One of the apsects of climate change which is a mantra of the environmentalist movement is the concept of 'carbon credits' and how this manipulation of CO2 emissions somehow converts them to a form of investment that can mitiigate the emissions themselves.
One individal from the religious community who takes issue with the environmentalists' rigid postion on climate change, while denying deniers the right to provide alternative evidence, is George Pell, Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, Australia. He spoke at the Global Warming Policy Forum annual lecture at Westminster Cathedral Hall, London.
"As a bishop who regularly preaches to congregations of every age and at widely different levels of prosperity and education," noted the Archbishop, " I have some grasp of the challenges in presenting a point of view to the general public. This helps me to understand the propaganda achievements of the climate extremists, at least until their attempted elimination of the Medieval Warming and then Climategate. I was not surprised to learn that the IPCC used some of the world's best advertising agencies to generate maximum effect among the public."
Climate Change is a Moving Target
Over the past 20 years, the environmentalists have frequently changed their definition and description of what Mother Nature is doing to the planet, a changing dynamic ever since there was a Mother Nature to call on.
In the 1990s, it was the "greenhouse effect," however, in the first decade of the new millennium "global warming" stopped. Next, we were confronted with the term "anthropogenic global warming," whatever relationship that might have to Mother Nature and naturally-occurring changes in the earth's climate. Eventually, we have had to cope with the challenge of "climate change," which eventually became "anthropogenic climate disruption," as it soon became apparent that the climate is changing no more now than it has in the past.
Somewhere along the way, the world was 'Gored' by global warming, a one-sided concept fostered by politicians like Al Gore, and supported by the faulty science from that infamous UN organization, the IPCC, which gave us Climategate, among other offspring of their elaborate and ill-fated attempt to fool Mother Nature into believing she was not responsible - it was the human race.
IPCC Opposition to Deniers of Global Warming
The Archbishop went on to describe how his suspicions about the climate movement's methods deepened over the years. "... by the climate movement's totalitarian approach to opposing views, their demonizing of successful opponents and their opposition to the publication of opposing views even in scientific journals."
"A point to be noted in this movement's struggle to convince public opinion," he noted," is that their language veers toward that of primitive religious controversy. Believers are contrasted with deniers, doubters and skeptics,"
The comparison made by Archbishop Pell between the the rewards for proper environmental behaviour and the grim scenarios for the future resulting from irresponsible human behavior reminded him of some religious practices of days gone by. Historically, it was not uncommon for certain religions to request and offer sacrifices for sought-after blessings, and in much the same way, he points out that "the immense financial costs true believers would impose on economies" can be compared to these religious sacrifices and the sale of carbon credits can be compared with the pre-Reformation practice of selling indulgences. This is an interesting and very accurate analogy.
Pay Attention to History
The old adage that "those who do not learn from the lessons of history are bound to repeat the failures," applies to the environmental practices of today. There is no evidence that climate change can be modified substantially, up or down, by human activity, or that global climate can be affected, one way or the other, over the long term, although there is ample evidence that humans can make important local changes which may be good or bad. History teaches us this.
Debates about anthropogenic global warming have validity if they accurately recognize and interpret scientific evidence. The evidence of historians is also important since environmental issues are not simply mathematical problems, in fact they are not "pure" science.
Raise the Living Standards of the Poor
A better solution than spending money on carbon credits and assuminmg that this investment market technique would somehow stem the flow of CO2, would be to raise money to improve the living standards to reduce the impact of natural disasters - floods, tsunami, hurricanes, tornadoes, firestorms, as well as climate change - which seem to be occurring frequently around the globe, thereby assisting people to survive these natural challenges.
As the Archbishop pointed out, "we must be sure the solutions being proposed are valid, the benefits are real and the end result justifies the impositions on the community, particularly the most vulnerable."
What are the benefits of various scenarios to combat global warming? It is true that what we have seen so far is extra tax revenue for governments and more revenue for those who develop and implement the various schemes which they believe will combat climate change. It is highly unlikely that the burden for financing these schemes will be shared equally among rich and poor.
Sources:
Financial Post, "Carbon credits like medieval indulgences," George Pell, Oct. 27, 2011
The Middlebury Community Network
Duane Sharp - I am a retired professional engineer (electronics), with over 40 years of writing experience in technology topics, with a focus on the IT ...
