Destroying U.S. Energy to Slow the Rise of the Oceans and Heal the Planet


Man’s efforts to safeguard nature sometimes ends up damaging our ecosystems and it now threatens our very way of life, but the government and their allied environmental extremists don’t care as long as they save every living species at all costs. They hope to defy Darwin and overcome natural selection with unnatural selection. In their love for the underdog – as long as that underdog isn’t mankind – they hope to ensure the survival of the un-fittest.

As they push their ideology, extremists actually destroy ecological systems, with the best of intentions.

In ‘State of Fear,’ a novel by Michael Crichton, he traces the actual history of man’s intervention in Yellowstone and, with legitimate research, Crichton presents the negative side of man’s well-intentioned meddling in nature.

One of the issues Crichton dealt with in his book and which supports that contention was the effect environmentalists have had on Yellowstone National Park.

Environmentalists have taken upon themselves the cause of preserving and protecting Yellowstone.

Crichton said the ecosystem was forever changed by the environmentalists and not for the better because of that intervention. Facts back that up.

Yellowstone Park, Crichton explained, was the first wilderness on earth to be set aside as a natural preserve by President Ulysses Grant who allocated two million acres for the creation of Yellowstone National Park.

No one at the time had any experience preserving wilderness because the need did not exist.

When Theodore Roosevelt visited the park in 1903, he saw thousands of elk, buffalo, black bear, deer, mountain lions, grizzlies, coyotes, wolves, and bighorn sheep. He wanted them protected. The Park Service was established soon after and their role was to maintain the park in its original state.

Within a decade, the teeming landscape that Roosevelt saw was gone forever and it was the park managers who were to blame.

The managers were charged with keeping the park in pristine condition and had taken a series of steps that they thought were in the best interest of preserving the park and its animals.

The early park managers mistakenly believed that elk were about to become extinct. So they tried to increase the elk herds within the park by eliminating predators. To that end, they shot and poisoned all the wolves in the park. They prohibited Indians from hunting in the park, though Yellowstone was a traditional hunting ground.

Now protected, the elk herds exploded and ate so much of specific trees and grasses that the ecology of the area began to change. The elk ate the trees that the beavers used to make dams, so the beavers vanished. That was when the managers discovered beavers were vital to the overall water management of the region.

When the beavers disappeared, the meadows dried up; the trout and otter vanished; soil erosion increased; and the park ecology changed even further.

By the 1920s it had become abundantly clear there were too many elk, so the rangers began to shoot them by the thousands. But the change in plant ecology seemed to be permanent; the old mix of trees and grasses did not return.

It also became increasingly clear that the Indian hunters of old had a valuable ecological influence on the park lands by keeping down the numbers of elk, moose, and bison. This belated recognition came as part of a more general understanding that native Americans had strongly shaped the “untouched wilderness.”

The “untouched wilderness” was nothing of the sort. Human beings on the North American continent had exerted a huge influence on the environment for thousands of years—burning plains grasses, modifying forests, thinning specific animal populations, and hunting others to extinction.

Grizzlies were protected, then killed off by the environmental caretakers. Wolves were killed off and are now being brought back.

Animal research involving field study and radio collars was halted, then resumed after certain species were declared endangered.

Rainbow trout were introduced in the 1970s, soon killing off the native cutthroat species.

A policy of fire prevention was instituted with no understanding of the regenerative effects of fire.

When the fire policy was finally reversed, thousands of acres burned so hotly that the ground was sterilized, and the forests did not grow back without reseeding.

The ecology of Yellowstone has forever been changed by the environmentalists who tout their success as they try to recover from their mistakes.

Lack of knowledge and scientific objectivity obfuscates reality and facts. We see that clearly in the global warming debate.

While we most certainly need to take care of our planet and role model good environmental behavior, extremism and lack of proper scientific inquiry threatens to ruin our standard of living while a major polluter like China grows theirs.

Mr. Obama plans to foist more unsustainable regulations and costs onto Americans tomorrow in the name of climate change. He is an environmental extremist while he ironically calls all people who want a more measured approach “flat-earthers”.

Conservative pundit and Pulitzer Prize winning author, Dr. Charles Krauthammer thinks Mr. Obama is the flat-earther:

On the contrary. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who refuse to acknowledge the problematic nature of contradictory data. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who cite a recent Alaskan heat wave — a freak event in one place at one time — as presumptive evidence of planetary climate change. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who cite perennial phenomena such as droughts as cosmic retribution for environmental sinfulness.

For the sake of argument, nonetheless, let’s concede that global warming is precisely what Obama thinks it is. Then answer this: What in God’s name is his massive new regulatory and spending program — which begins with a war on coal and ends with billions in more subsidies for new Solyndras — going to do about it?

The U.S. has already radically cut CO2 emissions — more than any country on earth since 2006, according to the International Energy Agency. Emissions today are back down to 1992 levels.

And yet, at the same time, global emissions have gone up. That’s because — surprise! — we don’t control the energy use of the other 96 percent of humankind.


Photo of Mr. Obama assessing the climate change situation before his speech.

Our scientific inquiry of global warming has given way to computer models and projections based on theories that bend to the extreme.

Timothy Wirth, Vice Chair of the UN Foundation and Al Gore compatriot, said, “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.”

Then there is this quote from Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment, “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

We supposedly had proof beyond computer models in Michael Mann’s hockey stick theory which “proved” global warming has occurred. The theory was debunked. A good explanation can be found on this link. The hockey stick was pivotal to the global warming alarmism and it’s pivotal in the global warming skepticism. It was no proof at all yet so many were convinced it was indeed proof.

