|
Would a malpractice suit protect Americans from another fraudulent
National Academy of Sciences or United Nations report on global warming –
one of the biggest scams of our lifetime?
by C. Grady Drago, Chairman of the Lincoln Heritage Institute
EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is reprinted from a previous issue of the ADDRESS, published by the Lincoln Heritage Institute. For more on global warming, search the LHI archives with key words 'globalony' and global warming.
By this time, it should be as plain as the nose on Cyrano de Bergerac’s face that not only has the Kyoto treaty been thoroughly discredited, but that the entire man-caused global warming fantasy is about politics, and the U.S. funding socialist nations, not science. The environmental extremists and liberals believed they had an issue that would allow the frighten the public, keep themselves in the headlines, gain them control, and keep the money rolling in from anti-American entities and from those not able to match the industrial creativity of U.S. and the American worker.
Just over 35 years ago, these same people brought us the ill-fated human created “global cooling” report threatening gloom and doom. Remember? They actually predicted the earth was getting ready to go into an ice age, that the polar ice caps would grow, break off and float into the gulf streams, melt, and flood New York harbor and Japan. For whatever reason, that “nightmare” didn’t catch on since the media did not promote it like they have the man-made global warming scam.
Over the past few years, there has been a great body of factual data and scientific evidence made available, not print-outs from the results of a run on someone’s computer model, that prove conclusively that we are not in the throws of a human-induced global warming era. Such information has come from scientists such as Dr. S. Fred Singer, president of The Science & Environmental Policy Project, research professor at George Mason University, and professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia; Dr. Richard S. Lindzen from MIT, and member of the NAS panel; and Dr. Frederick Seitz, past president of the NAS and president emeritus of Rockefeller University.
If your attorney’s advice proved fallacious and you found he ignored, didn’t consider, or simply did not do enough research to be aware of some key facts when formulating his advice, I assume he would be discredited and fired. Needless to say, the lawyer would also be subject to a malpractice suit.
If your surgeon conducted surgery that the overwhelming body of evidence and scientific data indicated should not have to be done, there would not only be a loss of reputation, but there would be a significant malpractice suit. Well, let me tell you, this is exactly what has happened in the case of the National Academy of Science’s report on global warming.
The Academy was established in the mid-1860’s to advise the President. Throughout the years, they have garnered an envious reputation; a reputation that was earned from their many creative, groundbreaking, and sometimes landmark scientific reports that our policy leaders relied upon to make important decisions affecting the nation. Well, according to numerous and more significant experts, as well as available overwhelming data, something has gone wrong. With publication of just this one report on global warming, the NAS appear to have put itself in the same position as the above physician and lawyer. It is clear that they have become politicized in a way we never would have thought possible.
The question is how do you bring a malpractice suite against the NAS, a government agency. We can, however, mistrust future reports. At a minimum, every study they produce for a long time to come will and should be questioned for its integrity and accuracy as may the work of most of the individual members of the eleven-member panel.
Unfortunately, the media has again done the nation a disservice by not publishing the full truth about this purely scientific issue. They know all of the facts, but obviously decided not the print anything that was contrary to the UN’s Kyoto treaty. Instead, they have treated this issue as they would a celebrity they are promoting – ignoring what was not to their liking for the sake of a sensational story.
Following are just some of the known scientific facts and available data that, at a minimum, raise questions as to the truth, accuracy, and motive of those reporting on the issue of global warming, and of the drafters and those promoting the Kyoto treaty.
The Kyoto Treaty – Impacts of Implementation
- While the European Economic Community (EEC) and individual European nations have complained that the U.S. has not signed the Kyoto Treaty (and have pressured the U.S. to approve the treaty), only one European nation has signed the treaty: Romania.
- Japan has not ratified the Kyoto Treaty.
- Only 33 of the 84 nations that signed the protocols have signed the treaty. They are all undeveloped countries and not affected by the treaty’s provisions.
- The NAS itself in early 2000 expressed doubts about the report contention about recent global warming.
- Proponents of the Treaty have already admitted that the economic impacts of the Treaty are much greater than the public has been told.
- According to studies by the U.S. Energy Information Administration and other experts, the provisions of the Kyoto Treaty would have a devastating impact on the U.S., drastically slowing our economy and costing Americans potentially millions of jobs. The EIA estimated that the Treaty would drive gasoline prices as high as an additional 66¢ per gallon by 2010, and that electricity prices would increase by up to 86% during that same period. Output of energy intensive products such as steel, chemicals, and automobiles would drop significantly causing huge worker layoffs and plant closings. It has also been predicted that minorities would be the hardest hit.
- Both Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America, and James Hoffa, president of the Teamsters Union, have raised many questions about the treaty’s provisions.
- In 1997, the U.S. Senate voted 95-0 to disapprove a treaty that contained the economic and social provisions of the Kyoto Treaty.
- There were no geologists, glaciologists, or statisticians on the NAS panel.
- Dr. Frederick Seitz states that the Kyoto Treaty is "based upon flawed ideas."
