- Divine Carelessness vs Recklessness
- The Gold Standard, Part 7
- Preparing for the Worst
- Comet Elenin, Planet X & More
- The Fed and Common Sense
- Interview with the Devil
- The Way of Truth or Lies?
- Taking It With You
- Lincoln – Good or Evil?
- Alternative Currency
- Giving Away Our Power
- Parable of Money Systems
- To Fiat or Not Fiat
- Questioning Mormonism
- Fiat Money of the Past, Part 1
- Fiat Money of the Past, Part 2
- Fiat Money of the Past, Part 3
- Molecular Preparation
- Fiat Money of the Past, Part 4
- Fiat Money of the Past, Part 5
- My Writing Instruments
- Fiat Money of the Past, Part 6
- Romney & Hot Air
- Examining Fiat Money
- A Flawed Money System
- The Ideal Money
- A Time for All Things
- The New Greenback
- Narrowing the Focus
- People Taking Charge
- Creating Wealth
LWK links to this Romney quote asking if he is full of hot air.
“I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course,’’ Romney said. “But I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that . . . so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing.’’ Boston Globe, Jun 4, 2011
Before I comment let me remind readers that I have attacked the greens, the U.N. IPCC and numerous politicians for their distortion of facts and their desire to tax global warming out of existence as well as using it as a device to destroy capitalism.
I do not see any of that coming from Romney. Let’s take a look at what he actually said.
“I believe the world’s getting warmer.”
So do I if you look at the overall picture of the past 100 years. It has leveled off since 1998 so we cannot say where it will go next for sure.
How I differ from the global warming alarmists is that I do not see enough evidence that we have any major problem coming that we can do anything about. We may get hit by a comet in five years but should we throw all of our resources into preventing this?
No. Because the risk is not high enough to warrant this. Neither is the proven risk of global warming.
Romney continues: “I believe that humans contribute to that (global warming).”
Again I agree with him. CO2, methane and other gasses released by humans do have some warming effect. Some scientists believe half of the warming comes from human produced greenhouse gasses and others think it to be less but all acknowledge that greenhouse gasses do have some warming effect. We just cannot prove how much that is.
Romney: “I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change.”
Again I agree with him. In addition to some warming effect the addition of excessive CO2 could have other unforeseen negative effects. For instance, studies show that the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere is decreasing and in some large population areas have gone down an alarming rate. Oxygen levels in the seas are also decreasing. When CO2 is formed oxygen is taken from the air. Some say that this and other human effects are producing oxygen sinks that take this vital element from the atmosphere. This should be of more concern than global warming.
I agree with Romney that we just can’t sit around and do nothing. My main point of disagreement with the environmentalists is their economy destroying approach that would do much more harm than good.
If we read on in this same Boston Globe article we see that Romney qualifies his approach with some common sense. It says:
“Romney has made clear that he opposes cap-and-trade, a system that would combat climate change by limiting total emissions and forcing polluters to pay for the greenhouse gases they produce.”
This is a huge item for me and is my main reason to take alarm at the standard environmentalist approach. Some say that the core of the environmental movement is not about the environment but about destroying capitalism and nothing gives evidence to this more than the insane cap and trade movement.
The fact that Romney is not deceived by this, as was candidates John McCain, Jon Huntsman, Pawlenty, Gingrich and Gary Johnson, score points in my book.
Someone can read about global warming and absorb some wrong information and this does me no harm. But if he wants to destroy our way of life (and eventually the environment) by destroying our economy then I am ready for battle.
Again Romney is quoted:
“Americans should do more to conserve.”
When Obama says something like this I get nervous but when someone with business sense says it I can be supportive for I also support common sense conservation. I am a big believer in the Law of Economy.
The article continues:
Instead, he said yesterday, he wants to wean the country from its dependence on foreign oil by seeking alternative sources of energy… If elected, he said he would pursue more oil drilling, as well as natural gas and nuclear energy.
Well, this is a man with some sense. I would do the same if I were president.
He wants to:
(1) Wean the country from its dependence on foreign oil
I am all for that. It is crazy to depend on those who hate us for oil.
(2) Seek alternative sources of energy.
Again to do this with a common sense approach may yield high results.
(3) “He would pursue more oil drilling, as well as natural gas and nuclear energy.”
My type of guy. That is 180 degrees the opposite of the Obama approach.
Romney adds a final caveat:
“We can’t just say it’s going to be all solar and wind,’’ he said. “I love solar and wind, but they don’t drive cars. And we’re not going to all drive Chevy Volts.’’
Copyright 2011 by J J Dewey