AL GORE AND THE LIMITATIONS OF POWER

AL GORE AND THE LIMITATIONS OF POWER

By: Phil Brennan

In the wake of the Biblical flood survivors migrated to a valley
called Sennaar where they settled and came up with a brilliant idea.
According to Holy Scripture, somebody said "let us build a city and a
tower with its top in the heavens."

The idea, of course was to build a tower high enough to rise above any
future floods the Lord might decide to inflict on his wayward
children, thus frustrating the Divine will. All the idea accomplished,
however was to guarantee a good living for Charles Berlitz and a horde
of other professional linguists and translators down through the
centuries.

The Bible does not identify the speaker who came up with the idea to
defy the Lord, but I have a sneaking suspicion that his name was
something like Algore.

The present day Mr. Gore has his own idea about building a tower to
defy Mother Nature. If the old gal is determined to fry humanity by
overheating the globe, Al stands like Horatius at the bridge, ready
to fend off nature's flame thrower by erecting a tower of global
bureaucratic regulations that seem to have been torn from the pages of
Karl Marx's socialist playbook.

Aside from the fact that the whole idea that puny mankind can defy the
forces of nature when they determine that, for reasons not clear to
us, it's time for some climate changes, the whole global warming scam
is built on a foundation of the junkiest of junk science.

Al Gore has failed to learn the lesson provided us by Britain's early
King Canute, who in order to demonstrate to his worshipful subjects
the limitations of political power sat on his throne on the shoreline,
waves lapping at his feet, and ordered the tides to cease pounding on
old Blighty's shore. Nature, of course simply ignored this royal fiat
as he knew it would and the tide kept creeping in.

Canute observed humbly "Let all men know how empty and worthless is
the power of kings. For there is none worthy of the name but God, whom
heaven, earth and sea obey".

As historians have noted, old Canute knew his limitations - even if
his subjects did not. - he made his point that, although the deeds of
kings and Gores might appear awesome in the minds of men, they were as
nothing in the face of God's power.

The same could be said about Mother Nature, God's surrogate. If she
has really made up her mind to inflict global overheating on her
favorite planet, with all that this implies, she's darn well going to
do it whether Al Gore and his acolytes like it or not.

Wherever it is that Ma Nature hangs her hat, she has to be vastly
amused at the whole spectacle of a panicked horde of global warning
fanatics relying on such measures as restricting the emission of
Carbon Dioxide (CO2), to stand in her way, an absurdity according to
retired physics professor Howard Hayden, a physics professor for 32
years at the University of Connecticut, an editor of a monthly
newsletter called "The Energy Advocate, " and the author of the book
"The Solar Fraud: Why Solar Energy Won't Run the World."

"You think SUVs are the cause of glaciers shrinking?" he says. "I
don't think so."

Instead, Hayden argued that climatic history proves that Gore has the
relationship between carbon dioxide concentration and global warming
backwards. He says a higher concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere does not cause the Earth to be warmer. It is, he insists,
the other way round: a warmer Earth causes the higher carbon dioxide
levels.




"The sun heats up the Earth," he said, "and the oceans warm up and
atmospheric carbon dioxide rises." He added that humans' contribution
to global carbon dioxide levels is virtually negligible anyway.

Writing in Australia's Courier Mail, Professor Bob Carter, an
environmental scientist at James Cook University who studies ancient
climate change, all of the alleged remedies for global warming are
what he calls a "high price for a load of hot air."

Writes Carter: "The salient facts are these. First, the accepted
global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) show that no ground-based warming has
occurred since 1998. Oddly, this eight-year-long temperature stasis
has occurred despite an increase over the same period of 15 parts per
million (or 4 per cent) in atmospheric CO2.

"Second, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements, if
corrected for non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and
large volcanic eruptions, show little if any global warming since
1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17
per cent).

"Third, there are strong indications from solar studies that Earth's
current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over
the next few decades."

Carter quotes leading economist David Henderson as saying that it is
extremely dangerous for an unelected and unaccountable body like the
U.N.'S IPCC to have a monopoly on climate policy advice to
governments. And even more so because, at heart, the IPCC is a
political and not a scientific agency.

Says Carter "It is past time for those who have deceived governments
and misled the public regarding dangerous human-caused global warming
to be called to account. Aided by hysterical posturing by green NGOs,
their actions have led to the cornering of government on the issue and
the likely implementation of futile emission policies that will impose
direct extra costs on every household and enterprise in Australia to
no identifiable benefit.

"Not only do humans not dominate Earth's current temperature trend but
the likelihood is that further large sums of public money are shortly
going to be committed to, theoretically, combat warming when cooling
is the more likely short-term climatic eventuality.

"In one of the more expensive ironies of history, the expenditure of
more than $50 billion on research into global warming since 1990 has
failed to demonstrate any human-caused climate trend, let alone a
dangerous one.

"Yet that expenditure will pale into insignificance compared with the
squandering of money that is going to accompany the introduction of a
carbon trading or taxation system.

"The costs of thus expiating comfortable middle class angst are, of
course, going to be imposed preferentially upon the poor and
underprivileged."

All this for paying homage to Al Gore's modern Tower of Babel.

According to Australian meteorologist Augie Auer man's contribution
to the greenhouse gases was so small we couldn't change the climate if
we tried.

"We're all going to survive this. It's all going to be a joke in five
years," he told Australia's Timaru Herald's Andrew Swallow.

Auer said that combination of misinterpreted and misguided science,
media hype, and political spin has created the current hysteria and it
was time to put a stop to it.

"It is time to attack the myth of global warming," he said.

Auer explained that water vapour is responsible for 95 per cent of the
greenhouse effect, an effect which is vital to keep the world warm.

"If we didn't have the greenhouse effect the planet would be at minus
18 deg C but because we do have the greenhouse effect it is plus 15
deg C, all the time."

The other greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen dioxide,
and various others including CFCs, contributed only five per cent of
the effect, carbon dioxide being by far the greatest contributor at
3.6 per cent.

However, carbon dioxide as a result of man's activities was only 3.2
per cent of that, hence only 0.12 per cent of the greenhouse gases in
total. Human-related methane, nitrogen dioxide and CFCs etc made
similarly minuscule contributions to the effect: 0.066, 0.047 and
0.046 per cent respectively.

"That ought to be the end of the argument, there and then," he said.

"We couldn't do it (change the climate) even if we wanted to because
water vapour dominates."

Yet the Greens continued to use phrases such as "The planet is
groaning under the weight of CO2" and Government policies were about
to hit industries such as farming, he warned.

"The Greens are really going to go after you because you put out 49
per cent of the countries emissions. Does anybody ask 49 per cent of
what? Does anybody know how small that number is?

"It's become a witch-hunt; a Salem witch-hunt," he said.

Note to Mr. Gore: Atmospheric levels of CO2 are at or above 400 ppms -
every time over the past five million years those levels have exceeded
200 ppms, an ice age has followed - every time.

The gap between of glaciation and interglacial periods is about 12,000
years. The last ice age ended 12,000 years ago. As politicians on the
outs like to say, "It's time for a change."

Button up your overcoat, Al.

http://www.etherzone.com/2007/bren061907.shtml

.