Scientific Climate Facts
- Since its creation, earth has been going through climate changes experiencing several ice ages and global warming trends most without mankind even being on the planet.
- A mini-ice age, which began about 1300, ended in about 1800. Temperatures, as you would expect, have risen since then by about .5 degrees Celsius. Man was using very little hydrocarbons in the 1800’s.
- NASA’s satellite and NOAA’s oceanographic and surface measuring devices indicate that there has been no measurable global warming for the past 50 years. (The UN’s computer models have been consistently wrong in temperature predictions. Before 1990 they predicted temperatures would rise by .8 degrees Celsius [about 2 degrees Fahrenheit] per decade. By 1990, they lowered that estimate to about .3 degrees Celsius, and in 1995 they again lowered their predictions to .2 degrees Celsius increases per decade. All of them were wrong.) In fact, there is a body of evidence that indicates that over the past 20 years there has actually been a slight cooling.
- According to scientists at MIT and NASA, water vapor – not carbon dioxide – is a greater regulator of global temperatures than carbon dioxide. In fact, there is a body of evidence that shows that not only is carbon dioxide absolutely crucial to the health and growth of vegetation through photosynthesis, but actually contributes to filtering the suns rays (see the records of the U.S. Historical Climatology Network which go back to 1890).
- 15,000 of the world top climatologists, geologists, meteorologists, physicists, and others have signed a petition denouncing the Kyoto Treaty.
- NAS published a report in January of 2000 that stated that the atmosphere showed no warming since 1979.
- We are simply experiencing what the planet has gone through since it was established -- natural atmospheric swings.
- Dr. Singer stated in his comments opposing the NAS study that “…none of the many proxy measurements (tree rings, ice cores, etc) shows any warming trend after 1940.” He states further that “…the available evidence directly contradicts the idea that humans have made and are making substantial contributions to temperature changes.”
- In an article written by Alan Caruba, a respected science and business writer, he pointed out that in previous eras the concentration of carbon dioxide was five times higher than today without human existence. For over 100 million years it sustained the dinosaurs and produced lush vegetation.
- Dr. Richard S. Lindzen states that the summary of the NAS report on climate change as reported by CNN’s Michelle Mitchell, claiming that the NAS panel unanimously agreed “…that global warming is real, is getting worse, and is due to man,” is absolutely wrong.
- Records cold temperatures over the past few years have killed thousands in Siberia, northern India, Inner Mongolian, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Norway, Sweden, Finland and elsewhere.
- Floridians have complained bitterly that they could not remember a winter as cold as the past few. Many orange groves in north central Florida no longer produce fruit and the frost line is moving further south, as is the case in many other areas in the Northern Hemisphere.
- In the U.S., we recorded the lowest two-month average temperature ever in November and December of last year.
This is by no means all of the factual data and information available, much more can be found on web sites of universities and scientific organizations. This data, common sense, and knowledge of how environmental activists operate and survive are also telltale. The idea that a group of fourth- and fifth-level political appointees are sitting around in New York at the U.N. looking for ways to expand their powers, telling sovereign nations that the U.N. can enforce their arbitrary laws on a nation’s citizens, contemplating imposing a worldwide tax on the internet, raising their own army, and complaining about how much money individual nations are donating to them would be laughable if it didn’t involve such important issues.
The U.S., the least polluting of all industrial nations, has finally taken the right course. President Bush has denounced the Kyoto accords for what everyone knows they are – unfounded manufactured data absent of any solid and true scientific facts. It is a document that would bring down the U.S. economy and standard of living while having no impact on socialist and underdeveloped nations – the nations that are the unquestioned worst polluters on the planet.
Recently in Bonn, Germany, members of the U.N. met on global warming in an attempt regain the initiative they lost and to salvage whatever is left of their integrity and honor. They have cut a last-minute deal with the European nations in an attempt to salvage their pipe dreams of world domination. President Bush did not sign onto the last minute changes to the Kyoto accords (which are incomplete and will be finished behind closed doors by even lower-level bureaucrats) in spite of the fact that he has been excoriated by Sen. Tom Daschle for not approving new heavy U.N. penalties against the U.S. which he obviously approves. The only significant and honest thing they can and should do at this point is admit that the study and protocols are flawed. Global warming has occurred several times in the last million years, as has global cooling, all without the assistance of mankind. Temperatures rise after an ice age and drop as we head into a new one unaffected by man. As the old ‘oleo’ commercial once said, “It’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.” Even though some may be trying, they’re not.
A closer look at the U.N. by this nation is also in order. The U.N. wants to control U.S. auto safety and emissions standards, impose gun control on the American public, control our national monuments, determine local land use issues, impose their non-codified international criminal laws on U.S. citizens through a new International Criminal Court…the list goes on and on. NATO appears to be a much better vehicle with which to maintain world peace and preserve the rights and well being of man.
The U.N. has outlived its usefulness and is cause for alarm to the world’s democracies where freedom reigns. As much as your writer hates to even make this suggestion, a whopping class-action malpractice suit against the U.N. and the NAS could protect the free people of this planet from further hoaxes.
|
