A One-Man Wrecking Crew

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Drop whatever you're doing and read Senator James Inhofe's spectacular speech against global warming hysteria. Here are just a few highlights.

Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time periods. From 1895 until the 1930's the media pedaled a coming ice age.

From the late 1920's until the 1960's they warned of global warming. From the 1950's until the 1970's they warned us again of a coming ice age. This makes modern global warming the fourth estate’s fourth attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the last 100 years. Recently, advocates of alarmism have grown increasingly desperate to try to convince the public that global warming is the greatest moral issue of our generation. Just last week, the vice president of London’s Royal Society sent a chilling letter to the media encouraging them to stifle the voices of scientists skeptical of climate alarmism.


The National Academy of Sciences report reaffirmed the existence of the Medieval Warm Period from about 900 AD to 1300 AD and the Little Ice Age from about 1500 to 1850. Both of these periods occurred long before the invention of the SUV or human industrial activity could have possibly impacted the Earth’s climate. In fact, scientists believe the Earth was warmer than today during the Medieval Warm Period, when the Vikings grew crops in Greenland.


One final point on the science of climate change: I am approached by many in the media and others who ask, "What if you are wrong to doubt the dire global warming predictions? Will you be able to live with yourself for opposing the Kyoto Protocol?"

My answer is blunt. The history of the modern environmental movement is chock full of predictions of doom that never came true. We have all heard the dire predictions about the threat of overpopulation, resource scarcity, mass starvation, and the projected death of our oceans. None of these predictions came true, yet it never stopped the doomsayers from continuing to predict a dire environmental future.


If the alarmists truly believe that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are dooming the planet, then they must face up to the fact that symbolism does not solve a supposed climate crisis. The alarmists freely concede that the Kyoto Protocol, even if fully ratified and complied with, would not have any meaningful impact on global temperatures. And keep in mind that Kyoto is not even close to being complied with by many of the nations that ratified it, including 13 of the EU-15 nations that are not going to meet their emission reduction promises.


The Kyoto Protocol's post 2012 agenda which mandates that the developing world be subjected to restrictions on greenhouse gases could have the potential to severely restrict development in regions of the world like Africa, Asia and South America -- where some of the Earth's most energy-deprived people currently reside.


I firmly believe that when the history of our era is written, future generations will look back with puzzlement and wonder why we spent so much time and effort on global warming fears and pointless solutions like the Kyoto Protocol.

French President Jacques Chirac provided the key clue as to why so many in the international community still revere the Kyoto Protocol, who in 2000 said Kyoto represents "the first component of an authentic global governance."
This is just a taste of this blistering, fact-filled masterpiece of political debunkery. Not only does Inhofe provide references thoughout his speech, he leaves no stone unturned. Among the many targets he completely mows down is Al Gore's recent book, An Inconvenient Truth.

I am very grateful we have at least one rational voice speaking in the Senate on this important issue. This is about a good as a speech of its kind can get.


-- CAV


Myrhaf said...

A liberal friend of mine asked me to go see Al Gore's film. I refused. She said that if I went, she would read any book I asked her to read. So I sat through the thing with 8 other people in the theater and then gave her a copy of "Atlas Shrugged." She got the best end of the deal.

Gus Van Horn said...

And people accuse Objectivists of not being generous!

American Individualist said...

Excellent excerpts. I'm assuming the rest was much of the same, so I forwarded it to TIA Daily.

Gus Van Horn said...


Actually, the rest was even better. The only flaw came at the end where Inhofe blamed the profit motive for sensationalism. This is wrong, of course, or the media would forthrightly (and profitably) report on numerous Moslem atrocities on a near-hourly basis.

But I think we can overlook that flaw in what was otherwise an excellentr speech.

Also, I've read some of your stuff in Capitalism Magazine. Good stuff. I'm flattered that you stopped by, and appreciate your having forwarded the link.

I've added you to the sidebar and look forward to more of your blogging.


Anonymous said...

Ah, you've linked up to this one already. You daywalkers sometimes get the drop on me...

It's encouraging to see this. Maybe Greg at Noodlefood was right that too much mainstream exposure will only serve to reveal the truth about the 'viros.

I can hope, anyway.

Gus Van Horn said...

If so, then Inhofe pretty much exposed everything. He did the pro-science side a great service by putting all of that together, given that there is now a transcript of it on the web.