Is the best way to protect our freedom, knowledge and preparedness?

Follow
  • Follow publicly
  • Follow privately
  • Unfollow
Denialists love to claim that "warmers" threaten their freedom. (As if arresting scientists who do not follow the official denialist line does not threaten our freedom.) But ...show more
Update : Sagebrush Who is taking away our freedom? It is denialists who want to ...show more
Update 2: Moe Global warming is not official government science. The government ...show more
Update 3: John Rockford You want me to look up the Medieval Warm Period. OK! ...show more
Update 4: Jeff Engr I was working for six years calibrating pressure gauges to ...show more
Update 5: Denialists want to jail scientists just for warning us about global ...show more
Best AnswerAsker's Choice
  • booM answered 2 years ago
As Sir Francis Bacon said, 'Knowledge is Power.' Of course, even if one is Sir Francis Bacon, knowledge doesn't always hold up against a mob, a lesson repeated more than once in the course of human events. Aside from the political "debate" (he said sarcastically, since political debate in this day and age is an oxymoron) the willingness to truncate research about climate change for economic reasons is nothing less than astoundingly ignorant; paranoia, economics and political loyalties have lead to an absolutism about climate science that is profoundly disturbing...however, one has to wonder if Y/A is truly a microcosm of society or an island unto itself if one is judging ignorance based on what is posted here. Not that the comment will get me a lot of fans in THIS category.

But society is also a juggernaut-ten years ago solar and wind power were still prohibitively expensive for individuals and wind farms were few and far between. Today 'energy zero' homes are being built and wind farms dot the countryside. While there are those who argue against alternative energy, its mettle is being tested-and I think with further research and development biofuels will become an efficient alternative to oil in years to come.

Advancing technology always has its adherents and those who are opposed to it. It may be true that we would have been better off without automobiles in the long run as many said back in the beginning of the automobile age (possibly spurred on by the buggy whip manufacturers, haha) but many of the very people who are arguing against alternative energy today are also arguing that adopting new technologies based on the use of oil is what advanced society in times past, which points out an interesting paradox. They have become the new buggy whip proponents arguing against the adoption of new technologies. Talk about your conundrums.

Here's what I think-we spend a LOT of money on military interventions to maintain our oil supplies; simultaneously we are spending a LOT of money on climate research and development of alternative energy, and both are occurring during a global economic downturn that has spurred a large group of political activists to select-as their solution to economic woes-putting the brakes on spending. They have a point.

However, how do we really define freedom? Is it the ability to go where we want when we want to? I think it is, in part-we certainly have a lot of people arguing about the use of oil to power that aspect of freedom, as well as competing for that resource. We spend trillions of dollars, thousands of lives of our own best citizens and take tens of thousands of lives halfway around the world in the effort to maintain that freedom. People argue for the free markets of capitalism as the best way to preserve freedom and therefore argue against government mandates, regulation and spending for other social engineering. Free markets certainly has merit-but when gas at the pump hits $3.50 and $4.00 a gallon that truncates one of the foundations of our individual freedom.

I'll tell you what-freedom to me is being able to jump in the car with my kids and go wherever I want. If I can't afford it or my kids are off fighting a foreign war to maintain gas at the pump its time for me to re-evaluate my love of a large V8 gasoline engine. Oh geez...that's hard to give up, especially when the alternatives today are basically sewing machines with steering wheels. But the V8 engine is today the horse of 100 years ago. We still love horses, we just don't ride 'em up to the convenience store for a loaf of bread-and eventually, we won't use a 12 mpg SUV to head up to the convenience store either.

So absolutely, the best way to protect our freedom is knowledge; if we define freedom as the ability to go where we want when we want to it doesn't matter much in the greater scheme of things whether our mode of transportation is a horse, gas powered car or sewing machine on wheels. If we can somehow free ourselves from killing and being killed by driving sewing machines I'm all for that too.
It's all based in knowledge, because knowledge is power.

And in answer to your second question, I'd say martial law is more likely to be imposed if oil supplies are cut off, which-if it happens-is likely to happen a lot sooner than Manhattan being inundated with water.

