Moloch and the Bible-Punchers in the US - 275 Words

Moloch and the Bible-Punchers in the US (Essay Sample) Content: Name:Instructor:Course:Date:Climate change and false gods: Moloch and the bible-punchers in the USThe Climate is changing. There have been several recommendations actions to mitigate, if not prevent, further change in climate. Discouraging usage of fossil fuel has been the primary recommendation. Optional sources of energy like wind, solar and water power are being encouraged. According to a report by Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC), global warming should be limited to 2ÂC by 2050. However, there are two challenges hindering the measures taken to curb global warming. Meredith Tax argues about two of them in this article; the power of money from the oil industry and the religious beliefs. Tax argues that the US government is focused on subsidizing the production of fossils fuel by using tax incentive amounting to four billion dollars annually, instead of imposing a carbon tax. Furthermore, it is planning to supply fracked natural gas to Europe end lessly. And worst still, the current government is pondering on whether to approve the Keystone pipeline project. All these are steps in the wrong direction (Tax).In the 2012 elections, the Koch brothers gave Republican candidates a total of $39.6 million, which came from oil. They are among the major funders of climate change disinformation. The general public is confused over the global warming issue, mostly due to the confusing information provided by those who cause confusion professionally. A former scientist at the Florida University, Tom Luongo, recently confessed that a network of corporations, scientists and politicians had tried to bribe him so that he would play a part in misleading the general public on the topic of global warming (Luongo). This begs the questions; how many professionals have fallen victims to such a bribery, and what information did they share with the public?However, money à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ or Moloch, as Tax calls it - is not the only factor hindering global warming mitigation measures. Christianity has also played its role. Christian fundamentalists are as fierce in attacking the scientific consensus. A small portion of them believe that the climate degradation is Godà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s punishment for sin. They define sin as anything from homosexuality to short skirts. Other Christians have welcomed global warming. They claim that it is a sign that the end of the world is near (Tax). In 2008, a group of conservative Christians launched a national campaign to collect one million signatures for a statement saying Christians shouldnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t believe in all the global warming hype (Archer). The supporters of the statement attempted to inform Christians about the biblical perspective on the environment. They also wanted to encourage them to look carefully at the hard evidence, which they say doesnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t support the devastating climate change degree claimed by the mainstream society.We know science is uncertain. Some people argue that pol icies can't be created based on it as a result. Like many scientific study fields, there are uncertainties associated with the global warming science. This doesnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t imply that all things are equally uncertain. Some science aspects are based on documented trends and well-known physical laws. It isnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t easy to figure out the extent the human-induced greenhouse gases accumulation since pre-industrial times is responsible for the global warming trend. Both natural and human factors affect the planet's temperature (Epstein). Understanding these scientific factors, the cooling effects of pollutant aerosols and changes in the sun's energy remains incomplete. In summary, scientists think the rising greenhouse gases levels in the atmosphere are contributing to global warming. But it is difficult to determine to what extent at the present time.A former member of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore argues that there is no proof of man-made global warming. He goes further to remark that a warm earth would be beneficial for human and other species. Most of the global warming debate has focused on the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions. For a long time, people have thought that fossil fuels warm the planet by emitting greenhouse gases. (Siegfried Fred Singer)Leighton Steward, a geologist, disagrees with this. He says that the CO2 levels are so low that more is needed to expand plant growth. Other scientists argue that reducing fossil fuel usage would result in financial hardship. Since economic growth is dependent on energy, Fred Singer believes that any action to restrict the use of the cheapest fuel available, coal, would cause the price of electricity to skyrocket. Fossil fuels donà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t turn a clean environment making it dirty. They, however, turn an environment from being dirty and make it clean. They donà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t make a safe climate dangerous, they turn a dangerous climate making it safe. The oil industry doesnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t deplete resources, it cre ates resources out of once-useless raw materials (Archer).Christians argue global warming is a liberal hoax. Liberals have used the manmade global warming theory to seek rationing by the US government to save energy production and consumption. The most accurate data confirms that there has been virtually no global warming since 1998. The media insist otherwise by publicizing local variations in unscientific surface thermometers. The more scientific atmospheric temperature doesnà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬t show such an increase. In addition, natural global warming periods and global cooling are expected to take place regardless of human activity. Liberals demanded more government control to combat an alleged cooling in temperatures not long ago. Some scientists warned of a possible ice age. ...