The media has begun to savor the taste of stories about mankind’s encroachment on the ‘wildlife kingdom’. On top of countless polar bear stories, I can recall a porcupine death story, a penguin habitat desolation story, a bird migration offset story and an elk story that vaguely referenced possible changes in population.

So with the latest headlines ringing alarm about humanity assassinating wildlife species, I decided to step aside from what the global warming crowd wants from the average person and actually think about what is being said.

Wildlife is wild. Soon, baseball will be back in swing and my hometown, once again, will witness opening day. Surely, we shall see some good pitching but much will be referred to as wild pitching. For those of you who have never tasted apple pie, a wild pitch is one that is unpredictable, uncontrolled and bound to cost the fielding team a base or even a run.

Wildlife is wild, uncontrolled, unpredictable and naturally inconsistent. Further, wildlife is constantly changing. Nature is a fluid economy. Population is affect by climate but population of one species is more directly affected by the presence of some other animals and plants or the absence of other organisms.

The belief that nature is a stable environment that does not change without disaster is a ludicrous assumption brought about primarily by the totality of controlled environments that most Americans subject themselves to. We live in climate controlled houses year round. We park in garages at work and home and only step outside to mow the lawn or get the mail. We have windows but many times can go hours without looking through them. We plan picnics and sporting events and barbeques and corn hole tournaments but only commence with those plans if the weather is ideal. The most wildlife the average person sees is having to stop on their way to the zoo for a raccoon crossing the road.

The bottom line is that most people believe that the primary force of control on reality is humanity because that is all they ever see. If humankind is so massive as to rule someone’s perception then we must be responsible for any perceived changes in the environment. But how could any of these people tell anything has changed? I just got through explaining how humanity seeks exactness in unchangingly comfortable environments.

Ultimately, they have faith in what science is told to them. Science of late has been co-opted to create hysteria, hyperventilation and hypoxia. The measure of panic to which this insanity is pushed is specifically geared to demand instant action and not clarification. It is obvious that science no longer has room for doubting questions. NASA has recently released information that the atmosphere of Mars is warming at a rate consistent with Earths warming. Are we to believe that the Mars Rover is diesel powered and has already begun to create billions of tons of greenhouse gases?

But since questioning theory is no longer acceptable, I will now reveal what I believe will two more enviro-psycho panic arguments.

First, as the bans creep over strong power sources, someone will figure a way to make better solar panels and that market will explode (and the socialist greens will try to demand money back from whoever gets rich). So solar panels will start to show up on every building and structure everywhere. Then someone will cry that there is no longer enough diffusion of solar energy into the atmosphere. It will be said that the next ice age is to be caused by man’s interference with solar radiation. Solar panels will be banned.

Secondly, wind turbines are about as useful as the headlight generator on a bike. Barely acknowledgeable power generation erupts from an expensive wind generator. That problem can be remedied by creating acres and acres and acres and acres of wind generators. Yet, with such a huge presence of atmospheric drag, some scientist somewhere will suggest a new cult hit. The wind generators will be accused of redirecting the atmospheric wind current, slowly reshaping weather patterns all over the world. Oh, and surely that can’t happen without millions of people dying from something.

Yes, it is laughable now. But recall, the first time CO2 was suggested as a major greenhouse gas the scientific world reeled. Sure it was thirty years ago and science must know better by now. I say this, as long as science is wrong only in the past, we as a group of people can believe whatever we are told without question no matter how surrealistic but it doesn’t make it right or true.

Finally, I cannot accept any argument that results in the diminishing of freedom. The propaganda is burning strong and soon it will be forced on us. Al Gore spoke to Congress about a major “persuasion campaign” and this week Sydney, Australia is participating in a voluntary one hour blackout across the entire capital to “raise awareness”. Let us stand up and rebuke the calls of the socialist elite left to strip us of the Constitution for any reason.