Global Warming Nonsense Is Everywhere
Picking through my scrambled eggs while reading The Wall Street Journal is not my best habit. But, there could be worse. I could be reading the New York Times.
What caught my attention was an ad for the San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance. It pictures a mommy and baby polar bear with the banner headline: “Without You There’s No THEM”. The follow-up text reads: “The world’s most extraordinary wildlife are relying on us to survive. Thank you for becoming a friend.”
Maybe the final tagline should be, “Thank you for becoming a dupe.”
This is a good example of what could be called emotional manipulation through misinformation. It strikes the emotional chord so necessary to strum when getting people to part with their money. But unfortunately, it repeats a falsehood that brings society to some disastrous policy positions.
Let’s take a moment to take this ad apart.
The first assumption is that polar bears are dying off and your dollars are necessary for zoos to breed them. Is this true?
Ok, so they lied. But perpetrating this lie is not only misleading from an ethical standpoint (they are lying to get your money), it feeds into the broader argument that school children have been fed since Al Gore became a documentary producer. You know the argument: man causes CO2 to rise, which causes global warming, which causes polar ice flows to shrink, which kills off all the beautiful polar bears and endangers all of us with rising sea levels.
We will point out that the beauty of a polar bear is entirely subjective. They look quite nice on the pages of National Geographic but harp seals might have a different perspective.
To be fair the ad does not mention CO2, but we suspect the authors know you have been taught to make the connection so it can go unstated and thus save room for pecuniary postering.
As for the sea ice, or lack thereof, the data shows no correlation with CO2 levels and that the level of Arctic ice has been steady for about the last 17 years. Since both Norway and Finland just reported the coldest temperatures since 1917, we expect the ice to be growing.
So, it would seem the notion that the polar bear population is declining and must be saved by zoos, is fallacious. Therefore, the implication that the non-existent decline in polar bear populations is correlated to the non-existent decline in the ice pack, can certainly be challenged. Neither event can be correlated with CO2 levels.
But parting with your money voluntarily, which is a renewable resource, is different than parting with your freedom or your wealth by force. One can’t begrudge those who earned their money the right to give to the cause of their choice, even on false assumptions.
What is of concern is the repetition of falsehoods endangers our freedom, wealth, and standard of living. It really doesn’t matter if the repetition is to raise money or consciousness. It promotes a falsehood that has public policy implications.
The environmental movement has moved from controlling things like pollution in air and water to a worldwide attempt to regulate temperatures a degree and a half a century from now by invading most areas of private choice. Among these areas are: where you live, what vehicles you may or may not drive, and how electric power is generated. It now extends to the types of light bulbs, washers, dryers, and leaf blowers you may wish to own. They want to restrict our travel and put us into environmental ghettos, like 15-minute cities. They don’t like modern agriculture and want to take control of our food supply, a truly frightening development.
As with Covid, if there is an “emergency”, the Left is perfectly willing to suppress free speech to ensure their agenda is not challenged. If you don’t wear a mask or get vaccinated, you are a threat to your fellow man. You don’t have a “right” to harm others. The same kind of argument is being used about the global warming crisis. They use the word “denier” to equate skeptics with those who deny the holocaust. They contend the science “is settled” and any challenge threatens the public. It is important to know that there is no such thing as “settled science”. By its very nature, science is never settled. The purpose of scientific investigation from the earliest recorded times is the advancement of scientific frontiers and the correction, enhancement and advancement of scientific explanations of the natural world. When the term “it is settled science” is thrust at you, it pure rhetorical bullying and should be called out as such.
This movement extends from the UN, to the nation-state, all the way down to the elementary school around the corner from you. The environmental agenda is everywhere.
Now it is likely the people placing the ad are well-meaning. But lying for a good cause is still lying. Moreover, non-profits and corporations that go on to peddle global warming lies help condition the population to accept the socialistic top-down controls actively promoted by the environmentalist Left.
You must believe this is a crisis or you would not be willing to give up both your wealth and your freedom.
Everywhere from zoo promotion to food packaging, one sees the promotion of the environmental global warming agenda. Participating in a falsehood to make one feel good or to make others feel good, is bad even if the objective is both laudable and perhaps unnecessary.
Recently, John Christy, Director of the Earth System Science Center, was quoted in the Epoch Times saying: ” CO2 is portrayed now as the cause of damaging extreme weather. Our research indicates these extremes are not becoming more intense or frequent. CO2 cannot be the cause of something not occurring.”
Patrick Moore, a Canadian scientist and Founder of Greenpeace, was somewhat blunter in the same article: “The whole thing is a total scam. There is actually no scientific evidence that CO2 is responsible for climate change.”
Given the agenda being pushed our way, the most likely thing to die off soon is not the polar bears. It is our freedom. Unfortunately, freedom cannot be saved by a zoo.
