The "Green" Destruction of America's 5,000 Year Leap

For the first 5,000 years of man's existence on earth, very little advancement was made in things technological. In the two centuries following the pilgrims' arrival on America's shores, technological innovation became unprecedented. In the two hundred or so years since, advances in technology have been even more astonishing. How did it happen? By harnessing the ingenuity of freedom. In the name of a farce, that is about to be destroyed.

Share/Save/Bookmark

In their perpetuation of one of the largest frauds in history, the global warming/climate change crowd is attempting to destroy much of the technological achievement of the past 400 years. Not for themselves, mind you, but for all of the rest of us. The propaganda of the environmental extremists is a not-so-veiled attempt to destroy liberty.

The settlers of Jamestown in the New World of the early 1600's exhibited a shocking similarity to everyone who had peopled the earth for the five thousand years prior--they had achieved very little technological advancement. In his book, The 5,000 Year Leap, Cleon Skousen tells why
The whole panorama of Jamestown demonstrated how shockingly little progress had been made by all of those fifty centuries.

[They] had come in a boat no more commodious than those of the ancient sea kings. Their tools still consisted of shovel, axe, hoe, and a stick plow...only slightly improved over those of China, Egypt, Persia, and Greece. They harvested...with the same primitive scythes... Their transportation was by cart and oxen.

The 5,000 Year Leap: A Miracle That Changed the World, pp. 1-2
Two centuries later, many of these rudiments had been replaced by implements far more technologically advanced. What caused this miracle? Liberty. Skousen says:
The spirit of freedom which moved out across the world in the 1800s was primarily inspired by the fruits of freedom in the United States. The climate of free-market economics allowed science to thrive in an explosion of inventions and technical discoveries that gave the world...harnessed electricity, the internal combustion engine, jet propulsion, exotic space vehicles, and all the wonders of nuclear energy.
Freedom has in the past four centuries allowed individuals to become more and more enlightened than over 90% of earth's population ever thought possible and to contribute to their communities on a much more meaningful

the leaders of the climate change movement have never had the earth's interest--or your interest, for that matter--at heart. Rather, their agenda has always been about the efficiency of top-down control--with them at the top.

basis. Freedom has brought us to the point where miraculous inventions, such as computers, dishwashers, cell phones, and jet airplanes, are considered common. Now, based on the pseudo-scientific farce referred to alternately as "global warming" or "climate change", the self-proclaimed elite want to destroy all that.

Two hundred years ago, before so many helpful inventions improved our way of life, people died at much younger ages. Without electricity, they froze to death or died from dehydration or food poisoning. Without modern transportation, they died of disease borne by the sepsis of animal feces in the streets of their cities. Without other modern miracles, they died from drinking contaminated water, stepping on rusty nails, and suffering from heart abnormalities. Those are, ironically, essentially the same problems that still cut short the lives of many in the Third World today.

Man is not causing the globe to warm in any but the most minuscule of manners. If the global warming claims were true, it might be advisable to not only take from you the comforts of a modern-day existence, but also to ensure that citizens of the Third World never get a chance to enjoy them. Since the claims are demonstrably false, such notions of control are the height of aristocratic arrogance.

Man is not causing the globe to warm in any appreciable way. Some of those who claim that man is having such an effect on the atmosphere know that the claim is a crock. In order to successfully destroy your liberty to learn, to grow, and to contribute to your society, however, they perpetuate their false claims from behind the faux-priestly robes of "consensus".

I know a day of weather does not a climate make. But several days does. Last year I recall hardly once saying that "this is the most beautiful day I have ever seen". This year, I have said that at least twenty times already. Yes, our climate is a-changin'. It's been getting cooler. Perhaps that's why man-caused global warming aficionados don't refer to it much as "global warming" anymore.

The same free-market principles that gave us marvelous technological innovation can also provide the improvements we need to keep our environment clean. They can help us to eventually share the comforts of life with our brothers and sisters in the Third World. In fact, where government does not have a choke hold on the process, we're already accomplishing such improvements. However, climate change advocates are desperate for you not to notice this salient and simple fact.

Despite what you may have been taught in school, elite communists and socialists have never been equal with their commoner counterparts. The cream of the climate change communist crop will be no exception if we allow the scam to proceed that far. In every experiment in government control of the masses, an aristocracy of sorts has arisen, to whom has never applied the egregious and unnecessary rules foisted on the populace at large. Stated another way, if the climate change elite can require you to forgo your comforts of life, they will be left to consume and debauch the environment in a way never before imagined. In fact, they already do.

