Millions face starvation as world warms, scientists say

Millions face starvation as world warms, scientists say Global-Alarmism makes a predictable appearance You can rely on scientific hysteria to keep making itself known on a recurring schedule. Great research minds locked away in sterilized laboratories occasionally surface to reveal the findings of their work, which continue to point to the need for more funding for their projects. Problems are never solved; they appear and must be combated until interest in them can no longer be generated. One of the most recent reasons to fret has been set off by the December release of the ‘Climate Change Indicators in the United States’ report. This was featured in Britain’s bastion of Sunday liberalism - The Observer, under the heading – “Millions face starvation as world warms, scientists say”. This week scientists are telling us that a warming earth will trigger massive food shortages. Apparently millions in Africa and Asia face floods, drought and extreme temperatures caused by overpopulation and a rising thermometer. Part of this story is neither new nor untrue; Africa and Asia have long suffered from drought and famine since long before the alleged rise in earth temperatures. In fact there are accounts in both the Bible and the Quran that attest to this, which makes for a very real religious argument that it has more to do with God than man. Almost 30 years ago we had America’s “We are the World”, Britain’s “Do they know it’s Christmas” and even the Canadians chiming in with “Tears are not enough”. Famine relief for Africa, and all before politicians had really got revved up with the concept of hot weather is mans fault and a good excuse for government intervention. Frank Rijsberman heads the worlds 15 CGIAR crop research centres, which study food insecurity. This may in fact be news to much of the food supply which is generally not known for being insecure. Rijsberman says the following: “Food production will have to rise 60% by 2050 just to keep pace with expected global population increase and changing demand. Climate change comes on top of that. The annual production gains we have come to expect … will be taken away by climate change. We are not so worried about the total amount of food produced so much as the vulnerability of the one billion people who are without food already and who will be hit hardest by climate change. They have no capacity to adapt.” So he admits that food production gains are keeping up with population increase but the infamous ‘climate change’ is negating that. These are the same climate change models that are continually shown to be wrong, with the UN in its notable East Anglia University bunker spending millions each year to say that although they were wrong they are going to be right. So climate change, global warming, is the real problem. The two terms are increasingly used interchangeably to cover the fact that global warming is constantly being debunked. The move is on towards re-branding the whole science so that any kind of weather event is really the fault of evil capitalism. Enter Monsanto Corporation. No stranger to sleeping with politicians from either side of the aisle on both sides of the Atlantic, they produce amongst other things a lot of bio-tech farming solutions. As government gravy begins to flow it is companies like this that will benefit. The company itself is not particularly more opportunistic than anyone else, but in this case they are an example of how the money machine flows. We cannot rely on or trust our governments or our media As the public are sold on climate change science and ‘the need to act’; companies like Monsanto step in with ‘solutions’. In this case it is genetically engineered crops that can overcome the alleged weather extremes and produce the higher yields necessary to combat population growth. The job of a company like Monsanto in this instance is not to fix the problem the best way according to free-market solutions; but to create something that fits the model a) created by politically funded scientists and b) according to the way that lobbyists have sold the deception through a complicit media. The potential problem with bio-tech crops is that you have to keep going back to the supplier for more. Which makes producing them a bit like, as one Observer reader alluded, a form of heroin distribution. Abandoning organic production is a slippery slope that leaves farmers in the hands of scientists, shareholder demands, corporate lobbying and political campaigns. Governments have already demonstrated their complete ineptitude in managing food supply. The push back against global-alarmism has to continue because the hysteria that drives it will not stop. We must continue to educate ourselves on what is, and what is not! We cannot rely on or trust our governments or our media to do it for us.