The REAL Libertarian Stance on Global warming

The Washington Post reported that because of melting ice caps and glaciers, "The End Is Near!" But melting Arctic ice won't raise sea levels any more than the melting ice in your drink makes your glass overflow....

...The former vice president's film shows dramatic film of big chunks of ice breaking off glaciers, but the "calving" of icebergs is a normal, natural process involved in the growth of glaciers into the sea. The movie features some majestic glaciers that existed in the 19th Century that have all but disappeared today -- but it doesn't bother to mention any of the glaciers growing in Norway, New Zealand and even the United States. The U.S. Forest Service reports that the Hubbard Glacier in Alaska's Tongass National Forest is advancing so rapidly, it threatens to close off a major fjord....

..."It's the money!" says Dr. Baliunas. "Twenty-five billion dollars in government funding has been spent since 1990 to research global warming. If scientists and researchers were coming out releasing reports that global warming has little to do with man, and most to do with just how the planet works, there wouldn't be as much money to study it."

http://www.lp.org/yourturn/archives/000362.shtml

Why the big difference in projections? Because "climatology is perhaps one of the most complex and uncertain of all scientific fields," wrote the Heritage Foundation's John Shanahan. "It is not possible to run controlled experiments for the whole planet in a laboratory test tube. Thus, scientists are forced to use models to predict the consequences of various influences, and to try to disentangle the effect of one factor from a myriad of others."...

....
Dennis T. Avery, writing on www.GlobalWarming.org (September 1, 1998), said a two degree increase in temperate would mean "milder winters, fewer storms, only a slight increase in daytime summer temperatures, and more carbon dioxide to fertilize crops and pastures."
Higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere would "improve agricultural production," agreed the Heritage Foundation's Shanahan. "Studies conducted by the Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service show that doubling the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere would improve cotton yields by 80%, wheat and rice by 36%, soybeans by 32%, and corn by 16%."

http://www.lp.org/lpnews/printer_493.shtml

The Libertarian Party is committed to America's heritage of freedom: individual liberty and personal responsibility; a free-market economy of abundance and prosperity; a foreign policy of non-intervention, peace, and free trade.

http://www.lp.org/

I'd like to address Dan Karlan's inquiry about global warming. [MailBox, December 2004 LP News]
Both war and global warming are about transferring wealth. Understanding one will help in understanding the other.
James Madison, "the father of our Constitution," had a lot to say about war and how it increases the power and scope of government and destroys individual freedom. At the end of one speech he said, "No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
Joseph Sobran once said, "War is just one more government program."
He nailed it!
War has been the most efficient vehicle for government to do what it does best, transfer wealth. Transferring wealth is the real purpose of war.
When Americans get tired of war their new program will take the place of war in the transference of wealth. That program is environmentalism.
When the war cools down environmentalism will heat up. One of the major tenets of environmentalism is the junk science of global warming. It took root over one hundred years ago when a man by the name of Arrhenius published an article in the Philosophical Magazine presenting calculations that with the doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere the planetary temperature would rise six degrees Celsius.
With the advent of the first Earth Day in 1970, [the theory of] global warming was off and running.
This gave global warming its push. Let's examine its flaws.
The earth has been warming and cooling since the big bang and there is nothing we can do about it because its primary cause is solar flares. The only near-accurate way to measure the earth's temperature is from satellites, and they tell us that from 1979 the earth has cooled by 0.13 degrees Celsius.
If you check the scientists who believe in the global warming myth they are always using land-based computer models and those models are incapable of factoring in sea ice, snow caps, localized storms, biological systems, and clouds. There is a lot more information you can get in Richard Bailey's book, The True State of the Planet.

http://www.lp.org/lpnews/article_66.shtml

 

They're not going to win much when they throw wingnuts like Stan Jones at us.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2297471.stm

 

I believe in adaptation, not evolution.

 

I wouldn't vote for a guy who experiments on his own body like that. It wasn't a diet.

 

He's the guy they picked to run against Burns & Tester. Was he the best they could do ?

 

I don't care what you think a majority supports, you can't prove it. It's just you blowing smoke.

And adaptatiuon is not evolution. One species will never become another one. That's what scripture says, and scripture trumps the barbarian, everytime.

 

Stan Jones was the mainstream candidate. I judge a party by the people they tell me to vote for.

 

Republicans should have been ashamed of Duke. At least the ones in Louisiana.

 

Well he was the guy the libertarians put up in '06, so I have to assume he was their best shot. If he's the best they could do, then I feel the libertarians still have a long way to go.

The last statement doesn't deserve a response. You're better than that.