In a manner similar to the Malthusians of "population bomb" infamy, the leaders of the climate change movement have never had the earth's interest--or your interest, for that matter--at heart. Rather, their agenda has always been about the efficiency of top-down control--with them at the top.

If we give in to their charade, your liberty will be destroyed (but not theirs), and the 5,000 year leap of liberty will be over.



Comments

  1. And what of the rivers turned into cesspools, the forests devastated, the farmlands turned to wasteland, oceans containing floating islands of plastic, fish stocks depleting, the groundwater turned toxic, and the air turned poison by the wondrous technological innovation and pursuit of lucre, passing on the costs to the less fortunate and future generations?

    This free market worship of development, growth without heed to the consequences, will lead to disaster just as much as any luddite vision of a return to the hunter-gatherer society (of whom I don't now any; do you?). That is the true arrogance, the arrogance of those who think we can take, use, and throw away without any negative consequences. Whether or not it is global climate disruption (and if you would ever care to actually listen to what these people are saying, you would have heard that they've always warned that warming would not be uniform or consistent, that weather patterns would change, and that while the atmospheric temperature overall would rise, there would be regions which would experience colder weather due to such factors as changes in the gulf stream) or localized pollution and disruption, someone will pay the piper if people are permitted to extract whatever they want and excrete whatever they want without consideration of the rights and freedom of others effected (interestingly, among the trials that the third world suffers, you neglect to mention suffering the effects of the effluence of the technology and markets we few enjoy).

    Free market advocates like to talk about freedom, but they don't seem to concerned with a person's freedom from the disastrous consequences of the development of others. Talk about destroying liberty. And they always pay lip service to protecting private property and rights, but in the end, it seems that the only rights they care to protect are the right to dig it out and burn it up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Derek,

    I agree with everything in your comment, except what you say about global warming.

    Corporations do rape the earth, but that's because of the dispensation from and look-the-other-way permission by governments. We definitely have to fix that.

    I am of the free-market Austrian economics mentality, which teaches that polluters and environmental destroyers should not be allowed to pass on the costs of their destruction.

    I support leaders in government who would make the polluters pay (which would be a huge disincentive to pollute) but who would also stop subscribing to all of the sky-is-falling global-warming propaganda. We need to almost clean house, because right now we have very few of those in government.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Frank, if you agree with my statements, then why would you sing this paean to technology and development, promoting the dogma so common among free market advocates that the solution to all our problems is more conversion of natural resources to stuff, more things new, more consumption, and more economic activity? It is false; development can cause as many problems as it solves. But your statements don't address that, they simply imply we should just keep recklessly rushing along development (indeed, more development, since you suggest we remove the restraints to "freedom") without considering the consequences.

    I have a hard time believing that the Austrian school takes seriously the need to restrain cost externalization. Yes, I've occasionally seen them pay lip service to the idea. But in practice, I've never seen any Paul, or Rockwood, or any devotees of Mises take a stand to make mines pay the costs of the environmental damage they cause, or to tax car emissions (which include much more than CO2), or tax the disposal of hazardous wastes, etc. All I ever see them talk about is eliminating taxes and increasing economic freedom. Free marketers may claim they oppose externalization and favor protecting property rights for all people, but the proof is in the pudding.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sorry, typing error: that was supposed to be "any Paul, or any devotees of Rockwell or Mises..." I was typing too fast and I guess I had the name of an old bishop in my head.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Simply, "progress", so-called, is destroying the earth(land, air, water, vegetation, creatures) and perverting that which is Spirit(Light, Life, Truth, Love, Peace, Hope, Grace, Miracles, Faith, etc.) ;-(

    Postings have been made at TheDestructionOfTheEarth.Wordpress.com concerning such destruction and perversion and also concerning The Creator's(G-D, Father) promise that HE will "destroy those who destroy the earth(HIS Creation)!" (Rev11:18c)

    Yet there is a Living, Lively Hope!

    However, such Hope is not for that which is of the earth, earthly and fleshly, but there is a Living, Lively Hope for that which is Spirit, Heavenly and Spiritual.

    Hope for that which is Spirit is Alive because "progress", which is the product of mankind's "imag"ination, can pervert, yet not destroy that which is Spirit! For that which is Spirit is Real, and that which is Real is Forever!

