Friday, April 18, 2008

Iwo Jima = Global Warming?

I saw this cover of Time magazine a couple of days ago and tried to start framing my thoughts about the serious problem that it represents. I don't think that I have arrived at any real clarity of thought yet, but I will try to present why it is so disturbing to me.

First, the image of U.S. marines planting our flag on top of Mount Suribachi has become a symbol of the determination that we showed as a nation to rid the world of both the European and Asian variants of fascism. The Battle of Iwo Jima has been called some of the fiercest fighting in the Pacific theater. About 21,000 Japanese soldiers defended the island while the U.S. forces were in excess of 100,000. The end result was over 20,000 dead Japanese and over 26,000 U.S. casualties (~7,000 dead). The bloodiness of the battle and the difficulties the U.S. forces encountered in taking this small island have been cited as one of the factors that President Truman used in deciding to use atomic weapons against the main island of Japan.

So, there is this theory called Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) that says driving an SUV, producing electricity, choosing the wrong pet products, and forgetting or neglecting to recycle are causing a catastrophic temperature increase that will end life on the planet as we know it. There are MANY respected scientists and engineers that believe that there is no crisis. In fact, the reason why most of them don't believe there is a crisis is because when a theory (or model) doesn't agree with reality, you have to choose the reality regardless of how elegant or convenient the theory is.

Now, putting the image together with the theory of AGW, are we being asked to sacrifice our current economy, future prosperity, and, quite possibly, our lives in an effort to "Win the War on Global Warming?" Although I have not read the article, I am going to assume that we are.

I have written on the lack of peer review (Wanted: Fact Checker), the lack of computer model validation (A Nuclear Engineer's View of Validation), lack of critical examination of model assumptions (The Problem of Choice), and just plain ol' bad science ("But where does the HEAT go?"). I am absolutely convinced that AGW theory is being used for at least these two (if not more) things: (1) A method for climate scientists and other scammers to maintain a funding stream that will dry up when the facts see the light of day; and (2) A means of scaring people into giving the federal government and the United Nations more of their money and more control of their lives.

What bothers me about this image is that Time magazine either is being duped into being a tool of the social engineers and environmental wackos, or is willingly producing propaganda that the average American will not investigate further. I find the first proposition highly unlikely, so I am forced to conclude that this magazine has become an outright propaganda organ of a socialist view of the environment. I am not ready to sacrifice my freedoms for a highly suspect view of the environmental damage that I supposedly produce by simply being an average American. However, if Time magazine has their editorial way, I am sure I will soon find myself in the minority.

By the way, if carbon dioxide becomes an environmental hazard in the Environmental Protection Agency (United Nations) sense of the word, then EVERY BREATH YOU EXHALE is now capable of being regulated by some government.

That should give you some idea about what lies at the end of this rainbow: A totalitarian jackpot.


Anonymous said...


Russ said...

Just so everyone knows, I deleted a comment that contained profanity. If you don't believe that these enviromental policies lead to regulation of every part of lives, then you are going to have to come up with better arguments than "You are full of ****!"

That is not an argument that would win any debate, but it might make you feel better about where your political ideas actually lead.

Also, how much guts does it take to make anonymous comments on websites that you disagree with? I put my name on everything I write.

Kritter Krit said...

Yeah. I agree.

Taking the time to make random rude comments anonymously is pretty lame.


...Even if I, too, usually think you're full of %&*@, sweetie. Hee. ;)

Robert (Bob) English said...

I am still on the fence about the whole issue, but alot of your points are grounded with some rational attempt at getting to the heart of the matter, which I respect.

Whoever can't use more eloquent language and sophisticated arguments to debate, well, they're probably just frustrated. They probably won't be running for any political office, that's for sure. However, to their credit, I bet they really feel strongly about their side of it too, just can't put their emotions into words I suppose.

I'm a tad impressed because I guess you've got other people reading your blog you hadn't counted on, which is very nice I must say.

Maybe your site is being monitored by some liberal watchdog group! Big Brother is watching you. hee..hee

Just when I think that Kristy has used up all her unique, witty comments, she comes up with more! Very funny.

Russ said...


Thanks for your comment. I really think that emotion about the issue of global warming is the real problem. People are not looking at the science in a critical way and are getting whipped into a frenzy about this supposed "crisis".

When someone presents a rational argument about where the current proposals to solve the crisis actually lead, those people in a frenzy can't/won't believe it. Whether we are warming or cooling or staying the same doesn't matter because adaptation is the best and cheapest way of dealing with it.

Keep commenting because it lets me know that at least one person besides Kristy is reading.

Robert (Bob) English said...

Yes, you're right. Just this weekend there was a segment on TV about (48 Hours, I think) about all the nasty organisms living in your house (your bed, your dishes, everywhere). And I'm thinking, yep, good way to scare everybody into becoming such clean, heavenly bodies, that someday we won't be able to fight off a simple infection because we won't have any immunity from keeping ourselves as clean as possible!

Robert (Bob) English said...

Oops. I wasn't finished and I hit "Enter" too soon. I meant to add that the TV show reminds me of what you're talking about....scare tactics to get you to react somehow. (Dont' get me wrong, I'll still take a shower everyday, but I might also still eat a piece of food that fell to the floor). :)

Kritter Krit said...

"I'll still take a shower every day, but I might also still eat a piece of food that fell to the floor."

Classic! =)

Anonymous said...

I don't often leave you comments, but I read your blog periodically and I want you to know that I agree whole-heartedly with your view that "global warming" is a conspiracy perpetuated by organizations that wish to gain ever-increasing control over our lives. I have thoroughly enjoyed your posts on this issue and I appreciate how well thought out and articulate they are. I grew up in Oregon, probably the capitol of the "go green/anti-global warming" movement. The propaganda there is so rampant that most people who never leave the state don't even know there is another school of thought on the issue out there. Thank you for making this information more accessible.

Amy Brady

PS- I hope you are feeling better soon!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...