Asker's Rating & Comment

5 out of 5
Jeff M, Hey Dook, Gary F, David B and Koshka also gave good answers.
  • 9
  • Comment

Other Answers (16)

Rated Highest
  • Rated Highest
  • Oldest
  • Newest
  • Ben answered 2 years ago
    It threatens our freedom because it gets rid of jobs in coal, and oil industry. EPA making those illegal and setting limits on them is costing jobs... like my dad's.
    • 10
    • Comment
  • toocool answered 2 years ago
    Forgive me but the only way I can answer your question, is in religious terms. You attack the beliefs of skeptics with beliefs of your own. Limiting the access to FOIA data that is gathered using public funds was one reason I became curious about the controversy surrounding Global Warming. It seemed odd that "scientists" would guard data to the point of aggressive behavior. Why would a thorough scientist decline the opportunity to have another scientist confirm his conclusion? Something dishonest? A hidden agenda? Knowledge, open and honest, is the best way to preserve freedom. However, no man should force another to do anything against his will whether he deems it to be "right" or not. Freedom is not just knowledge.

    You're now discussing imposition of martial law? Great. You have a fraction of a degree in evidence, and you are going to nuke everybody that disagrees? Do you realize what is coming out of your mouth? That is treasonous. You are invoking lethal force for the sake of a difference of opinion, a lifestyle that you disagree with, but which you yourself are not willing to give up. Hypocrite.
    • 9
    • Comment
  • Purge DC! answered 2 years ago
    As government expands it takes liberty. Are you for more government control or are you for liberty??? You can't have both.
    • 10
    • Comment
  • Koshka answered 2 years ago
    True freedom is independence, that is to say that freedom comes with responsibility.

    You get your driver's permit, you are free to drive wherever you want, however, you are responsible for your actions. That is not too complicated to understand, is it? In french we say 'la liberté des uns s'arrête là où celle des autres commence' which means your freedom stops where that of other begins. What does that mean? If you start piling junk in your backyard and play loud music all night long you are impeding on your neighbor's freedom to have peaceful sleep and enjoy their own garden. Such disrespect for others is not freedom it is abuse.

    Renewable do not threaten freedom and solar technology is improving, however, we are still dependent on oil, economically and practically. Do you think we can change the world tomorrow morning?
    --------
    david b: TY for your courage to stand up for women. I admire people with guts.I did hear about that Limbough pig-person referring to women using birth control as sluts. I am sorry for Americans that the Conservative party is turned into Theocratic party, seriously.
    • 8
    • Comment
  • Jim Z answered 2 years ago
    The most likely reason for governments to declare martial law is due to ignorance of its citizens and it is on display in the question and answers. I realize that the ignorant think that any mention of Marx is ludicrous, kind of like mentioning Hitler. Read what Marx said and then read Adam Smith. You will realize that we are well on our way to a Marxists society where government controls just about everything. If it makes you feel better, then exchange the word socialist for Marxist. I am not for no government but I am for constitutional controls. Our constitutional controls have been eroded for the last century. Our EPA is run by a bunch of faceless nameless unvoted for bureaucrats who have gained way too much control. When you have a President who thinks he has the authority to take over banks and car companies and oil companies, there really isn't any limit on them. We have moved from a constitutional government to an extra-constitutional government where rules are just meant to be broken whenever it is convenient. Alarmists don't threaten freedom because they are alarmists. They threaten freedom because they are leftists and are all too willing to be children under a protective government. When given too much power governments become less like parents and more like jailers.

    Koskika, before you judge Limbaugh, he did apologize. That woman was a lawyer in one of the most prestigious schools in America. Limbaugh didn't mock her for using birth control. He mocked her because of how much she said she used and how we were all supposed to pay for it. I personally don't want my tax money spent on condoms for 30 something college students who pays tens of thousand a year on their classes. If you want your money spent on that, feel free to start a cherity. It amazes me how the left just dreams up a crisis and the followers just accept it. AGW is another great example. Let's make this really clear. There is no contraceptive crisis in America. Stop being so damn gullible. Jeesh.
    • 7
    • Comment
  • Bob answered 2 years ago
    Yes knowledge is the best way to protect our freedom. That is why people are spreading the word and exposing the biggest scam in history. AGW
    • 8
    • Comment
  • John Rockford answered 2 years ago
    Well when you fake data and call it science and get paid for the faked data it's called fraud. That is still illegal. So yes jail time is called for.

    The earth has been warm in the past and society did just fine with out "preparing" for it. Look up medieval warm period.

    So far all the solutions call for higher taxes and more regulations. When someone proposes a so called solution that does not involve cost the tax payer or consumer money or has more regulations than maybe people will listen.

    AGW is still a scam
    • 8
    • Comment
  • Jeff Engr answered 2 years ago
    A declaration of martial law to enforce what you describe would equate to CIVIL WAR. If you KNOW how that will end, then you are a true prophet.

    Knoledge and preparedness are key to preservation of freedom. However as is in our military credo, the price of freedom is eternal vigilence.

    Any dictates are an imposiiton on freedom. By definition, freedom is the ability to FREELY choose what you want to do, purchase, use, plan etc.

    Nuclear, if you can eliminate the legal hurdles and significant legal costs, is a good cost effective and viable option. Solar has limits and without governemnt subsidies, I have only seen solar thermal applicaitons that have effective life cycle costs. For wind, it depends on your resource if you can get any kind of economic return for said investment. Some areas it can work fairly well, for other areas, not.

    Current gasoline prices and upwards trends are excellent examples of what your policies would do.

    Did you know that the oil fields in the Dakotas have now proven to have more than 25X the oil they were originally projected to hold? This makes then rival Saudi Arabia. Add the tar sands in Canada (also huge) and the MANY known oil fields in public lands that we are NOT allowed to harness and North America could be 100% feree of foreign sources of energy. BTW real unemployment in the Dakotas is under 3%.

    For me its this simple:
    Do you like people or care about trying to eliminate poverty? Then drill.
    Do you like having high paying domestic jobs? Then drill.
    Do you like helping people have prosperous and productive lives? Then drill.
    Do you like living in a modern and prosperous society? Then drill.
    Do you wnat to be off of foreign oil? Then drill.
    do you like freedom? Then allow people to make their own choices!
    • 6
    • Comment
  • Sagebrush answered 2 years ago
    Wow! To say it mildly, you are one confused person. Just look at your question. "Denialists love to claim that "warmers" threaten their freedom." Your supposition is that no one is trying to take away our freedom. Then you suggest invoking MARTIAL LAW! Do you really know what you are saying?
    • 10
    • Comment
  • Sign In 

    to add your answer

  • Ottawa Mike answered 2 years ago
    It might be instructive to read the words of someone who has lived most of his life under communist rule:

    "The reason is that environmentalism and its most extreme version, global warming alarmism, asks for an almost unprecedented expansion of government intrusion and intervention into our lives and of government control over us. We are forced to accept rules about how to live, what to do, how to behave, what to consume, what to eat, how to travel and many other things. Some of us had experienced similar examples of such manipulation with ourselves in the communist era and feel obliged to do everything we can to avoid similar developments in the future."
    http://www.klaus.cz/clanky/2529

    "The urge to save humanity is
    always a false front for the urge to rule it"
    - H. L. Mencken

    And while you're at it, read up on UN Agenda 21.
    • 4
    • Comment
  • david b answered 2 years ago
    Liberty and freedom are catchphrases used by the political idealogues on the right to scare the bejeepers out of "red-blooded", freedom loving Amurcans.

    It's really all a load of crap because they'd just as soon deny homosexuals the freedom and liberty to enter legally recognized unions. The Virginian Governor would like to practice his freedom and liberty to force women to have invasive ultrasounds prior to abortions. Rush Limbaugh wants to exercise his freedom to watch "slutty" law students have sex because we're supposedly paying for their birth control.

    Again, it's all a load of crap. It's a catch phrase and those on the right who repeat the line are guilty of not exercising their freedom and liberty to think for themselves.
    • 5
    • Comment
  • Pindar answered 2 years ago
    My God, I knew you were confused but I never realised just how much, White really is black in your world and vice versa.
    You're so far gone into this brainwashing that a disputed couple of mm possible sea level rise warrents martial law - unbelievable.
    People like yourself who put your own neck in the noose make it so much harder for us to break free of slavery, in fact you make our enslavement possible.
    • 1
    • Comment
  • Moe answered 2 years ago
    This kind of blind ignorance really hurts my brain. It's hard to describe. It's like looking at one of those impossible images, you see it could not exist physically but you still have that doubt that it must be possible because you are looking at the image of the object.

    If you want to define freedom as someone dictating what knowledge is acceptable and what knowledge is outlawed then yes. If freedome means being prepared by accepting the government solution to whatever it is that is the "problem", then sure.

