As the hot air generated by global-warming acolytes reaches new levels now that the US Supreme Court is hearing a case related to the climate-change issues, it is good to stop and take a deep breath. Do not allow yourself to get caught up the unquestioned belief in global warming caused by man as fact. Despite what you might hear from many quarters, it has never been proven without a doubt. In fact, there is as much science that DISproves "man-made" warming as proves it.
.
In this prior post, I reported on a new book released on the subject that seriously questions man’s impact:
The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) has released a new book debunking the notion that global warming is caused by human activity…DALLAS (November 16, 2006) – Human activities have little to do with the Earth’s current warming trend, according to a new book by Denis Avery and Fred Singer, Adjunct Scholars with the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA). In fact, the book concludes that global warming and cooling seem to be part of a 1,500-year cycle of moderate temperature swings. Coming out as the leadership of Congress shifts, the book – "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years – builds on research the two previously outlined in an NCPA study.
And yet, the US Supreme Court is deciding cases that might ultimately lead to COURT MANDATED "solutions" to combat global warming. The AFP reports:
The nine-member US Supreme Court appeared split as it took up the debate over global warming, with rival lawyers arguing whether some greenhouse gas emissions should be regulated..Despite its symbolic importance, the case is limited to whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the authority to regulate vehicle emissions of four greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide..But environmentalists hope a ruling in their favor would force changes in the policies of President George W. Bush’s administration, which has refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming..The plaintiffs in the case include several US state governments who argue that the EPA should use its authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the 1963 Clean Air Act..But the federal agency has refused, arguing that the act, which does not address global warming, does not require it to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
As usual, the sides have broken into two distinct camps: liberals and conservatives.
Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia insisted that the greenhouse gases in question represent "only" six percent of the world total and that they pose no "imminent harm," agreeing with Deputy Attorney General Gregory Garre, who represented the EPA..Liberal Justice David Souter slammed the government’s contention that cutting greenhouse gas emissions on new US-made cars would only have a very marginal effect on global warming.
Naturally. The article contains this line,that, once again assumes man-made global warming is a given:
The United States is the world’s biggest single contributor to man-made global warming, accounting for a quarter of global emissions of greenhouse gases.
That is, if it exists at all. Scientists can’t agree. Thank goodness we have the all-knowing judges to decide this for us. After all, who knows more about this than noted judge (and scientist) David Souter?
Saturday on our radio program, Meet the New Press, we will have H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow of the National Center for Policy Analysis to discuss this issue. The interview will be available, as always, on the GraniteGrok podcast page.