President Obama’s pick of Dr. John Holdren as his top climate adviser explains a lot about his administration’s promotion of climate change fear to justify draconian environment and energy policies.
During his last State of the Union address, Obama referred to “carbon pollution” three times in connection with his commitment to “set new standards on the amount of carbon pollution our power plants are allowed to dump into the air.”
Someone should have informed the president that those “carbon pollution” molecules which comprise only four one-hundredths of 1 percent of the atmosphere fertilize plants that all creatures depend upon for nourishment. And by the way, only about 3 percent of that already teensy-weensy amount comes from human fossil fuel-burning emissions.
The best news is that unlike Ice Ages, which are present about 90 percent of the time, we’re very lucky to be experiencing a very stable, life-friendly, comfortable, and fertile period. In fact, there has been virtually no global warming or cooling over the past 17 years since the time most of today’s high school students were born.
There has also been no upward trend in the strength or frequency of land-falling hurricanes in the world’s five main hurricane basins during the past 50-70 years; there is no trend in the strength or frequency of tropical cyclones in the main Atlantic hurricane development corridor over the past 370 years; there is no trend since 1950 in the frequency of strong (F3-F5) U.S. tornadoes; and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season was the first season since 1994 to end with no known major hurricanes and cyclonic activity.
But again, you wouldn’t get that impression from what we hear from the White House when noteworthy weather events, brutal winter storms included, are attributed to “climate change.” Take, for instance, the very cold conditions recently experienced by much of the nation caused by the recent “polar vortex.” The administration lost no time dispatching Holdren to alert the press not to get complacent about climate change as a non-hot-button issue on this score.
Issuing a two-minute White House-sponsored video, Holdren used the occasion to say: “If you’ve been hearing that extreme cold spells like the one we’re having in the United States now disprove global warming, don’t believe it . . . The fact is that no single weather episode can either prove or disprove global climate change.”
That’s fine so far. But then he issued the punch line conclusion: “I believe the odds are that we can expect as a result of global warming to see more of this pattern of extreme cold in the mid-latitudes and some extreme warm in the far north.” Before accepting that theory, let’s take a look at some of Dr. Holdren’s other previously stated beliefs.
Consider, for example, the deep-seated belief of the human “predicament” presented in the introduction to his 1971 book “Global Ecology” he coauthored with Paul Ehrlich whereby: “Only one rational path is open to us — simultaneous de-development of the [overdeveloped countries] and semi-development of the underdeveloped countries (UDCs), in order to approach a decent and ecologically sustainable standard of living for all in between. By de-development we mean lower per-capita energy consumption, fewer gadgets, and the abolition of planned obsolescence.”
Later, in another book titled “Population, Resources, and Environment” (1977), Holdren and coauthors Paul and Anne Ehrlich advocate a subsistence-level anti-growth philosophy put forth by Robert Malthus in the late 1880s, stating: “The need for de-development presents our economists with a major challenge. They must design a stable, low-consumption economy in which there is a much more equitable distribution of wealth than in the present one. Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential if a decent life is to be provided for every human being.”
In an effort to minimize environmental damage, their solution proposes “organized evasive action: population control, limitation of material consumption, redistribution of wealth, transitions to technologies that are environmentally and socially less disruptive than today’s, and movement toward some kind of world government.”
Apparently unaware that CO2 fertilizes vegetation, Holdren predicted in 1986 that “carbon dioxide-induced famines could kill as many as a billion people before the year 2020.” Then in 2006 he suggested that global warming could cause worldwide sea levels to rise by 13 feet by the end of this century. In reality, sea levels have been rising at the rate of about seven inches per century since the end of the Little Ice Age, and with no recent global rate of acceleration.
All of this might cause us to wonder why President Obama chose this particular person as his top climate adviser — a question which might also lead us to ponder that age-old conundrum of which came first, chicken or egg. Did White House climate alarm come before the junk science used to support it, or afterwards?
My theory is that they arrived simultaneously in the form of Holdren’s brand of Clicken Little egg-headed ideology.
Larry Bell is a professor and endowed professor at the University of Houston, where he directs the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture and heads the graduate program in space architecture. He is author of “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax,” and his professional aerospace work has been featured on the History Channel and the Discovery Channel-Canada. Read more of his reports — Click Here Now.
© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.