A Voice in the Wilderness In Defense of "Mere Conservatism"

Peer-reviewed Madness

If you haven't seen the interview actor Ed Begley Jr. gave on Fox News last week, here's the stimulating exchange:

Ed Begley Jr., Al Gore, and any other liberal global warming advocate with a pulpit all tell us that "the science is settled."  They tell us to look to the scientists and experts who affirm their climate change worries.

But, as Mark Steyn points out in his latest column, what do we non-experts do when the expers are exposed as frauds?

The trouble with outsourcing your marbles to the peer-reviewed set is that, if you take away one single thing from the leaked documents, it’s that the global warm-mongers have wholly corrupted the “peer-review” process.

When it comes to promoting the impending ecopalypse, the Climate Research Unit is the nerve-center of the operation. The “science” of the CRU dominates the “science” behind the UN’s IPCC, which dominates the “science” behind the Congressional cap-and-trade boondoggle, the upcoming Copenhagen shakindownen of the developed world, and the now routine phenomenon of leaders of advanced, prosperous societies talking like gibbering madmen escaped from the padded cell, whether it’s President Obama promising to end the rise of the oceans or the Prince of Wales saying we only have 96 months left to save the planet.

But don’t worry, it’s all “peer-reviewed.”

The problem with this entire global warming/climate change debate is of course that the science is NOT settled, and the current leaders in congress and the White House are pushing catastrophic pieces of legislation and public policies that assume it is.

Steyn also recently wrote this about the upcoming Copenhagen world summit that President Obama will be attending:

I’m always appreciative when a fellow says what he really means. Tim Flannery, the jet-setting doomsaying global warm-monger from down under, was in Ottawa the other day promoting his latest eco-tract, and offered a few thoughts on “Copenhagen”—which is transnational-speak for December’s UN Convention on Climate Change. “We all too often mistake the nature of those negotiations in Copenhagen,” remarked professor Flannery. “We think of them as being concerned with some sort of environmental treaty. That is far from the case. The negotiations now ongoing toward the Copenhagen agreement are in effect diplomacy at the most profound global level. They deal with every aspect of our life and they will influence every aspect of our life, our economy, our society.”

Hold that thought: “They deal with every aspect of our life.” Did you know every aspect of your life was being negotiated at Copenhagen? But in a good way! So no need to worry. After all, we all care about the environment, don’t we? So we ought to do something about it, right? And, since “the environment” isn’t just in your town or county but spreads across the entire planet, we can only really do something at the planetary level.

But what to do? According to paragraph 38 on page 18 of the latest negotiating text, the convention will set up a “government” to manage the “new funds” and the “related facilitative processes.”

The Left has a totalitarian instinct that should alarm any proponent of liberty and free markets.