How do you feel about this article in today's newspaper?
Just wondering if the Global warming myth is starting to unravel Friday, October 19th, 2007 Harper advocating unfounded eco-salvation Fri Oct 19 2007 By Tom Harris ALTHOUGH environmentalists complain bitterly about the Harper government's admission of the obvious -- we will not meet our Kyoto Protocol targets -- climate campaigners have in fact won over the House of Commons. The throne speech showed that, rather than opposing the unfounded rhetoric of David Suzuki and Al Gore, the government has embraced it. The throne speech asserts: "Threats to our environment are a clear and present danger that now confronts governments around the world." The most significant "clear and present danger" is widespread public ignorance of basic climate science, a problem that provides fertile ground for the unfounded eco-salvationism of politicians and activists driving today's agenda. Next we are told in the throne speech, "This is nowhere more evident than in the growing challenge of climate change." Climate change is not a growing challenge; it is a shrinking one. As the Earth has warmed slightly in the past century, the "challenge" to society is considerably less than it was during previous cold periods. The throne speech continues: "Our Government believes that action is needed now to ensure our quality of life, particularly for those most vulnerable to health threats from the environment --our children and seniors." Neither children nor seniors are threatened by global warming. They may be threatened by funding diversions from social programs to the supposed "climate crisis." And they definitely would be threatened by global cooling, something the government steadfastly refuses to plan for. "Climate change is a global issue and requires a global solution." This nonsense line is repeated often -- the only "global solution" to climate change is adaptation. "Our Government believes strongly that an effective global approach to greenhouse gas emissions must have binding targets that apply to all major emitters, including Canada." "Greenhouse gas emissions" sound dangerous but, in Canada and most of the developed world, it is essentially code for carbon dioxide, a benign gas that is increasingly being shown to not be a significant cause of climate change. "Canada has already engaged the international community at APEC, the G8 and the United Nations and will continue to press for a new international agreement that cuts global emissions in half by 2050." Lead pipe APEC's approach is not as bad as the UN's (i.e. Kyoto), much as hitting ourselves in the head with a stick is not as bad as using a lead pipe. However, both are based on the false premise that we need clobber ourselves with CO2 emissions restrictions. Cutting global emissions by 50 per cent would require global energy rationing on a scale never before seen, a ticket to mass starvation. "Our Government will implement our national strategy to reduce Canada's total greenhouse gas emissions 60 to 70 per cent by 2050. There will be a 20 per cent reduction by 2020." Like Jean Chrétien's original endorsement of Kyoto and Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty's 2002 promise to close the province's coal stations by 2007, the Harper government must know this will not happen. "This strategy will institute binding national regulations on greenhouse gas emissions across all major industrial sectors -- with requirements for emissions reductions starting this year." Such a plan, carried out at levels even remotely close to those demanded by environmentalists, would cost of tens of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of jobs. This would ultimately be the government's undoing. "Our Government will also establish a carbon emissions trading market that will give business the incentive to run cleaner, greener operations." This confuses carbon emissions (namely CO2) with pollution. A carbon dioxide emissions trading market would make some companies and market traders rich but would do little to help the environment. "Canada's emissions cannot be brought to the level required under the Kyoto Protocol within the compliance period...." The solution to the problem of non-compliance is obvious -- rather than breaking international law by violating the terms of a treaty Chrétien made the mistake of ratifying on our behalf, Canada must simply withdraw from the protocol in February 2008. Article 27 of Kyoto states, "At any time after three years from the date on which this Protocol has entered into force for a Party [February 2005], that Party may withdraw from this Protocol by giving written notification to the Depositary." Instead of looking to replace Kyoto with alternative carbon dioxide reduction schemes, government must acknowledge that climate science is still an immature field in which our major discoveries lie ahead of us. In April 2006, 61 climate experts wrote a public letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper requesting open, unbiased hearings into the science of climate change, something that has never happened in Canada. The scientists said, "We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue." Harper completely ignored them. He must do so no longer. Tom Harris is an Ottawa-based mechanical engineer and Executive Director of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (www.nrsp.com). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © 2007 Winnipeg Free Press. All Rights Reserved.
Asked By: PHILIP F - 10/19/2007
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
Many concerned citizens are just repeatedly "stating the obvious" What we need is solution to the problem already being faced by mankind. Prevention is better than cure - citizens should take this as grassroots level initiative and contribute their might albeit at micro level so every drop of water can create an... More
Answered By: Vasanth K - 10/19/2007
Additional Answers (1)
At the moment in Canada and the UK the oil companies are making a last ditch stand to try to stave off action on teh e global warming crisis. That's al this is. Global warming is a serious threat. And all the paid propaganda BS like this won't change that... More
Answered By: Crabby_blindguy - 10/19/2007
Over 483 Local Jobs Now Hiring In Your Area. $18-$87/Hr - Apply Today!
Drive your car - make up to $40/hr. Work when you want with Uber.
$21/hr Start, Avg Pay $72K/yr No Experience Needed! Get Started.
Up to $47/hr Part-Time Job Openings. Free Schedule, No Scam. Start Now
Other Career Questions
What jobs are there in the business field that are night jobs? Places and job titles please. Im have a BA in Business Admin and looking for a night job, already have a morning/day job.
Content is not owned or controlled by Monster. Any content concerns should be addressed with Yahoo!
Yahoo! Does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any Yahoo! Answers content. Yahoo! Disclaimer.
Best-Paying Work-from-Home Jobs
It’s easier than ever to work from home. Of course, not every job is a mobile job, and some companies aren’t interested in having their employees work from home.
2013 Marketing Jobs Outlook
The US may be facing another year of anemic hiring overall, but that won't be the case in the high-orbit world of multichannel, digital media marketing.
2013 Engineering Jobs Outlook
Engineers will find job opportunities in select disciplines in 2013, with candidates who are all-around, client-oriented businesspeople in demand.
Best-Paying Jobs by Major
What could you earn with a particular four-year degree? Find out by checking out this list of the top-paying jobs for 20 of the most common majors.
Eight High-Paying, Secure Jobs
Want to earn a good salary and enjoy a measure of job security as well? Check out these well-paying jobs on tap for fast growth in the coming years.