Martin O’Malley admitted climate change is natural

  I admittedly do not know much about Democratic Presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley but from what I have read about him recently there is not much that I agree with him on. I also have to admit that there is one thing I really like about him and that is the fact that he is unafraid to go after the Democratic presumptive nominee, Hillary Clinton, even after he faced what could be considered a veiled threat from one of Mrs. Clinton’s advisers.

  Martin O’Malley seems to have a little bit of momentum and some seem to think he could be a viable candidate in the event that Hillary Clinton’s email scandal continues to drag her poll numbers down, but during an interview with George Stephanopoulos he might have made an admission which will hinder his prospects with Democratic voters when he seemed to admit that global warming was not a man-made threat but rather a natural one.

  Here is more:

The greatest danger that we face right now on a consistent basis in terms of manmade threats is — is — nuclear Iran and related to that, extremist violence. I don’t think you can separate the two. I think they go together. In terms of natural threats, clearly, it’s climate change. And we have to confront — we have to confront manmade and natural threats.

  Perhaps he did not properly articulate the point he was trying to make but it sure looks as though he believes global warming is a natural occurrence and is not cause by man. 

  Of course he still believes in global warming and still thinks it needs to be dealt with but this leads us to one obvious question: if global warming is real and it is a part of nature how can mankind combat it? It would seem to me that if it is natural there is nothing man can do to stop it, or at least very little. Maybe plant more trees or something…

  Here is what I found about his view on climate change:

“Climate change is not an ideological issue any more than gravity is”… “It is physics, pure and simple”… “Maryland might not be able to change what people in India or China do with respect to climate. We can, however, use the prospect of a carbon constrained world as the means to invent a more prosperous future, and to drive innovation, education, industry, jobs, and growth.”

  That is interesting because it seems to imply that he supports cap and trade, but if he does it seems as if this flies in the face of his recent statement that global warming is natural unless he believes that man can offset nature by implementing restrictions on manufacturing and the energy industry.

  But if this is the case is it not an admission that man is in fact contributing to global warming? He seems to be conflicted here, unless of course, the global warming agenda is nothing more than an attack on capitalism…

 Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium