Climate Science - Why the Political Divide, Who Started It and Why?

Not long ago, I was discussing with a group of gentleman the topic of AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) and one of them asked a very good question regarding the politics of how this debate had shaped up and become a political football. Let's talk shall we?

The question asked was simple: "Why does the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) debate fall predominately along party lines?"

Now then, I'd say the reason is because if we look at the Kyoto Treaty attempts, we note that the Japanese used it to circumvent our industrial might to their advantage and environmentalists in the US took it on as a point of contention, some of those environmentalists were communists, which had other motives and an ardent political viewpoint. To counter act that the opposing side lined up against it for two reasons:

A.) Industrial Capitalists saw it as cutting into their territory - oil, steel, coal, energy sector.

B.) Industrial Capitalists are right leaning, although they are really crony capitalists, basically what Adam Smith warned us about.

Thus we set up for a war between big business VS. environmentalists (a portion of which were communists). Since left-leaning sides of the political aisle are closer to communism than capitalism and opposed to big business for reasons or righteousness or experience, the left leaning politicians saw a very vocal group to help do their bidding. Academia typically, especially in the last 5 decades is more left leaning than right, so when all those forces joined we had a perfect division for the debate.

All sides blowing things out of proportion, lots of name calling, demeaning of character, calling into question motives, integrity, intelligence. Then we have the International forces, many of which were pro-Kyoto trying for round two, some of which were international conglomerates from Europe, Japan, elsewhere, some here too wanting to cash in on a paradigm shift which everyone eventually expects anyway (Peak Oil theory - one day we will run out anyhow).

Those centralized planners here said, may as well lead the charge, makes sense, of course the status quo would rather it be later than sooner.

Germany, Japan, France, Canada, are all in for manufacturing alternative energy stuff, China too - Solar Panels, Wind Power equipment, etc. Even some Oil Companies, BP for instance wanted in on the game, and oil companies laughed because wind is unreliable and solar technology was nowhere close (then) to compete for ROI. The reality is the Ocean Wave energy with 75% of our population living close to the ocean would make more sense, but those projects seemed to go nowhere, not even on the DOE's funding list usually for pure research.

Now you have all the makings of political agenda driven side taking. I think that's how I see it. What say you? Please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow is the Founder of the Online Think Tank, a diverse group of achievers, experts, innovators, entrepreneurs, thinkers, futurists, academics, dreamers, leaders, and general all around brilliant minds. http://www.WorldThinkTank.net - Have an important subject to discuss, contact Lance Winslow. Lance also writes eBooks on all sorts of topics including this one, check out the selection.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Lance_Winslow

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/8813431