Ron Paul on Global Warming 15


November 20, 2008 Ron Paul said in a New York Times / Freakonomics interview:

“I try to look at global warming the same way I look at all other serious issues: as objectively and open-minded as possible. There is clear evidence that the temperatures in some parts of the globe are rising, but temperatures are cooling in other parts. The average surface temperature had risen for several decades, but it fell back substantially in the past few years.

Clearly there is something afoot. The question is: Is the upward fluctuation in temperature man-made or part of a natural phenomenon. Geological records indicate that in the 12th century, Earth experienced a warming period during which Greenland was literally green and served as rich farmland for Nordic peoples. There was then a mini ice age, the polar ice caps grew, and the once-thriving population of Greenland was virtually wiped out.

It is clear that the earth experiences natural cycles in temperature. However, science shows that human activity probably does play a role in stimulating the current fluctuations.

The question is: how much? Rather than taking a “sky is falling” approach, I think there are common-sense steps we can take to cut emissions and preserve our environment. I am, after all, a conservative and seek to conserve not just American traditions and our Constitution, but our natural resources as well.

We should start by ending subsidies for oil companies. And we should never, ever go to war to protect our perceived oil interests. If oil were allowed to rise to its natural price, there would be tremendous market incentives to find alternate sources of energy. At the same time, I can’t support government “investment” in alternative sources either, for this is not investment at all.

Government cannot invest, it can only redistribute resources. Just look at the mess government created with ethanol. Congress decided that we needed more biofuels, and the best choice was ethanol from corn. So we subsidized corn farmers at the expense of others, and investment in other types of renewables was crowded out.

Now it turns out that corn ethanol is inefficient, and it actually takes more energy to produce the fuel than you get when you burn it. The most efficient ethanol may come from hemp, but hemp production is illegal and there has been little progress on hemp ethanol. And on top of that, corn is now going into our gas tanks instead of onto our tables or feeding our livestock or dairy cows; so food prices have been driven up. This is what happens when we allow government to make choices instead of the market; I hope we avoid those mistakes moving forward.”

I think that is a fairer assessment than I have seen from a climate scientist. The problem is that when you dig into the field of climate science there is data and there are models and then there’s 50 feet of Climategate crap and big-government science funding. Below that there’s the IPCC.

  • Ged

    That’s probably one of the fairest and most reasonable arguments on the issue I’ve ever seen, from any source. Ron Paul is many things, and pragmatic is definitely one of them.

  • KuhnKat

    Unfortunately Ron Paul is completely unreasonable on one other VERY important issue. He tells us that it is our own fault that Islam is attacking us. If you believe that he is your man. I do not. Who do I vote for?

    • Davids99us

      What is unreasonable about “Blowback”? That’s all he is talking about. Being over there, makes them want to get us over here.

      • Kuhnkat

        David,

        there is nothing unreasonable with the idea of blowback. I am sure that some of the attacks we see are partially a result of blowback.

        What is unreasonable is to label everything blowback when over 40 countries of the world are under continuous attack by Muslims of different sects all fighting to overthrow or consolidate their overthrow of the countries. The fact that the US has “invaded” and occupied” or whatever other loaded words you would like to use has absolutely nothing to do with Muslims killing people in Bangladesh, Thaisland, Phillipines, Nigeria………. etc.

        The Crusades were blowback against the Islamic Caliphates invading Europe. We can run forward and back in time pointing fingers virtually forever. There is only one truly violent expansionistic ideology active in the world today and it is Islam. It also spreads itself through deceptive peaceful means until it has a large enough population in the country to start exerting itself as we see in numerous European Countries.

        The fact that Ron Paul, as many other Republicans until this election, refuses to recognize this danger to our country shows that he is as unfit to run the country as anyone else who is blind to Islam on a Worldwide basis.

        Then there is the recent realization of how badly the Gubmint, FBI, and other intelligence agencies have been penetrated by Islamic partisans. We have a serious problem that MUST BE ADDRESSED from the President on down. Obie’s installing blatant partisans for Islam is making it even more important that the next President is not like Bush whining thatIslam is not our enemy. Islam gives us three choices. Convert, submit, or die.

        I would point to Obie’s recent decision that the Ft. Hood attack was workplace violence as an example of IGNORING the dangers of Islam. We have an Islamic man who was pretty much hands off to the Commanders above him due to PC policies who was blatantly influenced by Islamic beliefs and murdered our soldiers. Those soldiers wounded and surviving families are now even denied the small comfort of a Purple Heart or other awards for facing the enemy because of these perverted policies ignoring the real enemy.

        • Davids99us

           What do you think about endorsements such as these

          Intelligence Officer Says Ron Paul is Right on Iran?

