New Industrial/Socialist Complex to Fleece Individual US Taxpayers

The global warming hucksters are still after your dollar. They want to redistribute wealth, if there is anything left after they first bleed you.

The topic has been changed from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change". It was found that Global Warming was a little too specific. It was directly connected with the theory that increases in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would increase Earth temperatures and cause massive devastation. That fear mongering has been pretty much ridiculed, based on the lack of science logic to support it. However the idea has not been completely discarded and is still supported by new imaginative terms such as "Radiative Forcing", which no one can really give a clear picture of what it actually is. Even the U.S. Congress has started to question global warming as related to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

In addition to changing the name of the topic, the hucksters have now developed a very clever approach. That is to obtain the support of major science industries, who will petition Congress for climate change (global warming) regulation. We will then be back to CO2 emission control, taxing, installing unnecessary emissions capture equipment, and subsequent redistribution of wealth.

This is not really very difficult to do, since the science industry would gain a lot of business through production of chemical control products machinery and construction, whether the objective is justified or not. These are business decisions, and in industry businessmen make the company decisions. Scientists in industry only make recommendations, and they generally tend to support the business leaders, who also control the salaries.

However, the global warming hucksters still use a somewhat devious approach. They ask industry whether industrial philosophy of flexibility, rather than rigidity, will help guarantee that a company will remain in business. You know the obvious answer to that one. It's "yes". The second question is, since climate change is an established fact (one day it's cloudy, the next day it is not), would it not be helpful to know more about climate change and how to control it. The obvious answer is again "yes".

The third question is would you support government research, to establish more information on climate change and allow it to help you in developing new products and protecting the longevity of your business. The obvious answer is again "yes". In this case the affirmative is based on a simple decision that it will cost the companies nothing. All they have to do is holler at Congress, which they been doing anyhow. Congress will listen, because industry is a good source of their campaign funds.

If this thing comes to pass, it will be an unnecessary waste of assets not only in continuing ridiculous grants from government agencies, such as NSF, to academic institutions for "research" to support the fallacy. More importantly, the tremendous waste in building unnecessary CO2 control operations will accelerate the bleeding of the already jeopardized taxpayer.

The only defense against this onslaught is an informed public which actually has the voting right to congressional seats and to convince Congress that this right will be used, in spite of any massive propaganda advertising by an Industrial/Socialist Complex.

Reference: C&E News June 27, 2011, page 13, Climate Change by Marc Reisch