I know global warming a serious topic. If Al Gore is right, we will burn to a crisp, life as we know it will end, and even the UN won’t be able to save us. Alas, it’s hard for laymen to figure out all of the details. Still, shouldn’t global warming mean, well, the planet is warming? But it hasn’t over the last decade. If the alarmists can’t get today’s temperature right, I keep wondering why we chould believe them when they purport to predict the temperature a century from now. “Some day we’ll get it right” seems to be the mantra of the alarmist lobby.
At least I’m not the only person with questions. Christopher Booker has a wonderful year-ending column in The Daily Telegraph. He wryly observes:
Looking back over my columns of the past 12 months, one of their major themes was neatly encapsulated by two recent items from The Daily Telegraph.
The first, on May 21, headed “Climate change threat to Alpine ski resorts” , reported that the entire Alpine “winter sports industry” could soon “grind to a halt for lack of snow”. The second, on December 19, headed “The Alps have best snow conditions in a generation” , reported that this winter’s Alpine snowfalls “look set to beat all records by New Year’s Day”.
Well, I guess that’s why the operative phrase now is “climate change.” That way the social engineers can justify destroying the economy whatever happens to the temperature. If temperatures rise, it shows the earth is warming. If temperatures fall, it shows that global warming is causing the climate to change, presumably even if that means a new Ice Age. In principle, there is no difference between droughts, floods, and blizzards–all justify turning control over to Al & Co.
Ain’t the politics of science wonderful?
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.