On January 20, 2015, in his State of the Union speech, President Barack Obama stated the greatest threat to future generations was neither terrorism nor ISIS. It wasn’t nuclear weapons in rogue states either. “No challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change,” said Obama.
Earlier, in February of 2014, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, referring to climate change, called on all nations to respond to “the greatest challenge of our generation.” Addressing anyone who would have the temerity to question his politically motivated claim, Kerry said “We should not allow a tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science and extreme ideologues to compete with scientific fact.”
With America and much of the entire free world facing multiple threats from radical Islamic terrorists, including bombings, beheadings, mass slaughter of Christians and Muslims, etc., etc., we are supposed to believe the weather is our “greatest threat?”
What we are seeing is a great example of an administration’s utilization of the bully pulpit. To get the American people to believe this climate change poppycock requires a “willing suspension of disbelief,” something that Obama has become very skilled in promoting.
Then on the day before the Paris massacre, on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” President Barack Obama downplayed the threat of ISIS to fit into his climate change rhetoric. George Stephanopoulos asked Obama if ISIS was gaining in strength. “I don’t think they’re gaining strength,” Obama responded. “What is true is that from the start, our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them.”
Of course, this would have us discount the downing of the Russian Airbus, killing 224 innocent people, including 17 children, or the horrible attacks Friday evening in France. The death toll there is far above 100 people. That’s just in the last two weeks! Obama certainly can’t let a few terrorists attacks get in the way of the “No. 1 Threat”. Nor does he think we change our strategy to fight them. Why, we have the bigger threat of “weather” to suck up most of the concern in the room.
But what are the “shoddy scientists” saying that would refute this line of rhetoric coming from the administration? Well, let’s put aside the “shoddy scientist’s” writings on what is the real science of our climate. Let’s disregard the facts just being released that our polar ice caps are not shrinking, but are growing, seen here, or the plain, elementary science that the warming of the Earth and increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere “is currently net beneficial for both humanity and the biosphere generally” see story here, or the credible forecast of a coming ice age, story here.
I draw your attention to the thoughts of just one of those “shoddy scientists”, Dr. Richard Lindzen. Dr. Lindzen is an American atmospheric physicist known for his work in the dynamics of the middle atmosphere, atmospheric tides, and ozone photochemistry. He has published more than 200 scientific papers and books. For 30 years he was Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He was a lead author of Chapter 7, “Physical Climate Processes and Feedbacks,” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Third Assessment Report on climate change.
Dr. Lindzen likens climate change alarmists (kinda like Obama and Kerry?) to a fanatical cult. He recently told a Massachusetts-based radio station that people who believe in global warming are becoming more hysterical in their arguments. See story here.
“As with any cult, once the mythology of the cult begins falling apart, instead of saying, oh, we were wrong, they get more and more fanatical,” he said. “You’ve led an unpleasant life, you haven’t led a very virtuous life, but now you’re told, you get absolution if you watch your carbon footprint. It’s salvation.”
Anyone want to give the Obama administration a little absolution?