E-mail this story to a friend Have comments? Send them to the editor. Printer Friendly Version Subscribe for Free!

Eugenics pioneer, Francis Galton, defined eugenics as: "the study of all agencies under human control which can improve or impair the racial quality of future generations."

Global warming can be defined as: "the study of all agencies under human control which can improve or impair the environmental quality of future generations."

The eugenics movement and the global warming movement are similar in many respects. Both ideas were introduced by scientists, advanced by politicians, popularized by the media, embraced as a moral necessity, resulted in severe consequences, and eventually rejected as harmful hogwash.

Eugenics, thankfully, has run its course. Global warming, however, is approaching its zenith, just before imposing severe consequences, and is, perhaps, still a generation away from being rejected as the hogwash it is.

Early in the last century, eugenics was called a science that justified public policies that promoted selective breeding among humans and attempted to force sterilization among the "lower classes" of people who did not fit the vision of popular eugenicists. In this century, what is called science is used to justify public policies that promote prescribed life styles and attempts to penalize people whose choices do not fit the vision of popular global warming zealots.

Scientists, politicians, preachers, and ordinary people who doubted the doctrine of eugenics were outcasts, subject to ridicule and worse. Scientists, politicians, preachers, and ordinary people who doubt the doctrine of global warming are outcasts, ridiculed, and worse.

The eugenics movement, carried to its logical conclusion by Hitler, killed millions of innocent people. Global warming, when carried to its logical conclusion, will kill far more people than eugenics, and cause incomprehensible agony to people who desperately need affordable energy to survive and prosper.

The goal of the global warming movement is to end the use of fossil fuel. Proponents of this movement claim that fossil fuel use is "killing God's green earth," as one popular TV ad declares. They claim that the use of alternative energy will save the planet for future generations.

Eugenics proponents claimed that selective breeding would constantly improve society by eliminating the lower classes destined for perpetual poverty. They were wrong. Global warming proponents are also wrong in their claims. The use of fossil fuels releases carbon dioxide which certainly does not kill God's green earth -- it enhances it. Carbon dioxide is to vegetation what oxygen is to people -- essential to life. It is an indisputable fact that vegetation growth and production is enhanced in direct proportion to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide.

The idea that increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is "killing God's green earth," is as preposterous as the idea that society would be better if it consisted only of blond-haired, blue-eyed Aryans.

Were President-elect Obama taking office a hundred years ago, he would undoubtedly be filling his cabinet with eugenics experts. This is a reasonable conclusion because he has obviously bought into the popular global warming movement, and is filling his cabinet with people who share his vision.

>> Continued -- Page 1 2