Global warming has been almost non-existent over the last 17 years and 8 months but because global warming-climate change-climate chaos has led to the politicization of scientific investigation into the effect man and carbon emissions might have on the planet, we might never get to the real truth.

The global warming alarmists are stealing land to protect obscure and unnecessary animals and plants; President Obama plans to destroy the coal industry and tax fossil fuels until they cost more than so-called green energy sources; and we are aligning ourselves with communist and socialist dictators in the U.N. who want us to “share” our resources until our country is a reflection of their unproductive statist nations.

Nothing can go wrong here.

The facts are not all in on global warming but environmentalists insist on acting as if they have all the facts. History has shown that it can be a dangerous way to think.

Long Island ecoterrorists, members of ELF, were burning down new home developments on the North Shore of Long Island a number of years back. They were being arrested and thrown in jail so they learned an important lesson. They learned to bring their extremism to a more peaceful setting. Some are now members of ICLEI – Vision Long Island – the armpit of the UN’s Agenda 21.

Long Island now has a number of schemes to take land off the tax rolls. One comes in the form of “land trusts” which are used to buy up the best land with donations and taxpayer money with the sole intention of taking the land off the tax rolls.

The ultimate goal is the same as it is throughout the nation, they want to return land to the wild – a lot of land. In all of this, one thing is forgotten – man. When man is diminished and when his standard of living is deficient, what will become of our planet?

More reasoned, honest scientific inquiry, and common sense needs to be injected into the global warming debate before all of nature’s ecosystems are damaged. Instead, we have the beginnings of nationalized education in Common Core which will teach the science of global warming as a “settled science” leaving no room for debate or inquiry well in advance of it being “settled.” We are not teaching our children scientific inquiry, we are teaching them politicized science. We are telling them to make decisions based on emotion and projections.

The Daily Caller cited research by University of Colorado climate scientist Roger Pielke, Jr. who found that weather events have not been getting more extreme due to global warming.  Pielke found that hurricanes, for example, “have not increased in the U.S. in frequency, intensity or normalized damage since at least 1900.” Pielke said that the costs of disasters have not been increasing either when economic and population growth are taken into account. As one example, the economic losses from floods have fallen 75 percent as a percentage of GDP since 1940.

Secretary of State John Kerry said global warming is a weapon of mass destruction and as big a threat as terrorism. President Obama told the graduating class at West Point that the real war we are fighting is the war of climate change. We’ve even been told our national monuments are facing destruction because of climate change.

But, predictions by scientists have been notoriously inaccurate.

Max Planck, Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg said on September 2, 2008: “More heat waves, no snow in the winter… Climate models… over 20 times more precise than the UN IPCC global models. In no other country do we have more precise calculations of climate consequences. They should form the basis for political planning… Temperatures in the wintertime will rise the most… there will be less cold air coming to Central Europe from the east…In the Alps winters will be 2°C warmer already between 2021 and 2050.”

May 15, 1989, Associated Press: “Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide [USA] two degrees by 2010.”

Go to wattsupwiththat for a nice summary of inaccurate forecasts.

These errors become more concerning when one realizes that they are being used to lower and perhaps destroy our standard of living.

That doesn’t mean there is no cause for concern or that it isn’t happening. It does mean that we need to stop exaggerating, lying and politicizing science. We must allow dissenting voices in the debate.

Mankind is being relegated to a lesser place than all else on earth, but not to worry, it’s probably being done with the best of intentions and it’s the right “environmental and economic policy” if we are to believe the global warming provocateurs who think lying to get their way is a good approach.

The most endangered species right now is man because emotions rule over reality and our very way of life is in the crosshairs.

The video below of a speech by expert and whistleblower Jim Beers is interesting. He is a long-time wildlife biologist. In this speech he talks about the endangered species act. At the beginning of his speech, he says wolves are an example of the government and environmentalists interfering with nature and harming the safety and domestic tranquility of residents. Wolves have been forcibly injected back into communities where they were deliberately eradicated years before. The wolves are destroying livestock and dogs, bringing diseases into the communities, and frightening families who are afraid to go outdoors. The very people who caused the problem – the government and environmental extremists – are completely unaccountable. He names the people behind it at about 07:00.

One of Mr. Obama’s upcoming climate change rules leaked out via the Wall Street Journal. The EPA will mandate a cut in carbon emissions from existing power plants by 30% from 2005 levels by 2030. The EPA will seek a 25% overall reduction in power plant emissions by 2020 and ratchet up the requirement to 30 percent by 2030.  Coal and electricity will be hit very hard.

In an address on Friday, Mr. Obama said that the cost of carbon pollution “can be measured in lost lives” and roughly “100,000 asthma attacks and 2,100 heart attacks will be avoided” in just the first year that the standards go into effect. Of course there is no way to know that. It’s nonsense.

Mr. Obama could have pushed for clean coal but he’d rather destroy coal.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce argues the rule will kill jobs, increase electricity prices and close power plants across the country. That seems closer to the truth.

At a time when our economy is showing signs of contracting despite monthly Wall Street bailouts, Mr. Obama will kill jobs and oversee the rise in electricity prices because he wants the “rise of the oceans to slow” and “our planet” to begin “to heal”. He thinks he’s God.

If the government and extreme environmentalists succeed in destroying our standard of living, who will we blame? It doesn’t matter really because by then it will be too late.