    So no matter how perverse this world's systems of religion become, that which is Spirit can only be abused and perverted, not destroyed!

    That which is Spirit is Eternal.......

    As for that which is called "religion".

    "Pure religion and undefiled before G-D The Father(Creator) is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself uncontaminated by the world." (James 1:27)

    Simply, every other religion is impure and defiled!

    As stated previously, "that which is called ""progress" is of mankind's "imag"ination and can pervert, yet not destroy, that which is Spirit", and so it is that this world, and it's systems of religion, have their version of "Light", which can be turned on and off;

    Their version of "Truth", which is of the "imag"ination;

    Their version of "Love", which should be called lust;

    Their version of "Peace", which needs be enforced;

    Their version of "Hope", which is but a desire for temporal "things";

    Their version of "Faith", which is powerless;

    Their version of "Grace", which is the liberty to "do your own thing";

    And sadly, the favorite color of this world's religion is gray ;-(

    So come out of the shadows! And as is said by many, "Get Real"!

    Once again, "only that which is Spirit is Real, and only that which is Real is Forever"!

    Hope is there would be those who "see" that The Life is in and of The Spirit. Those who "see" will no longer have their portion with the multitudes who are destroying the earth(and, air, water, creatures, vegetation) and perverting that which is Spirit(Light, Life, Truth, Love, Peace, Hope, Faith, Grace, etc.) ;-(

    Simply, each breath(Spirit) you take is a revelation of The Source of Life.

    And "A Simple and Spiritual Life is the only Life that will survive!"

    Forever.......

    So "set your affections on Heavenly things" and be not of those "whose god is their bellies because they mind earthly things". Be not of those who "love this world and it's things" and who are "progress"ively destroying the earth(land, air, water, vegetation, creatures) and perverting that which is Spirit(Light, Life, Truth, Love, Peace, Hope, Faith, Grace, etc.).......

    Peace, in spite of the dis-ease(no-peace) that is of this world and it's systems of religion, for "The WHOLE world is under the control of the evil one" (1John5:19) indeed and Truth.......

    Truth is never ending....... TheDestructionOfTheEarth.Wordpress.Com

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I know a day of weather does not a climate make. But several days does."

    Several days of cool is just several days of cool weather. Climate is what you have when you look at long-term trends over several years and the long-term trend in temperature is up. Days of cool are like down days in an otherwise growing stock market. A few days of decline don't make a bear market anymore than a few days of cool make for an ice age.

    Given you, like most deniers, cannot distinguish between climate and weather, why should we take any of your arguments seriously?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh, dear god!

    I'm, I'm, dare I say it...a DENIER!!!

    I realize the difference between climate and weather. However, the longer the weather stays cooler, the more it begins to blend into an alteration of the climate.

    Given that you think that the long-term temperature trend is up, can we take any of YOUR arguments seriously?

    ReplyDelete
  8. "In our analysis, 2008 is the ninth warmest year in the period of instrumental measurements, which extends back to 1880 (left panel of Fig. 1). The ten warmest years all occur within the 12-year period 1997-2008." Source: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/

    2008 was the coolest year since 2000 but still the ninth warmest on record with 10 of the warmest since 1880 coming in the last 12 years. Yes, I would say you can take me seriously. That said, I know you won't. I agree with Secretary Chu - You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 1880 wasn't that long ago compared to the earth's age, and compared to how much we know about how hot (and variable) the climate has been from other means besides NASA's very limited research.

    So if you really want the facts, rather than to just be right, don't just go back to 1880.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Carbon dioxide concentrations dropped to 180 ppm during the coldest periods and reached a maximum of 300 ppm in the warmest periods. Current CO2 concentrations are at about 380 ppm." Source: http://gwfact.rso.wisc.edu/history.html

    The graphs on this site go back about 400,000 years. That won't be good enough either though will it? Is denier still too strong a word?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Carbon dioxide concentrations dropped to 180 ppm during the coldest periods and reached a maximum of 300 ppm in the warmest periods. Current CO2 concentrations are at about 380 ppm." Source: http://gwfact.rso.wisc.edu/history.html

    The graphs on this site go back about 400,000 years. That won't be good enough either though will it? Is denier still too strong a word?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

"Mormon Leaks": What They Really Said-Senator Gordon Smith Discusses Politcs