Global Warming: The ‘Anthropocentric’ Crisis (Part 4)
Arnold Bock - February 14, 2010
Arnold Bock - February 14, 2010
The global climate warming fuss is not principally an environmental issue but, rather, it is a manufactured crisis supported by copious amounts of manipulated science, reinforced by opinion leaders and promulgated by the cheerleading of the mass media. Global warming has become the mother of all politically correct issues. www.MunKnee.com; By: Arnold Bock; Words: 1551
Various components of the warming cause, which are only tangentially related to the environment, have been outlined at some length in Part 1 (Global Warming: The Man-Made Crisis), Part 2 (U.S. and Canada Are Global Warming Scapegoats) and Part 3 (Why Should WE Make Sacrifices to Offset Global Warming?) of this series. However, it is important to comment on what has been regularly presented as scientific justification for sounding alarm bells over climate change, if for no other reason than to set the record straight.
Global Warming is Not a Proven Fact
Simply put, climate change – originally an emerging new ice age, then global warming and now climate change – is not a proven fact. To sarcastically mimic the affected gravitas of certain warming experts, we might call it an “anthropocentrically manufactured” issue. As mentioned in Part 2, in the late 1960’s the United Nations assigned Canadian Maurice Strong, a man possessed of a strong belief in the merits of global governance and the need to establish transnational governmental institutions, to head up what subsequently came to be known as the global climate change initiative.
.
2 comments:
Shouldn't it be anthropogenic... not anthropocentric... just sayin'
phil:
I believe the article uses the term 'anthropocentric' because it considers the concept of global warming an unproven factor. In other words "fixated" on the idea that it is a human produced phenomenon.
As in 'ethno-centric' which proposes that a particular race believes that it is superior without there being any tangible proof to substansiate such an assertion. Capite?
That's the way I understand this.
Post a Comment