    There is a reason to develop alternate forms of energy and those forms of alternate energy are much larger than the 3 you listed. The reason to develop alternate forms of energy is to sustain the truly "unprecedented" improvement in human civilization that has occured because of freedom and the discovery of how to put energy to work.

    Solyndra is not freedom. The government deciding to act on the knowledge they think is correct, in "the best interest of citizens"of course, to loan a solar company money who's plan is to make solar panels that cost more than anybody else is ridiculous. Even if I was on your side of the AGW fence I can't think of any reason I should let the government decide which ideas to favor and which ones to ignore. I have 15 trillion reasons to believe the government is inept at making decisions that involve spending money and not surprisingly a full 1/3 of the spending has come from the hope and change president who's doing what you believe is the solution.

    We will attain the best results at achieving sustainable alternate forms of energy if our goal is making cheap affordable energy and if the incentive for achieving that is capitalism. Thomas Edison was not inspired to create a light bulb because the government decided we needed to end darkness and the solution to the problem was a light bulb, or to solve the problem of burning candles which cause lung cancer. I'm sorry I really don't like your definition of freedom.

    A better reason to declare martial law is to enforce restrictions to solve the problem of using fosil fuels.
    • 6
    • Comment
  • Hey Dook answered 2 years ago
    Eternal vigilance is the proverbial essential price that must be paid to protect freedom. In the case of freedom from the impositions and imposed costs resulting from the organized deceptions of pseudo science, such vigilance needs to include vigilance against deliberate ignorance and disinformation. In that sense, YES, Accurate knowledge and effective preparedness are important bulwarks for freedom.

    It is important to keep in mind that the harebrained though common idea that climate science has anything whatever to do with political freedom is based on a monstrous and very stupid anti-science lie: That many decades of extensive and solid scientific research -from the 1800s to the early 1980s- did not precede even the earliest public discussions about AGW, let alone how serious it might become, what public policy action if any to take, or the possible role of taxes and regulations in any such public policy action.

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...

    Source(s):

    • 7
    • Comment
  • Gary F answered 2 years ago
    Maybe the best protection for our freedom is an informed and educated voting public.

    There is an ever growing and well organized anti-education, anti-intellectual, and anti-science sentiment in the US that has given social and political legitimacy to what historically has been a loose collection of paranoid conspiracy freaks.

    AGW Deniers and Creationists represent the modern incarnation of Flat Earthers. They are also the social and political voice for everyone who thinks that vaccines cause autism, that the moon landing was a hoax, and that there are thousands-of-years old secret societies of crazed power-mongers who effectively manipulate the world's governments and economies through their control over education, science, and the media.

    I'm not sure what the best survival strategy might be, but intentionally becoming more stupid than everyone else in the world is probably the worst strategy.

    =========

    jim z --

    >> I personally don't want my tax money spent on condom<<

    So, your ideal model would be something like America's Bible Belt.

    And, what does make the country look like?

    America’s Bible Belt is also:

    America’s Divorce Belt;
    America’s Homicide Belt;
    America’s HIV Belt;
    America’s Chlamydia Belt;
    America’s Gonorrhea Belt;
    America’s Syphilis Belt;
    America’s Teen Pregnancy Belt, and;
    America’s Illiteracy Belt.

    http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005...

    http://www.livescience.com/culture/09060...

    http://www.livescience.com/culture/09091...

    http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Ar...

    You must really hate America.
    • 7
    • Comment
  • Jeff M answered 2 years ago
    If they wanted to protect our freedom they would stop and think about where that 'freedom' comes from. It comes on the heels of the fossil fuel industry. If I was as wild and crazy as most of them seem to be I'd suggest that our reliance on fossil fuels is allowing those fossil fuel companies to rule us as they control everything dealing with our modern lives where as wind power, solar power, geothermal and so on can be achieved without the use of big companies. All we need to do to see this is look at how many people are installing personal solar panels on their houses for free energy that they do not have to pay for as they produce it themselves. But most of them are too set in their ignorant ways to care and would rather keep paying their money to the fossil fuel industry instead of producing the energy themselves. But then again I'm not as crazy and out to lunch as they are.
    • 9
    • Comment

Who is following this question?

    %
    BEST ANSWERS
    Member since:
    Points: Points: Level
    Total answers:
    Points this week:
    Follow
     
    Unfollow
     
    Block
     
    Unblock