What’s more dangerous—global warming or the proposed “solutions” to global warming? One new documentary sets to find out.
Global warming is a fact of life. Not a fact in a scientific sense. Far from it. But a fact in that it is an issue—an issue that will shape public policy, international relations, and the economies of the world for decades to come.
An eye-opening documentary called Not Evil Just Wrong: The True Cost of Global Warming Hysteria is being released this week by the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation—an outfit I endorse.
I dare say the film will be controversial because it tackles head on the sacred cows of the man-made global warming crowd.
The film points out that a British High Court ruled in a lawsuit that Al Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, contains nine factual errors. Among those errors are the claims that sea levels could rise 20 feet by the end of the century, and that polar bears are disappearing because of global warming (in fact, they are not).*
Not Evil Just Wrong also presents a number of scientists and a founding member of the radical environmental organization Greenpeace, who are unafraid to challenge the chief scientific claims behind global warming.
For example, the arctic ice is not disappearing. In fact, in the last two years, it has expanded. (Bet you haven’t heard that in the media.) Another widely publicized claim is that 1998 and 2006 were the warmest years in the history of the U.S. Again, not true. 1934 was. In fact, as Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT says, “warming has not been increasing and has not even been present for 13 years.”
The film also interviews the scientists who have discredited the famous “hockey stick” graph, which has been used by global warming alarmists. The “hockey stick” graph purports to show that for the last thousand years, global temperatures were flat, and then, in the 20th century, they shot up—like the blade of a hockey stick.
That would be interesting and significant if the data had been analyzed and graphed properly. But, as the film shows, that is not the case.
The film drives home the fact that the earth’s climate has always been in flux. That’s why 1,000 years ago, for example, during the medieval warm period, parts of Greenland were literally that—green! Vikings could settle and herd there successfully. Northern England could grow wine grapes. But there’s a reason why today you can’t find a fine Yorkshire wine. Today’s climate is too cold.
So why should we care about all the global warming hubbub? If the so-called “solutions” to global warming being bandied about by the U.N. and Congress are put into effect, they could severely damage the U.S. economy and absolutely devastate the economies of the world’s poorest nations—potentially endangering the lives and livelihoods of millions. All in response to a faulty premise.
Now that is a truly alarming claim. But I believe the film—half of which is devoted to the human and economic consequences of buying into global warming—makes the case persuasively.
Come to BreakPoint.org, and we’ll show you how you can get a copy of this important and sure-to-be controversial film. Share it with friends and neighbors. Because the debate is far from over. And Not Evil Just Wrong shows how much is at stake.
*The transcript of this commentary has been amended to eliminate a quote mistakenly attributed to the British High Court.
Information about Not Evil Just Wrong
Watch the Trailer, or Purchase Not Evil Just Wrong
Bold, Decisive Folly: Punishing the Poor
Chuck Colson | BreakPoint Commentary | October 8, 2009