By Bob Thomas
In just a few weeks, President Obama will travel to Copenhagen to attend a summit on climate change.
Climate change is better known as global warming, but when the data could no longer support warming, the term was changed to climate change so the pundits are covered either way the temperature goes.
In the early 1970s, the rage of the day was global cooling. Experts espoused that ice would cover the U.S. somewhere between Kentucky to Florida by the year 2000.
So, despite all of the doom and gloom depicted on the Weather Channel, I can’t take global warming seriously.
Before the U.S. enters into any national treaties on the subject, there needs to be something to hang our hat on.
But what we have is more conjecture than fact. There are frequent reports of measurement errors taking place with regard to temperatures around the world.
According to economics professor and syndicated columnist Walter Williams, in March of this year “more than 700 international scientists went on record dissenting over man-made global warming claims.”
He goes on to state that 31,500 American scientists, including 9,029 with Ph.D.s, have signed a petition that states that there is no convincing evidences that human caused global warming is a major issue in the foreseeable future.
In fact, according to an email an internal report by Alan Carlin, an EPA analyst who criticized the EPA’s position on global warming, was squelched for political reasons.
The fact is that temperatures over the past ten years indicate that the earth has been cooling and not warming.
Unfortunately the present cooling was not predicted by global warming computer models. Modeling is a popular research methodology, but it is only reliable if the measurements used in building the model are reliable.
As such, models are usually built from known data and then the reliability of the model is tested on a sample of past data before it is used to predict the future.
Neal Boortz reported that none of the global warming computer models test reliably on a sample of past data.
Again, the motive behind global warming “cap and trade,” which is a tax, is redistributing wealth within the U.S. (and killing the economy in the process).
According to some, if Obama signs the Copenhagen treaty, the U.S. will be required to send 2% of its annual GDP to a world government for the purpose of redistribution to lesser well off countries (again killing our economy).
Like so-called “health care reform,” the real issue is tax increases and the redistribution of wealth.
Private sector economic growth via the invisible hand of capitalism is the best solution to the economic ills of the U.S. and the world — not the visible hand of government intervention.
Aftermath News 
