September 22, 2019

General Article of the Uniform Code of Climate Change Justice

………….Or something!

For those not aware, there exists the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This is used by the United States Military for law and order. For those who are or have served in the Military, they probably are aware of the famed, General Article, i.e Article 134. It is often laughed about because it’s historic use has always been to cover all those things not covered in the rest of the uniform codes. If you must know, Article 134 states:

Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special, or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.

Like I said. It’s a collect-all, gotcha kind of law for, well……just in case. When you think you have out-foxed the military, BAM! They will slap Article 134 on you.

For those with an athlete’s mentality, perhaps the universal code of coaches will better give you understanding:

Rule #1 – The coach is always right.
Rule #2 – See Rule #1.

Is this what it’s come to as far as climate change goes?

Rich Lowry of the National Review now calls the weasels who refuse to let go of their blind worship of the evils of man-caused global warming, “Climate Deniers.” He defines these climate deniers as, “all those advocates of limits on carbon emissions who are so certain of the science that they have no interest in the latest evidence.”

That’s nothing new. I think we just didn’t have a name for them….or least names writers were willing to publish. But consider what one of these “settled science” promoters and “climate deniers” is saying about why there has been no global warming for over a decade.

Now, just four years later, he [James Hansen] is arguing that all the new coal-fired plants have saved the planet from more global warming, by “fertilizing” the biosphere and creating aerosols that are a global coolant.

How do you discuss anything with anyone so embroiled in their man-caused global warming creed, that regardless of what any facts say, there’s always, if not a general article (excuse), a convenient one that will always explain man’s evil while exempting themselves from any wrong.

Who knows? Perhaps Hansen is right and coal-fired power plants are doing that, but isn’t his claim providing even more support for the fact that we don’t know enough about global climate change to declare the “science is settled,” while moving forward with draconian regulations of carbon dioxide emissions, carbon taxes, etc.?

When we read about instances such as this one, we then should seriously be asking ourselves about whether there should be background checks done on scientists. After all, isn’t some of this stuff, if not criminal, it certainly comes very close.

Share