Global warming rhetoric continues from radical environmentalists and even from our White House. But is the information we’re getting based on facts or is it just a lot of hot air?
Recently, President Bill Clinton invited meteorologists from the top 50 media markets to the White House to help him convince the American people of climatic changes and global warming葉his in spite of 18 years of satellite research which has demonstrated a slight cooling trend in the atmosphere. In fact, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chant (I.P.C.C.), global warming predictions for the next century have actually decreased by nearly 40 %.
In the same meeting with meteorologists, Vice President Gore alluded to overpopulation as the culprit for global warming and suggested abortion as one way to curb this “problem.”
“No goal is more crucial to healing the global environment than stabilizing human population,” Gore said.
But again, the latest report from the I.P.C.C. reads, “Our ability to quantify the human influence on global climate is limited because there are uncertainties in key factors.”
So why the intensified push by the White House to spread the “global warming” frenzy? Because the President is garnishing public support for a United Nations “Global Climate Treaty” being proposed at the international climate conference in Kyoto, Japan. There, the United States will likely agree to drastically restrict energy use to address global climate concerns謡ith little or no concern for the devastating effects this policy will have on America and on the American people. Many have argued that we need to better understand the science and the probable economic impact before we impose heavy burdens on the citizens of the world, but our President is not listening.
Why should you be concerned? How will this policy affect you and your family? Economists say that achieving the proposed energy reduction would take huge energy price increases. For example, a 50-cent-per-gallon hike in gasoline and home heating oil. You can look forward to a 20% increase in electricity costs and to natural gas prices skyrocketing over 45%. These measures would cost our economy hundreds of billions of dollars each year in lost jobs and economic activity.
If these concerns are not appalling enough, add the fact that only 34 of the 166 nations participating in the negotiations will be required to enforce these legally binding energy cuts. So, while the United States will be forced to lower energy use, countries like India, China and Mexico will not. Also, the proposed treaty could require that developing nations be compensated for any damage to their economies. In other words, we would have to pay oil producing nations like Iran and Kuwait for not buying their oil!
Please join Concerned Women for America in letting President Clinton and your senators know that you oppose the U.N. Global Climate Treaty.
Carmen Pate is vice president of communications with Concerned Women for America.