How strange that someone made a moral case against global warming. The trend is to promote it as a just cause. Global warming is presented as a problem that we should do everything possible to solve it or life as we know it will no longer be. The so-called “science” that global warming advocates use to justify their position is anything but established. New evidence is constantly being discovered that puts more and more holes in global warming theories, not in laws, but in theories. The most ridiculous of these theories is that global warming, if it is happening at all, is caused by human beings.

The point here is not to review the science that casts an overwhelming shadow of doubt about the accuracy of global warming theories, but it would be a waste not to share it. Not enough people know this information as it is.

It’s probably safe to say that there is no life on the other planets in our solar system. Most places are too hot, too cold, or lack an atmosphere like ours. Most likely, no aliens are driving carbon-producing SUVs on our neighboring planets. Pluto happens to be experiencing a warming up. There was a storm on Jupiter that scientists believe is due to climate change. Our closest neighbor, Mars, has experienced rising temperatures and, as a result, melting. Either our hideous carbon footprints are so gigantic that they are affecting the entire solar system or it is the sun.

Al Gore’s claim to the Hollywood trophies and the Nobel Peace Prize is due entirely to An inconvenient truth–conveniently, it has few truths. Gore’s most important case for linking human activity to global warming is the theory that carbon dioxide levels are directly responsible for temperature increases. Its graphics and animations certainly looked sharp and gave an aura of authority. However, CO2 and rising temperatures are not related in the way that Gore suggests. It would make you think that temperatures rise as a result of rising CO2 levels. Statistically, the warmest periods in Earth’s history occurred about 800 years before an increase in CO2; that means CO2 levels increased after temperatures increased. In other words, adjusting our “carbon emissions” may not affect global temperatures.

It would also be wise to look back on elementary school science. We know that plant life thrives in high CO2 environments. The greener there is on earth, the better. The increase in plant life will lead to an increase in wildlife and the problem of starving nations could be more easily solved; The more places for agriculture, the more food we can produce.

That is part of the science and has been known for years. Global warming fanatics have ignored him and the public has blindly accepted his bogus science. Why? Because we are morally good. We want to do the right thing and presenting global warming as a result of human activity puts the moral responsibility in our hands. Inconveniently for global warming fear mongers, the war on global warming is largely immoral and human activity is likely not the cause of global warming.

Among the most immoral propositions in the war against global warming is the cap on carbon emissions from developing countries. The people who live there don’t have access to electricity, clean running water, or any of the luxuries we take for granted. Who are we in the developed world to tell these nations that they must adhere to “green” practices when we have built our lives on a carbon-emitting system? It is immoral to keep people in poverty by force because of scientific theories. We have no right as a person or as a nation to tell another person or nation how to live or run their own country.

The big ethanol lie is another by-product of global warming. One third of our corn crop in the United States this year will be consumed by ethanol production. That sounds like a lot, except that it will account for 3 percent of our total fuel use as the price of other grains and foods rises. This reduces the amount of food we send to those who are starving. And if you didn’t already know, it takes more fuel to produce and transport ethanol than ethanol can provide. A gigantic losing strategy that only makes it harder for Americans to buy food and reduces the food supply to the hungry and needy.

This war on global warming is largely a means of stealing more money from ordinary people. The government regulations and subsidies that have come out of this war, like carbon taxes and subsidized initiatives like corn-based ethanol, are going to impoverish us all. The carbon tax is touted as a great idea for evil car drivers to pay for their crimes against the planet. Income tax was also sold to us as a means of taxing those rich and wicked and the last time I checked, the IRS robs us all every two weeks. These taxes are simply a means for one group to steal money from another group for its own agenda. A carbon tax is not backed by scientific facts and will be more destructive to ordinary people who depend on their car for a living.

Absolutely no government legislation or regulation as a result of global warming is going to solve the “problem” or improve the situation for any of us. Supporting government global warming initiatives is tantamount to starving and robbing other people. The war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war on anything is another way to ensure that the problem is never solved. The war on drugs has not reduced drug use, but has put huge numbers of people in jail for non-aggressive crimes and created a black market where the really bad guys profit.

If all those who preach the global warming gospel are truly humanitarian, they would stop using the government to carry out their orders. The fact is, more people are going to be worse off and perhaps die because of our policies regarding an unproven scientific theory. Those who believe that global warming is a crisis can act without using government force. Automakers have responded with hybrid vehicles, better gas mileage, and even all electric vehicles. No party is worse off because of these improvements and actions. That is the moral way to deal with global warming.