THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume XIII, Issue # 86, April 5, 2011
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE CLIMATE WAR SHOULD BE DECLARED OVER
By Art Horn
THE CLIMATE WAR: A WAR FORCED UPON THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD -- THE FOSSIL FUEL BURNING WORLD
BEING ATTACKED BY FACTIONS THAT WANT TO EXTRACT THE WEALTH FROM THE PROSPEROUS SOCIETIES TO PAY FOR
A RADICAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE WORLD & "SAVE IT" FROM THE INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES' "CRIME" OF
RELEASING CARBON DIOXIDE INTO THE AIR -- WHY THE CLIMATE WAR IS SO DANGEROUS: NO ANSWERS AS TO
WHAT SPECIFIC CLIMATE BENEFIT WOULD RESULT FROM THE VICTORY OF THE RADICALS IN THE WAR -- THE HIGHLY
PROBABLE CONSEQUENCES OF AN ATTEMPTED RE-MAKING OF ENERGY PRODUCTION ON A GLOBAL SCALE:
PROHIBITIVE COSTS & NEGLIGIBLE BENEFITS.
FULL STORY:
Whether you know it or not the industrialized world is at war, a climate war. The industrialized world didn’t ask for it; it
has been forced upon us. The fossil-fuel burning world is being attacked by factions that want to extract the wealth of
the prosperous nations to pay for a remaking of the world and “save it” from the industrialized nations crime of releasing
carbon dioxide into the air.
However, as one of the Australian climate commissioners recently revealed, these governments, environmentalist groups,
and the United Nations have no answers as to what specific climate benefit would result from their victory. This is what
makes the climate war so dangerous. Without a specific, targeted temperature drop figure somewhere in the future as a
goal, the entire transformation from fossil fuels to “renewables” lacks any true objective. The attempt to re-make energy
production on a global scale will likely be prohibitively expensive and yield a temperature reduction that can only be
guessed at! History has proven over and over again that stumbling into war without a specified, targeted objective,
results in billions or trillions of wasted dollars and the pointless loss of human life.
Every once in a great while, when our moon’s orbit takes it closer to Earth, something quite remarkable can happen, a
government official tells the truth. Apparently the increased gravitational force of the closer moon wrenches the truth
from the unwitting official’s mouth. Before you know it, he or she has blurted out something that, in a moment, changes
the entire landscape. With the last full moon being closer to earth since 1993, just such a thing happened in Australia.
In March, 2011, around the time of the moon’s closer proximity, a reporter named Andrew Bolt, writing for Melbourne’s
Herald Sun, happened to be interviewing Australia’s leading Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery. Bolt was
looking to get a figure as to how much the earth’s temperature would drop, if Australia reduced its carbon dioxide
emissions 5% by 2020. At first Flannery was unwilling to give an answer, probably because he didn’t have one. Bolt
pressed him for an actual number, something he could get his arms around. Flannery responded with “look it will be a
very, very small increment.” Bolt continued to ask Flannery for an actual number.
Apparently, at this point, the moon’s stronger gravity effect kicked in. Upon further questioning, Flannery blurted out
“If we cut emissions today, global temperatures are not likely to drop for about a thousand years.” The first time I read
this, I had to go back and read it again. I was that stunned. Bolt was not satisfied with this answer. He was simply
looking for an actual number, not a vague statement of generalities. He pressed Flannery to give a number like the cost
of buying a car. He said you need to know the price of the car before you spend real money to buy it right? Flannery
agreed.
Bolt then used a different approach. He gave Flannery a set of temperature numbers that he could pick from. This
would help Flannery give the amount of temperature drop benefit Australia would achieve by reducing carbon dioxide
emissions 5% by 2020. The closer moon’s proximity and increased gravity was now pulling harder on the earth than it
had in 18 years. Flannery responded with this remarkable admission. “Just let me finish and say this. If the world, as a
whole, cut all emissions tomorrow, the average temperature of the planet is not going to drop in several hundred years,
perhaps as much as a thousand years.” After reading this I was glad I was sitting down.
This eye popping remark comes not from some everyday politician, but from a climate commissioner of Australia. He is
saying that, if we shut down every coal, gas, or oil burning electric utility, eliminate every car, bus, train and ground all
planes, shut all factories that make things and stop using fossil fuels entirely everywhere in the world, it would have no
effect on earth’s temperature for hundreds of years, perhaps a thousand years. Amazingly, even after that tectonic plate
shifting admission, Flannery still had no actual number as to how much the temperature would drop, if Australia shut
everything off today. He could only offer “it’s going to be slight.”
What is “slight” Is it a tenth of a degree? A hundredth of a degree? A thousandths of a degree? Flannery had no
answer. That’s because he doesn’t know what the number is. It’s like saying the car is going to cost you money to buy.
Well ok, but how much? Well, we really don’t have a number for you, but trust us it does have a price. Well then, I’m not
going to buy it if I don’t know the price. What’s scary and dangerous about the climate war is that governments will
force you to buy that car no matter what it costs.
And that is the whole issue. What price are we supposed to pay to revolutionize the way the industrial world makes
energy and what temperature benefit will result? This climate commissioner of Australia has no answer as to what the
temperature drop would be. I strongly suspect he has no idea what the cost will be to achieve the temperature drop
either. It took 200 years to achieve the amount of energy production we have in the world today. You can bet it will take
trillions of dollars to re-engineer it into something else. Even if such a thing were possible there is no guarantee it would
have any significant effect on earth’s average temperature. According to the Australian climate commissioner the end
result, whatever that might be, would take up to one thousand years to take effect.
There is hope. Mr. Flannery has basically admitted there is no need for the climate war to continue. By revealing that the
temperature drop would not be realized for perhaps a thousand years, he indicated that there simply is no pressing need
to transform the way we make energy today, tomorrow, or twenty years from now. The collateral damage resulting from
such a forced and rapid transformation would likely far, far exceed any guessed at benefit of unknown magnitude
hundreds of years in the future. To risk the prosperity and safety of billions of people on such tenuous assumptions is
reckless and irresponsible to the extreme. The climate war should be declared over.
---------------------------------------------------------
Energy Tribune, 31 March 2011
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Political Environmentalism Versus Human Progress & Prosperity:
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
A native of Connecticut, Art Horn earned the Bachelor of Science degree in Meterology with Honors at Lyndon State
College, Lyndonville, Vermont. Horn has had thirty years of experience working as a radio and television weatherman,
including service via CBS and NBC stations and channels. His work has included service as an expert witness for
lawyers in weather-related cases, providing critical testimony in cases in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Florida, and Maine.
Self-employed as "The Art of Weather," Horn presents informational and educational programs about various topics in
weather. He is the recipient of the American Meterological Society's Television Seal of Approval #199.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume XIII, 2011
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity