Fossil Fuels – Another Side to the Story

Anna Santana

Special to the Village News

Fossil fuels, the world’s leading source of cheap, reliable energy, have lifted millions out of poverty and mass starvation. Contrary to urban legend, there is an almost unlimited supply and advances in technology are constantly reducing its environmental impact.

Good, bad or undecided; it all depends on your standard of value: Does it benefit human life or does the impact on the planet take precedence over human life?

A compelling argument can be made for the virtuous use of fossil fuels. With the support of globalists, governments, environmentalists, and the use of a largely unopposed marketing campaign, the green lobby has controlled the narrative to abandon cheap, reliable energy that has given mankind (and I use that term in the traditional sense to include all of humanity) the means to control his environment, increase reliable food production, provide clean water, enjoy mobility, as well as to develop medicines that cure disease and increase life expectancy.

Significantly, it has given us “time” to solve civilization’s most pressing problems by relieving us of onerous manual labor-intensive work.

Since 1972, the United Nations, the popular media and “climate“ experts” have been predicting environmental catastrophes that would shortly devastate the planet. I’m still waiting. Hypothetical computer models predicted dire consequences and the results were fudged to confirm them. Anything or anybody who disagreed was aggressively canceled. And we still continue to hear that “the sky is falling.”

Climate change is based on the idea that warming will cause extreme weather, resulting in droughts, wildfires, tornadoes, “hovering” hurricanes, even earthquakes and tsunamis and extreme drops or rises in temperatures. Some of these disasters are due to natural weather fluctuations, as well as ecological mismanagement.

Recent data indicate that warming is emanating from the earth’s core. Other evidence attributes climate anomalies to sunspots. Do not, however, discount manmade weather modification, which began after World War II by the U.S. Navy. For some background on the topic, go to http://www.GeoEngineeringWatch.org and view the video “The Dimming” or do an internet search on the HAARP program.

Yes, it’s true. CO2 emissions have increased. Slightly. However, world wide, plant growth has also increased – including trees, fruits, vegetables and grains. Modern agricultural yields are attributed to increased atmospheric CO2.

The belief that man made impacts on our environment are necessarily bad, and that the standard of value is non impact, has led to the cessation of more creative and effective solutions than sending civilization back to the dark ages.

Cheap, reliable and available energy has enabled advances in civilization to multiply exponentially. The earth’s supply of fossil fuels can adequately supply the world with power for the next 100-200 years. Fossil fuels offer us the ability to insulate ourselves from climate disasters as well. Climate-related deaths have actually plummeted.

Now to be sure, we have a responsibility to those who will inherit the earth to actually have an earth to inherit. So man’s (there’s that word again) ingenuity plus the time to solve civilization’s pressing problems have been steadily focusing on cleaning up the planet and minimizing the negative aspects attributed to the production and use of fossil fuels through the ever increasing advances in technology.

However, a swift transition to “sustainable” energy and the limited solutions mandated by ideological and self-seeking interests drastically fail to search for other options. It assumes settled science, in spite of the fact that they have silenced anyone who would dare voice a dissenting opinion.

Beware of mistaking the false flags of promoting a more widely acceptable intention that hides an ulterior motive, such as the harbingers of disaster who fly in private planes while manipulating the economic conditions that ultimately force the masses to rely on public transportation.

Certainly, it’s worthwhile to look for alternative sources of energy. Unfortunately, the two sources of “sustainable” energy being promoted as the ultimate solution, solar and wind power, are inconsistent, unreliable, inadequate, require huge amounts of space, hardware with a limited lifespan and disposal challenges, as well as massive storage systems.

While the West is focused on transitioning to green energy and electric cars, China, the world’s worst polluter with its shameful human rights record, holds the lion’s share of the needed resources whose mining relies on exploitative child labor and leaves vast toxic wastelands in its wake.

Fortunately, when these two sources of energy fail to meet the world’s needs, hydro technology and the peaceful use of nuclear fusion are two potential alternatives to fossil fuels, but there are likely others. According to Alex Epstein, who has done considerable research in this area, “Our concern for the future should be running out of the freedom to create energy resources.”

Unfortunately, the fossil fuel industry has fallen in line with the green energy narrative and rather than enumerating the vastly improved quality of life that fossil fuels have made possible, they have largely conceded to the intimidation tactics of the government, globalists, environmentalists and other entities that control our world.

Epstein has written a book that documents (through the use of extensive footnotes) the enormous but often unrealized benefits that access to affordable, reliable fossil fuels has given us and the immorality of pressuring underdeveloped countries to accept the green agenda, which has resulted in food insecurity in the world’s poorest countries.

There is, of course, much more to the story. I urge you to read “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels” by Alex Epstein. It may open your eyes to things unimagined.