When President Obama heads to Europe next week to address the Copenhagen United Nations Climate Conference, it’s a shame that he will not have clear “marching orders” from a consensus America. Both sides of our political spectrum have voraciously argued the impact of manmade greenhouse gasses on global warming since the Kyoto Protocols were put forth in 1997 to ostensibly combat global warming. Heated arguments have surrounded the Protocols’ provisions that “advanced” countries (read the United States) must substantially cut back on carbon based fuel emissions (oil and coal primarily) in order to hopefully reduce the perceived negative effects of global warming.

Last week the world became aware of hacked emails in what is now being referred to as ClimateGate. The emails were obtained from Britain’s East Anglia University’s Hadley Climatic Research Unit. They suggest to many that some renowned climatologists have colluded to improperly manipulate data to support the view that climate change is real, and that it is being caused by the collective air pollution acts of the industrialized world. As a result, the gulf between Republicans and Democrats on the climate change issue is continuing to widen, and the average American is left wondering whom to believe.

No doubt the bickering, arguing, infighting and political partisanship will continue, regardless of the outcome of what the President says or doesn’t say at the upcoming Copenhagen Conference. Unfortunately, both sides in this debate fail to see the real issue facing America. Regardless of real or perceived global warming and the impact of carbon based emissions, the United States is being held hostage by Middle-Eastern oil rich countries. We pay outrageous prices for their oil in the greatest transfer of wealth activity – our wealth -- in the history of mankind. We burn their oil in our cars and then we are accused by much of our own population and the world of causing global climate change. Our demand for foreign oil is predicted to continue to rise, and could reach as much as 70% of our requirement in the next decade. America’s national security and economic well-being is on the line as we become more beholding to the OPEC oil monopoly.

There’s only one way out of this and it is a path where, with the right leadership, both Republicans and Democrats can hopefully come together. It’s clear that we have to wean ourselves from carbon based fuels and quickly, or be prepared to submit to OPEC’s price gouging and thus continue to see our wealth and standard of living diminish as oil sheiks build skyscrapers in the desert with our money. America must adopt an energy policy to quickly shift our automobiles from oil energy to a combination of electricity, hydrogen, and natural gas, all of which can be supplied from potentially plentiful domestic sources.

To meet our electric automobile needs, we must immediately begin construction of dozens of new generation and safe nuclear fission power plants. By shifting to nuclear generated electricity, hydrogen and natural gas we will not only free ourselves of the hegemony of the OPEC oil cartel, but we will also be able to dramatically reduce our long standing military footprint in the Middle-East, something long overdue. And last, and regardless of who’s right in the global warming and emissions argument, we will also substantially reduce our carbon based emissions into the atmosphere, something I think everyone can sign up for.

America needs a real energy policy that allows us to snub our noses at OPEC while at the same time reducing our carbon based emissions. We can get this done by the year 2030 with domestic nuclear, hydrogen and natural gas energy sources.

General (Retired) B.B. Bell
bbbell12@yahoo.com

* * *

Gen. Bell’s commentary should have directed a healthy dose of skepticism toward the climate data and methods of the “scientists/politicians” involved in Climategate. Combining Climategate and Energy Policy signals his belief that energy use causes climate change. Whether he realizes it or not the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit is the primary support for the theory of anthropogenic global warming, manmade global warming. Not only do they lend support to the U.N.s’ IPCC group but the U.S. EPA also uses their climate “data.” In other words American taxpayers help fund CRU.

The controversy is not only the emails, but the blatant manipulation of data to show warming where there is none.

When the man on the street sees the temperature graphs flashed on their TVs from Copenhagen they appear to show a severe warming trend.

Most of the graphs are variations of the vaunted “hockey stick” variety. Everyone should know by now that the “hockey stick” is a fraud by manipulation created by Dr. Mann, CRU and their associates.

If you remove the hockey stick graphs, there is really no evidence left that would suggest that the natural temperature swings before the industrial revolution were any different than what we experience today. The industrialized civilization probably does add some warming trend but this trend is small enough so that it can't be isolated and empirically proven by any available scientific technique today.

If the CO2 emissions increased twenty-fold, their effect could become measurable - but this question is a rhetorical one because the CO2 emissions will never increase by a factor of 20.

You should be aware of:

The majority of rural climate monitoring stations have been removed from the database. Most temperature readings are taken from urban areas were many are poorly located due to expansion of roads and buildings. Poor locations such as rooftops, parking lots and near heat sources have been documented.

Most scientists agree that readings from cities should be adjusted downward to remove the “urban heat island” effect. Much of the CRU data does not compensate for the UHI effect.

CRU ClimateGate has led scientists to question treatment of temperature data elsewhere in the world; each time a date set is “adjusted” by their method temperatures increase. We are not seeing straight forward plotting of temperature; instead data is manipulated to fit an agenda, the manmade global warming by carbon dioxide agenda.

The earth has been warming slowly for thousands of years, not just since the start of the industrial revolution. It has been shown time after time that increasing carbon dioxide, CO2; levels are the result of warming not the cause of warming. First comes warming then CO2 levels rise.

The dire climate predictions of rising sea levels, extreme heat, floods, drought, hurricanes etc. are based on manipulated climate data spewed out by computer models, not empirical data. Its scaremongering on a world wide scale with a veneer of scientific respectability.

The world runs on energy. If you believe, really believe that CO2 causes the planet to warm, please note the following: a) The activities of mankind produce 3% of CO2 emissions; the earth produces the other 97%, b) CO2 is not a pollutant, I repeat CO2 is not a pollutant. It’s a colorless, odorless, inert trace gas that is essential to life.

c) And by the way CO2 is 0.000388 of our atmosphere--) 0.0388% that’s right, go google it.

The last time I checked there are nearly 250,000,000 vehicles in the U.S. that require gasoline and diesel fuel to transport people and goods around this country. You can’t simply declare them obsolete by saying we should be driving electric or hydrogen fueled vehicles.

Kyoto and Copenhagen are simply control mechanisms of the U.N. to impose a government on the world. America must vigorously resist draconian measures to reduce CO2 at every turn. If we don’t we’ll quickly become a third world country running on batteries.

Al Gore is a liar and a hypocrite who has and wants to continue profiting from the manmade global warming fraud/hoax.

Don’t give me “Even if manmade global warming isn’t happening, we should still do something. What will it hurt?” routine. Not with my taxes. Go ahead, throw your money away; write the U.N. a check.

I do not and will not support any measure to control CO2 emissions, either by legislation or regulation. There is no such thing as “manmade global warming” and leveling taxes on all America to reduce CO2 is nothing short of criminal. Stop climate change? Declare war on climate change? Cap and Trade to stop climate change? Don’t kid yourself. The earth’s climate is always changing and I expect it will continue.

Doug Howerton
Soddy Daisy