global warmingAl Gore says it is over (the debate on global warming). Al Gore says everyone believes it, accepts it, and understands that it is happening. The only people, according to Gore who do not accept the fear-mongering about global warming are right-wing nuts and crazy people.
Then came East Anglia, and the dawning of the depths of the conspiracy over falsifying data, limiting what data is available, creating a schedule that conforms to their desired outcome.
Now admittedly, some people will say - but scientists are by their very nature objective, placing scientific reason and serious study ahead of bias and opinion. Scientists we are told are better able to discern between fact and fiction, between what is right, and what is most necessary for all of us mortals to do to save ourselves. After all, they only have our planets best interests in the forefront of all discussion and debate. They wish to help us, save us, make our lives better, and provide a future for mankind.
So compassionate, so parental of these scientists.
How about those many many scientists who are engaged as we read this, in cloning - even those who have gone beyond theory, and perhaps beyond simple manipulation of genes or cells. After all, are humans not just complex gene arrangements? For scientists we are very little else. We accidentally have achieved what no other set of genes / cells, and DNA have - control of a planet. It could just as easily been the dog or dinosaur, but for their inability to adapt. We are, to these scientists lucky we exist at all, and consequently the idea of cloning does not in the slightest cause some of these scientists to lose sleep. I am quite certain if you polled 1000 scientists, and asked them if they believed it inevitable in the next 100 years that humans end up cloned, or at the very least, our body parts end up cloned - I am willing to bet 96% would accept that finality, and they would do so with little hesitation - as a matter of fact.
Yet what of a majority of humans on earth - I can think of, with little effort, at least 3 billion people who oppose cloning. What of the majority - should not the fact a majority oppose it not end the discussion and debate on the topic? You may offer a retort - the planet has 6+ billion, and 3 is not a majority. It is. Of the 6.3 billion, at least 450-500 million would have no thought, no idea one way or another. That would be about 8% and in any given poll on almost any subject - 8-10% have no opinion. That leaves about 5 billion 800 million, of which 3 billion is more than half, and a majority.
So - shouldn't the debate be over? If a majority is what Gore seeks in his argument to force an end to any debate or questioning of his religion - should the fact that 3 billion oppose it, not end the debate?
And more importantly - assume for one moment that we are governed by what nearly all the planet accepts is a God of some type or form, how does He feel about it. We have a clue - we read either the Old Testament, the New Testament, or the Koran - the books of more than 3 billion people on earth. God is particularly annoyed by man who thinks he has the power of God. God has, after all, only two powers - life and death, whether the corporal or the spiritual - and suddenly man has taken over creating life. God is not important, and for a God who ravaged mankind a few times when He was ignored, we are surely tempting Him again. The majority of mankind opposes cloning humans and the creation of life through science. For many, it is dangerous and treads into areas mankind has long been fearful of violating. For the vast majority of mankind, it is an area of great danger and the scientists leading us down this path are not regarded as pioneers, but rather as cult figures drawing more gullible people into their lifestyle each day.
If these scientists are wrong and the idea of cloning humans is perhaps not ethical and more than likely immoral yet the scientists are plowing ahead anyway, why are climatologists so different?
Why are the climatologists, paleontologists, anthropologists, meteorologists - why are they not susceptible to the wrong path, as are scientists involved in cloning? There are hundreds of millions of dollars thrown at global warming universities, groups, scientists, and believers. More money than is the GNP for most of Africa in any given year, and with this extreme wealth, scientists and their faithful following would have us believe no one falls prey to making up lies? So some scientists may be unethical (cloning) but all climatologists are acting in the world's best interests, out of altruism.
How much money was spread around in Chile when Pinochet was in power - to keep the system blinded. How much was spread around hen Peron was in power in Argentina. How much do the Saudis spread around each year to keep the world off guard about what is happening? And the governments of the world are dumping hundreds of millions into global warming ... and someone will say - of course it isn't happening and here is the rest of your money back, I didn't want a job next year anyway.
The White House decided it was time it got into the whole debate ... Robert Gibbs who will go down as one of the biggest lackeys in any administration "claimed that global warming was no longer in dispute by most people. But a subsequent Rasmussen Reports poll of Americans finds only one in four adults believe most scientists agree on the topic."
According to the same article, a poll by Rasmussen found that "nearly 60% believe it is at least somewhat likely that scientists have falsified environmental data to support their own global warming beliefs and theories."
Get over it, we won!