According to reports out of Argentina, the bodies were found after neighbors smelled a strong odor emanating from the couple’s house. When police entered they found “the lifeless bodies of the couple, each shot in the chest, and their 2-year-old son, who had been shot in the back.”
Fortunately, in another room, police found the 7-month-old baby still alive, but covered in blood from a bullet wound in the chest.
The reason for the tragic and disturbing shooting was found by police in a letter left on the table. According to reports, the couple was worried “about global warming” and also noted that they were angry about what they perceived to be “the government’s lack of interest in the matter.”
This story along with much else about the global warming fraud should make everyone outraged. Innocent children have now been murdered and maimed, by their parents, because of the planetary delusion that an unprecedented climate catastrophe is about to destroy Gaia.
Where would people get such an idea? Let’s start with Hollywood. In 2004 Twentieth Century Fox released the abominable Roland Emmerich stinker The Day After Tomorrow. According to the Internet Movie Database (IMDB), this cinematic atrocity, based on the dubious idea of abrupt climate change brought on by mankind’s foolhardy emissions of carbon dioxide, raked in $85,807,341 million on its opening weekend in the U.S. alone, and went on to make a total of almost $187 million. Since then it’s been aired on television in the United States repeatedly, becoming a disaster movie staple on cable. In fact, as I write this article it is March 1, 2010, and guess what’s on tonight? That’s right, the cable channel FX has the movie scheduled to replay again at 5:30 pm. Just in time for the kids to come home from school to get their daily dose of propaganda sweetened with CGI effects. Maybe they can watch this for credit in “science” in lieu of their regular homework.
Who else is to blame? How about the so-called scientists who lied, covered up, and conveniently lost data? You know, those fun folks at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. These include not only the people at CRU, but also their collaborators around the world. Noteworthy among them are Professors Phil Jones, the head of the CRU, and Penn State Professor Michael Mann (he of the famously debunked “hockey stick” graph). In the leaked climategate emails, Jones tells Mann of his plans to hide his data: “If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone” and “We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind.” Another professor at CRU, Tim Osborne, discussed in emails how he might change a data series to hide a cooling trend.
It’s dishonesty and deviousness like this that is shot through the whole climate “science” establishment, including the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). And here we meet another organization that can be blamed for scaring people into believing, incorrectly, that the end is nigh. As real climate scientist Timothy Ball notes, “Predictions of disaster are in the Report of Working Group II of the IPCC are based solely on the false science prepared by Working Group I controlled by the CRU gang.”
And there’s still plenty of blame to go around. How about major international corporations? A look at the website for USCAP, the U.S. Climate Action Partnership — a corporate lobbying group — reads like a who’s who of the Fortune 500. A look at their membership roster reveals that companies like Alcoa, Chrysler, John Deere, Dow Chemical, DuPont, Ford Motor, General Electric, General Motors, Honeywell, Rio Tinto, and Shell, have joined with the leftist environmental groups like the Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council to call for government intervention on climate change. Specifically, USCAP says it is calling “on the federal government to quickly enact strong national legislation to require significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.”
Cap and trade legislation will hurt millions, if not billions, of people worldwide. A cap and trade regime will increase the cost of energy artificially. This increase in cost will mean that people on the poor side of the spectrum will find it increasingly difficult to access energy. This has a direct impact on wellness and public health. Cap and trade will also make food more expensive because in addition to making fuel more expensive, it will also make fertilizer more expensive. These increased costs aren’t going to be absorbed by producers and manufacturers — they will be passed down in the form of increased prices and increased food prices have a disproportionate impact on the poor.
But elite progressives, for all their whining about helping people, don’t really care, or if they do they hide it well. Witness Al Gore. No one person has done more to spread the myth about imminent catastrophe caused by anthropogenic global warming than the former vice president. And he’s kept at it. In his recent editorial on the subject for The New York Times, Gore wrote: “It would be an enormous relief if the recent attacks on the science of global warming actually indicated that we do not face an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it.” But, he said, “the crisis is still growing because we are continuing to dump 90 million tons of global-warming pollution every 24 hours into the atmosphere — as if it were an open sewer.”
His insistence on imminent catastrophe comes at the very same time one of the very best and most skilled actual climate scientists was warning that the worries about AGW are exaggerated. That climate scientist is Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT. On February 10, Lindzen delivered a talk entitled “The Peculiar Issue of Global Warming” at Fermilab (watch on YouTube here), where he concluded for his audience: “What we see is that the very foundation of global warming alarm (namely positive feedback) is likely wrong.” He also noted, wryly, that such a conclusion “constitutes an ‘insult to the sensibilities of the educated class and the entire East and West Coasts.'”
Unfortunately, it is the tender sensibilities of the “educated class,” the demagoguery of Al Gore, the propaganda from Hollywood, and the bizarre attempts of many of America’s biggest corporations to curry favor with the progressive establishment that have led to the unreasoned hysteria and fears of so many people. Now that hysteria seems to have led to one family committing the unspeakably heinous crime of murdering their children and killing themselves. It’s a crime that should never have happened. Al Gore could have saved them, if only he — and his collaborators — hadn’t persisted in an unreasoned fear campaign.
Dennis Behreandt is a contributor to The New American magazine. Visit his blog and archives here.
