Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
"Weapons of Mass Destruction" and "Climate Change"
Share:
by forthebetta | November 22, 2008 at 01:04 pm
567 views | 16 Recommendations | 10 comments
Photos
I'll now start with Saddam Hussein's "Weapons of Mass Destruction" which Bush used as reason to invade Iraq. Saddam Hussein was not a terrorist. He was not a radical Islamist, and in fact protected the Christian minority. Since 2003 there has been a slow genocide of these same Christians he once protected. Before the Ba'ath Party, back when Iraq was a monarchy, Baghdad was a fairly safe and flourishing city, with Muslims, Christians, and Jews all living together without any serious problems. The Jews mostly went to Israel after its creation, and the Christians have only started leaving in large numbers in the last five years. My point is that Saddam Hussein, although ruthless against the idea of Kurdish Independance or Shi'ite majority taking over, he kept the country together.
Bush went into Iraq with seemingly good intentions. He wanted to stop a ruthless dictator from obtaining "Weapons of Mass Destruction" that he may have had, but was still not a threat to America, either way. Of course we all know it was about oil. It's the reason "why" he wanted to remove a dictator which we have a problem with. Politicians today simply cannot tell the full truth, for many different reasons depending on the situation. It was Orwell who once wrote, "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
Now I will move on to Obama, where I see a parallel between Bush's "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and Obama's "Climate Change." I hate to criticize him before he even comes into office, but I feel that people need this warning. Like Bush's supposed intentions of removing a dictator, Obama wants to change the way we obtain energy. It's a good thing to reduce pollution, so obviously his intentions seem good. The reason "why" is what I have a problem with. Like Bush's Iraqi-oil in the name of "Weapons of Mass Destruction", Obama will be able to control energy in the name of "Climate Change," and both of their intentions seem good, at the time.
I was once a believer that the world is warming and humanity is doomed if we don't stop our greenhouse gas emmisions. Then I began studying climate change professionally, and found that, even if the earth's temperature rose a couple degrees over the past hundred years, that is insignificant compared to changes of ten or twenty degrees in a few decades, which have happened naturally during the earth's long history. A couple degrees change over a hundred years time is extremely stable, and there is no reason to call it a "crisis" which is definitely "man-made," without real proof, enough to convince someone skeptical.
Like I said, I think it's a good thing to reduce pollution sometimes, just like it's a good thing to remove a dictator sometimes. It's the reason "why" that bothers me. Obama has a lot of good characteristics, and he'll probably end up to be an okay president, with some inevitable disappointment, but I feel the "Man-Made Climate Change" threat will be remembered in a similar way to Saddam's supposed "Weapons of Mass Destruction."
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
forthebetta
Detroit, Michigan, United States
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (10)
at 23:27 on November 23rd, 2008
i know people are reading this.
at 09:32 on November 24th, 2008
Genius!
at 13:03 on November 27th, 2008
You have been duped. The pending environmental disaster IS real, and warrants a great attention and allocation of resources. Swallow your pride, your cynicism and the human tendency to believe without reason that a global conspiracy works against you. Read this (compiled by the website http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to_a_sceptic.php) :
Here is a list of "enviro-Nazis" and "left-wing loonies" who believe that Anthropogenic Global Warming is real and well supported by sound science:
Every major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and/or atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions. On top of that list, see also this joint statement [PDF] that specifically and unequivocally endorses the work and conclusions of the IPCC Third Assessment report, a statement issued by
You can also read this one that includes all of the above signatories plus the following:
But if scientists are too liberal and politicians too unreliable, perhaps you would find the opinion of some of the bastions of industry more convincing?
at 13:07 on November 27th, 2008
You have been duped. The pending environmental disaster IS real, and warrants a great attention and allocation of resources. Swallow your pride, your cynicism and the human tendency to believe without reason that a global conspiracy works against you. Read this (compiled by the website http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to_a_sceptic.php) :
Here is a list of "enviro-Nazis" and "left-wing loonies" who believe that Anthropogenic Global Warming is real and well supported by sound science:
Every major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and/or atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions. On top of that list, see also this joint statement [PDF] that specifically and unequivocally endorses the work and conclusions of the IPCC Third Assessment report, a statement issued by
You can also read this one that includes all of the above signatories plus the following:
But if scientists are too liberal and politicians too unreliable, perhaps you would find the opinion of some of the bastions of industry more convincing?
at 14:02 on November 28th, 2008
i'm sorry sir, i've done my own research at libraries looking up the facts. i've studied the natural cycles of climate change over the earth's long history, and global warming is definitely not a threat. one or two degrees warming in a hundred years is extremely stable when looking at the past twenty-thousand years, where changes of ten or twenty degrees in a few decades have happened naturally. it was warmer a thousand years ago, was that man-made?
i suggest you go to a library and study for yourself. most professional scientists in any related field do not believe in "man-made global warming" and yet "they*" would never dare let them have a real voice on the issue.
"they"= the mainstream media, most websites (including government websites) that people read regularly, and anyone who supports any of them.
at 14:45 on November 27th, 2008
Global warming is to liberals, what WMD's were to neocons, myths, lies and tools of power.
History will laugh at the very thought of human monkeys changing temperature of planets. And to think we just had an election where every politician promised to lower the temperature of the planet and we just take it all in strid.
God help us.
Stop this fear mongering environMENTALism that is stealing our kid's futures. Why do we need fear as a motivation anyways. What are we, cave men?
I for one will dispell this aging 23 year old CO2 theory so humans can further evolve in reason and inteligence.
Protect, preserve and RESPECT nature. Not save and rescue it from an non existent crisis. The CO2 debate is NOT about pollution. It's about primal fear that our kids will condem us for.
at 14:06 on November 28th, 2008
thank you. i'm glad some others understand that both political parties are not in the best interests of the people, and neither are honest on their intentions.
at 15:05 on November 28th, 2008
Forthebetta... I'm glad you consider your own research to have more validity than NASA. Good luck with that.
at 23:28 on November 28th, 2008
I just looked at NASA's website, looking at several articles relating to earth's climate history and supposed global warming. I was honestly trying to find something worth my time, and found jokes instead. They have absolutely no data to support a man-made global warming theory, and also, avoid any discussion of actual-factual comparison of: 1. previous times when the earth warmed significantly VS. 2. today's supposed global warming. They cannot release those facts to the public because they are a government-sponsered agency, and the facts will show the truth. Go to the library and study climate change, please.
I will support John Coleman, founder of the weather channel, who wants to sue Al Gore for fraud.
at 06:00 on December 16th, 2008
My google search is better than your google search. Na na na na naaaa na!
This is so silly to ignore the blue sky outside, the green grass, lots of cheap energy, we are living longer than at any time in history, modern day health care, environmental protections and laws and technology and what do we do? We whine and bitch and insist on dooms day still coming despite the fact that the IPCC has been making predictions of doom for 19 FREAKING YEARS.