig has hit the nail on the head. This is what “climate change” is about. Another letter in the same paper notes that “climate change” results in lots of government funding.
