Mother Earf

Despite evidence coming to light indicating that the climate is changing but not in the way politically motivated scientists, wags, ect are thinking, the effort to drive the climate cult to the forefront still is running.

Case in point: Al Gore's editorial in the New York Times (hat tip: ABC). Does Mr. Gore at any time mention his palatial home or his jet-setting to hugely financially rewarding talks filled with unsubstantiated blather? No, but he does do some fear-mongering:

But what a burden would be lifted! We would no longer have to worry that our grandchildren would one day look back on us as a criminal generation that had selfishly and blithely ignored clear warnings that their fate was in our hands. We could instead celebrate the naysayers who had doggedly persisted in proving that every major National Academy of Sciences report on climate change had simply made a huge mistake.

The effort is as shameless as it is disingenuous. I doubt Mr. Gore believes his would-be followers read newspapers, magazines or blogs. Would he care to explain the Himalayan glaciers?

The UN's climate science body has admitted that a claim made in its 2007 report - that Himalayan glaciers could melt away by 2035 - was unfounded.

The admission today followed a New Scientist article last week that revealed the source of the claim made in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was not peer-reviewed scientific literature – but a media interview with a scientist conducted in 1999. Several senior scientists have now said the claim was unrealistic and that the large Himalayan glaciers could not melt in a few decades.

I guess not.

I submit that Mr. Gore has made a very good living off of his "green" claims. His reckless disregard for facts and their effect on the public cannot be ignored. How does one deal with an individual bent on saving trees rather than people? It breeds and/or feeds a misanthropy that pervades society at large. How do we explain away a couple who would murder their own children believing the failure at Copenhagen to effect "real change" was akin to apocalypse (hat tip: SDA)? Earth Day itself was founded by a communist-leaning radical who murdered his own girlfriend. Are these examples of people-minded conservationists who want to preserve the world for others? I do not put these tragedies directly at the feet of any one individual but I do blame an ideology based on suppositions and complete disregard for humanity.

Just my thoughts.