Wednesday, December 23, 2009

Avatar's Green Agenda

While I must admit that I have not watched the movie Avatar, there is ample evidence that this movie is promoting a green agenda. I myself am an anti greenie. Why? Because I am an evil capitalist who wants to destroy the earth starting with the polar bears? No. What I don't like about greenies is there extreme ideological stance that is not based on reality and plays into other ideologies that are not necessarily linked to a healthy environmental awareness.

First, let me way that I a a big fan of the planet earth and seeing it polluted the way it often has been does not make me happy. Is this the result of capitalism? Sure, greed makes people do some bad things but isn't that why we have regulation? I also don't totally buy into the belief that the earth is on the edge of the abyss and that within a few years we are going to be plagued with massive hurricanes and massive increases in the sea level just to mention a few of the warnings that are almost routinely spouted by greenies with a sickening glee. Truth is, the science of climatology is an inexact science and there is more than enough wiggle room for debate here. Let's also not forget that it was not that long ago that the earth was going to go into another ice age. Remember the movie, very dramatic but totally false. So first, lets use good science not Gore style fear mongering.

Second, the greenies believe that the earth can be saved by windmills and solar panels. Perhaps a long time in the future this might be true but the technology is just not there for this to be a reality for the average family household or for large scale energy production. Nuclear energy was almost completely shut down by a Hollywood movie by a actress who felt it justified to support the enemy while men where dying in Vietnam. Nuclear energy does come with it's risks but why not discuss ways of dealing with these. Nuclear energy has worked will for France and can for the United States and make us energy independent not to mention greener than Al Gore ever could imagine. It would also put a lot of people to work and last time I checked, that was a good thing.

I also see the argument for global energy standards an agenda that has more to do with a global redistribution of wealth than anything else. If we are going to reduce pollution in the world then every nation has to share in this effort. I question the motives of those who accept uneven rules for each nation penalizing the industrialized nations.

On a final note. It would be nice if we could all be like the aliens in Avatar and live a green existence. Perhaps, there was a time that this might have happened for this country. Certainly the American Indian did seem to have a closer connection to the land but they also drove thousands of buffalos off of cliffs. OK, so that are not as cute as polar bears but they were also not perfect. They also burned fires. The truth is that perhaps with the right culture, we could have a much more environmental friendly world but the truth is that the world has a large population living in sometimes complex economies. These realities can be ignored. In the end, if you save the polar bears but people are starving I don't see this as a win.

The truth is that underlying the agenda of the greenies is a Darwinian belief that man is no different than any other animal. Greenies and animal rights activists are often cut from the same political clothe. I for one believe that mankind is unique among all the animals. Does that mean that man should be free to pollute the earth to the point of threatening our survival and the survival of many species? No, of course not but I do believe that decisions regarding the environment should not be divorced from decisions about human beings. Human beings are not as some of the Obama administration claim, a virus.

So yes, I am not a greenie but don't call me anti planet or anti environment because I am neither. I also believe that capitalism if regulated at times, can work very well and can take into consideration environmental concerns.

So if you want, call me an evil capitalist but beware of the road that those who are green may want to take all of us. It may not be as rosy and many believe.

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

The Science of Intimidation

When I grew up, I remember the scientific method being pretty simple. Experiments were used to confirm scientific theories and usually, within the limits of the accuracy of the measuring devices, theories would be confirmed . With global warming, now we have moved into a new type of science which claims to predict the future, specifically, the science of global warming.

In the related science of meteorology there is about about a 5 day window in which predictions about the future work reasonably well. However, there have been days when the weatherman said it would rain and a mere look out the window confirmed the contrary. Even short term theories about the weather seem often more to be educated guesses. With theories about global worming , some sciences and certainly Al Gore claim to know what will happen to the climate years down the road. Al Gore recently claimed that in 5 to 10 years the ice caps will melt. I have never known climatology to be so accurate.

Call me a radical, but I suspect that the ice caps will not melt in 5 or even 10 years and that Mr. Gores claims, have more to to with hype than actual science. I frankly don't see a lot of science in Al Gore's dire predictions. He seems to believe that the mere fact that he makes a claim should inspire complete confidence that he know what he is talking about. Sorry if I don't have that much confidence in Al Gore predictions and frankly, don't understand why come claim I should. Even Al claims that those who disagree with him are the modern day concept of flat earthers. Well Al, I don't believe that I am going to fall of the earth if I go to far any more than I beleive that the ice caps will melt in 10 years, sorry if that offends.

Perhaps Al Gore should go back to school and learn more about the scientific method before making such dire claims. I am a realist. Do I want to see our planet ravaged by pollution? No, and I endorse reasonable effects to reduce pollution but if science becomes more about fear than verifiable results then it stops being science and Al Gore actually contributes more to global warming by his hot air than anything else.