What Global Warming is Really About
Figuratively, CO2 is bad. The “C” word is destroying the planet, figuratively. But it literally is just America’s CO2. Of course, when we say CO2 is bad we really mean too much CO2 is bad and that really means America produces so much it is causing global warming. But literally, global warming isn’t really bad because global warming has always been good for humanity: it’s cold that kills. So, when we say global warming is bad we’re actually speaking metaphorically; we mean the making of too much CO2 is bad and by extension, America and capitalism are evil, tra-la.
It of course is not even We who believe we’re bad. Real scientists don’t believe that. Just, some of us feel that way: Eurocommies, academia, the Democrat party, government bureaucrats, the UN-IPCC, liberals –i.e., everyone on the Left has a problem with the American way of life!
Since global warming is really a politically and ideologically-driven issue that is only masked in the trappings of science, the ease with which global warming alarmists denigrate scientific skeptics of global warming science is hardly remarkable. The Left wears its pretense of caring about global warming like a badge of superiority. The discrimination by the preening socialists of the Left against the productive is only going to get worse as they agitate for more and more government while those who agitate for free enterprise and a Constitution that recognizes humanity’s God-given right to liberty become a smaller and smaller part of the defining mood of our age.
Those who speak in the figurative language of climate change really mean we must pass more laws because we need more regulation. Concern about global warming is a metaphor which really means we care about people and we will pass more laws to help others because they cannot help themselves. Speaking figuratively, liberals and the Left are saying we’ve been drafted into their army of do-gooders; but literally, they want us to pay more taxes (as if that helps others). We should be more skeptical of more rules.
All along, while the welfare state was growing constantly, liberals were insisting constantly it wasn’t big enough or growing fast enough. So I wondered, five years ago, whether there is a Platonic ideal when it comes to the size of the welfare state—whether there is a point at which the welfare state has all the money, programs, personnel, and political support it needs, thereby rendering any further additions pointless. The answer, I concluded, is that there is no answer—the welfare state is a permanent work-in-progress, and its liberal advocates believe that however many resources it has, it always needs a great deal more. ~William Voegeli (The Case Against Liberal Compassion)
ISIS proves its not always about oil or the welfare of all humanity, just like with academia: it’s not really about oil at all; it’s about their welfare. Global warming is political not natural science. The opinions and agenda of the Left wouldn’t bother me except that, like ISIS, they demand our obedience to their beliefs. Figuratively speaking we’re already drowning in red tape. Literally, we’re going broke. Socialism, the liberal Utopia of the Left has failed every time it’s been tried and has literally not figuratively, resulted in millions of deaths. “The trouble with socialism,” said Margaret Thatcher, “is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
In its attempt to literally take over the American economy, the Left’s anti-CO2 crusade may result in millions of deaths around the globe, especially in the Third world. Plants love CO2 and people need plants, more energy, more water, more not less personal freedom. And, more CO2.
Right now, at our current low levels of carbon dioxide, plants are paying a heavy price in water usage. Whether plants are C3 or C4, the way they get carbon dioxide from the air is the same: The plant leaves have little holes, or stomata, through which carbon dioxide molecules can diffuse into the moist interior for use in the plant’s photosynthetic cycles.
The density of water molecules within the leaf is typically 60 times greater than the density of carbon dioxide in the air, and the diffusion rate of the water molecule is greater than that of the carbon-dioxide molecule.
So depending on the relative humidity and temperature, 100 or more water molecules diffuse out of the leaf for every molecule of carbon dioxide that diffuses in. And not every carbon-dioxide molecule that diffuses into a leaf gets incorporated into a carbohydrate. As a result, plants require many hundreds of grams of water to produce one gram of plant biomass, largely carbohydrate.
Driven by the need to conserve water, plants produce fewer stomata openings in their leaves when there is more carbon dioxide in the air. This decreases the amount of water that the plant is forced to transpire and allows the plant to withstand dry conditions better. ~Harrison H. Schmitt and William Happer (In Defense of Carbon Dioxide)
The Left uses figurative language to avoid being honest about its desire to destroy capitalism. Even so, continuing to cast Americanism as emblematic of rising seas and the annihilation of species across the globe due to CO2-causing climate change only seeds clouds of doubt about the real motivations of the Left when the warming stops. The danger is we’ll all turn a cold shoulder to their climate propaganda when winters turn wretchedly cold. Fears about global warming and the loathing of America provide little warmth to those who learn a couple weeks out that the upcoming winter in the UK may be something like we’ve seen before –e.g., “an event close to 2010/11 which experienced the coldest December in 100 years,” says British weather journalist Nathan Rao (Express). “Britain is edging closer to an artic freeze with blizzards, record low temperatures and polar gales set to cripple the country in weeks.”
“Why do liberals feel,” asks William Voegeli, “that no matter how much we’re doing through government programs to alleviate and prevent poverty, whatever we are doing is shamefully inadequate?” Worry more about the motives of socialists’ demagoguery.
The pathology of pathological altruism is not the failure to salve every wound. It is, rather, the indifference — blithe, heedless, smug, or solipsistic— to the fact and consequences of those failures, just as long as the empathizer is accruing compassion points that he and others will admire. As philosophy professor David Schmidtz has said, “If you’re trying to prove your heart is in the right place, it isn’t.” ~William Voegeli
The scientific method can free us from the Left’s climate change alarmism but not from the Left’s underlying self-defeating ideology and liberals who only, care about caring, but not really caring about actually accomplishing something. Voegeli cannot help but notice that the, “liberals who profess to be anguished about other people’s suffering can be so weirdly complacent regarding wasteful, misdirected, and above all ineffective government programs created to relieve that suffering.”
I conclude that the machinery created by the politics of kindness doesn’t work very well — in the sense of being economical, adaptable, and above all effective — because the liberals who build, operate, defend, and seek to expand this machine don’t really care whether it works very well and are, on balance, happier when it fails than when it succeeds. ~William Voegeli
“…as the mid-term elections showed clearly, in the United States in particular, the public is not buying the deception. ~Alex Newman