Have you ever been “that guy”? I know I have. You say something and, of course, you are right, but still . . . Anyway, that’s how I feel when talking about climate change. I feel arrogant and (how you say?) repetitive. I apologize. I tried to make this post entertaining and worthwhile, but, by all means, I will understand if you find you cannot proceed past the next punctuation mark.
Climate change regulation is, in my mind, up there next to gay marriage on the list of the stupidest things ever. Now, this may be because mine is an unsophistocated, uncultivated, anything-but-scientific mind. But, actually, I contend that it is precisely this which has saved me. I see the “green” fad for what it is: silliness cloaked in righteousness (thank you Phil and Dick Cheney).
My dilemma is how to prove it to others. Hitherto I have been rather unsuccessful. Therefore, I will try a different line of reasoning this time and see what happens.
Let me put it this way: I have the ability to write pretty good English papers. I learned, long ago, the art of making nothing go a long way. But, I have found, after hours of research, that I have nothing on the most-Nobel-prized of the climate changers out there.
And so, as a start, below are some of my favorite quotes regarding climate change taken from those websites who should know:
“Climate change affects us all. Nine out of every ten disasters recorded are now climate related. Rising temperatures and more frequent floods, droughts and storms affect millions of people’s lives. This is set against a backdrop of financial and food insecurity.”
Man alive, I could go on all day. As any thinking person recognizes, these statements literally mean nothing. In other words, the conjecture upon which all of the climate change hubabaloo finds itself founded is nothing more than nothing.
But, let’s never mind that for a moment. Let’s digress for the sake of argument. Say, for example, that you come to believe that nine out of every ten disasters are caused by your throwing away your water bottle. Next, imagine it is within your power to stop nine of ten disasters. Will you do it? Of course you will. What kind of jerk wouldn’t reduce the world’s disasters to a mere one a year?
And so, what is the next logical leap? Well, obviously you are helpless to stop climate change all by your lonesome. Act locally and all that. And so, what’s left but for all of humanity to institute a world government and bank dedicated to regulating every ever-love’n soul under the sun? Nothing. Nothing unless you want nine out of every ten disasters to keep on keep’n on. But, of course you don’t, because you’re nice.
In conclusion, and in a very “that guy” way, let me tell you a little story. Once upon a time, a group of self-interested persons invented a man-made crisis. Sometime later, after the myth of this crisis had become ensconed in popular culture, a wealthy, democratic country passes legislation capping greenhouse-gas emissions in an effort to “fight” this crisis — or else. A model for taxing and trading government-granted emission credits is thus implemented. Following such legislation, a series of like-minded international treaties are signed somewhere exotic. After a few years a sufficiently powerful world government and bank is established. And it shall come to pass in those days that “all the world should be taxed.”
The market created by this world-regulatory agency involves trillions of dollars. A general fund is managed by unelected political elites who promptly promise to redistribute wealth from western nations to developing ones for the sake of social justice. On the side these same unelected political elites involve themselves in the transferring of funds to, well, whoever or whatever they want. Corruption and theft and graft occurs on a scale never before seen.
The member-states involved in the treaties will inevitably fall short of the ambitious goals set. This will have been a calculated failure. The more honest of these states will most-certainly have digressed (after the tenure of some five-year plan or some sort) economically speaking, compared to those less-honest, shall we say, practical societies (chalk it up to social justcice). World governments will then, obviously, have to double their efforts and, by extension, their power, over one’s life — or else. The end.
There are those who will not believe this story. For the skeptic I offer the following anecdote: a little somethin’-somthin’ from a draft of the treaty that world leaders will consider in Copenhagen soon.
“38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:
(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.”
Oh, I admit the deceitfulness of the climate change guilt-trip argument is quite complete. Look at me! I can do that too! I can lie and build a house of cards on top of that lie until I have absolute power too. That is, if I had the political clout and money and ego of a European Union or a United Nations or a Barack Obama campaign or, on a smaller scale, UNC.
Climate change talk is nothing more than a brilliantly designed scheme to lord power over you. Crafted by self-serving politicians and lobbyists, there are a myriad of people working to make it, as Al Gore once put it, “the central organizing principal for civilization.” If you don’t believe me just watch Youtube videos of world leaders pontificating about it. To hear them talk you’d think the camera was a gun. “We must act now” and “greatest threat facing the planet” are phrases oft repeated.
But, whatever. Believe what you want. Can’t say I didn’t try. The Good Lord knows I tried.