          • Kuhnkat

            This addresses ONLY Iran. He admits that Iran is developing new weapons. He thinks Iran already has 2 warheads. He claims the regime is sane enough to realize they can’t go too far or we will attack them. That is not a good argument when Ron Paul will be cutting our military substantially and withdrawing from forward deployments worldwide.
            I would point to the Balkans and our bombing of the Serbs. Where was our intelligence community?? Sorry, I don’t have much respect for any of those people. They never seem to have a reasonable view of what is happening when seen in 20/20 hindsight. They have been driving our assisting Islamic regimes for far too long. I assume that it was to counter the USSR during the Cold War. If so it is far past time to update their short term and long term plans.
            I would also point out that we have NO assets in Iran. The only good information we get is from the Massad who have their own priorities. We may also get some info from Saudi Arabia and members of the Arab League. I wouldn’t trust that either. We depend far too much on electronic intercept and evaluation.
            Our intelligence community caused the Iranian problems by helping to oust the Shah. It was a worse mistake than our bombing Libya which helped to install another Muslim Brotherhood oriented regime. They also were involved with the early Muslim Brotherhood, part of the overall ME policy attempting to counteract the USSR involvement apparently. Basically our military involvements have been Politically Correct operations often on the wrong side and NEVER going after those behind the problems. In Iraq I would remind you that the last 3 years we were primarily fighting an insurgency financed and led by Iran. This is why we have forever wars. We NEVER go after the instigators, only the pawns. Korea and Vietnam are other excellent examples of the failure of PC Wars where we did not go after those supporting the combatants meaning that we lost in the short term with enormous loss of life and disruption to the countries.
            I am not telling you that we should be waging large scale warfare around the world. I am telling you that Ron Paul’s statements that Islam is not our enemy shows an abysmal ignorance of what is happening in the world and here in the US. When he talks about reasonable policies of blocking insurgencies and penetration of US organizations and structures I may listen. Until then he is bent on continuing the US suicide Obie started. If we do not accept who our enemy is and what he is doing how can we possibly formulate rational effective policies against them?? 
             

          • Davids99us

             The issue, though, is what gets cut, isn’t it? You can argue about what it is, but 250 odd bases in Germany, 1000 around the world, and a military budget that has burgeoned since 2006,  well after 9/11, is a good place to start. 

            RPs argument is that the military presence makes the US less safe, and there is often truth in these types of counter-intuitive arguments, IMHO.  But its a way more subtle argument than people make out, which is that he is a Osama sympathizer.

            RP is calling attention back to the reality, the US debt is out of control, and cuts need to be made.  Most of the issues people raise are irrelevant next to this.

  • Kuhnkat

    David, this is a reply to your last.
     
    I have heard the arguments that having our troops out there CAN make us less safe. Unfortunately no one can provide empirical evidence of this as we have never NOT had them out there under the conditions of the last 60 years. I will set that aside for the now because there are numerous arguments on both sides of it and that isn’t even my argument.
    The same for those who claim he is an Osama sympathizer. I do not think he is. I believe he thinks Osama and the Jihadis are hijacking Islam. He is VERY wrong there.
    My argument is that since he believes Islam is NOT our enemy, that they will back off if we bring our troops home. Unfortunately that would NOT have worked against the Soviet Union or any other expansionist country, ism or whatever. I won’t even push whether it is our job to stop Islam from overrunning other countries out there or whether even that would make us safer.
     Nope, my argument goes all the way back to the FACT that many politicians and groups are being sucked into being allies and promoters if Islam here in the US. RP does not see Islam as an enemy and, similar to what happened with Communism, it will continue to subvert our institutions and systems as long as no one is specifically fighting back. There is only so much individuals can do to block this if the Federal Gubmint and the Courts are telling us we HAVE to defer to them as it is a CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE!!!
     One of the recent articles I posted on my FB account:
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/taqiyya_for_kids.html
    This shows a small bit of how our own people are being propagandized on Islam and our own activities in the world. Like the fact that Harvard is involved?? Here is an article that shows what Islam teaches its own children here in the US:
    http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.11242/pub_detail.asp
    These are the worst, but, certainly not unique. As mentioned in the article many Mosques teach the Quran, Hadiths, and Sharia. It cannot be otherwise as they fanatically stick to the letter of the books and even proclaim that not a dot or tiddle has been changed since Mohammed recorded Allah’s word. This is my issue. Until people like Ron Paul pull their heads out and realize that the US is headed the same direction as the EU, pulling back from the world will only allow them to advance more quickly worldwide and certainly won’t slow their encroachments on our own territory.
    Here is my FB page where I post a lot of links on Islam.
    https://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000229631425

    • Davids99us

       I’ll check out your links.

      • Kuhnkat

        There was no Islam before about 700! How much of their territory during their largest expansion would you consider traditional?? According to Islam every bit of land ever owned, governed, or on which a Mosque was built upon is considered theirs.

    • Davids99us

       Your second link shows that the enemy is within US borders… http://www.familysecuritymatte

      A good article I read about Osama, i think it was by Pointman, said that his motivation for 911 was to unify the Arab states to overthrow their dictators.  With the arab spring, he got his goal.  Its just a theory, and there are many theories. 

      The Islamic expansionism is certainly worth considering, though where has Islam taken over a country beyond its traditional borders in say, the last 50 years?

  • Pingback: wypozyczalnia lawet()

  • Pingback: witryna firmowa()

  • Pingback: strona()

  • Pingback: link do strony()