Although there has been no warming for the last 15 years and global temperatures are flat or slightly declining, the drivel continues in the major media that unless we don’t take immediate and drastic action (read: pay more taxes), we (the entire human population of the earth) are all going to “burn in hell.”
Is there any data to support the theory of human-induced global warming? Not unless you cherry pick data. There is no question that the CO2 level in the atmosphere is rising at a rate of about 1.5 parts per million annually, hitting 400 parts per million recently, but so what? Temperatures are not climbing. If anything global temperatures are slightly declining.
Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, the Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT recently said, “The influence of mankind on climate is trivially true and numerically insignificant.” And that statement is important in relation to a recent study now touting a 97 percent consensus of scientists who say mankind is causing global warming. Of course no one in the media checks on the study’s methodology. By how the study was done, even Lindzen would be included in that 97 percent. But Lindzen, who is perhaps the most renowned climate scientist in the world, says the issue of human-induced global warming is insignificant, a non-problem. But even more important to this 97 percent statement (if it were true) is that science is not done by consensus.
But the truth does not stop the mainstream media from continuing the lie. Al Gore tried to stop the truth by saying in 2005, “The debate (over global warming) is over.” Interestingly, science is all about debate, questioning and data. The alleged idol or guru of global warming is the U.N.’s IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) which says that global warming is the largest problem facing mankind. How does the IPCC come to that conclusion? By the process of eliminating any data or science that disagrees with “their science.” All their predictions are based on models, none of which have even come close to recreating past weather and climate. So why should we trust future model predictions?
Recently in the Sacramento Bee(lony) was an opinion piece entitled “Climate debate is settled; carbon tax is vital.” And there you have in the simplest, cleanest, clearest terms: Global warming is about more taxes on the public, more government, more regulation, less freedom and with more regulation will come a second tax hike in higher prices for goods and services with less choice for both. It couldn’t be plainer.
Interestingly, in this very piece the writers said that CO2 now exceeds 400 ppm. And then they said the last time CO2 exceeded 400 ppm, some 3 million years ago, sea levels were 50 feet higher and humans did not exist. While trying to scare us, the writers defeated their own argument. CO2 does not have a significant effect on sea levels and there is no correlation between CO2 and sea levels, as sea levels currently are not rising significantly and are 50 feet lower even with the same level of CO2 at 400 ppm as 3 million years ago.
A couple of weeks later the Bee(lony) went at it again. In an opinion piece written by a sci-fi writer, he lamented the atmospheric CO2 concentration past 400 ppm, but it’s not too late to do “something” and we should totally change our way of life and infrastructure. Can you say more taxes and regulation and a lot less freedom and less money in your pocket?
As the “science” and data continue to show that CO2 is not a problem, the alarmist voices continue to shout the sky is falling. One of the latest is none other than climate expert and preserver of the Sacramento Kings, Mayor Kevin Johnson, with a column he published in none other than the Sacramento Bee(lony) entitled “Sacramento can lead the way in response to climate change.”
Johnson repeated the usual diatribe such as extreme weather in the form of storms, heat waves, droughts or floods are on the rise and to stop it we need to spend money to lessen the impact like clean energy programs. While he may have been brilliant in retaining the Kings, Johnson shows his ignorance of weather, climate, science and history. Doesn’t Mayor Johnson remember the Dust Bowl? Maybe he didn’t read Steinbeck’s “Grapes of Wrath.” Or perhaps he forgot about the Long Island Express hurricane that ravaged New England in 1938. Has he read Scotti’s “Sudden Storm?” Extreme weather is not on the rise, it is a constant throughout history. Does Johnson not remember the valley floods of 1955? Johnson should stick to basketball.
Finally, last but certainly not least, our president gave his long-awaited speech on his climate plan. Yes, he has a plan to have perfect weather for everyone, just ask him. By the way, what is the perfect temperature and weather? In his plan he is giving the EPA sweeping new powers where bureaucrats get to dictate regulations, which means less freedom for Americans (our president must have forgotten that part of the Constitution that gives law making and other legislative powers to Congress; maybe Congress should defund the EPA). His first attack will be on power plants, eliminating our cheapest form of power, coal. Who will pay? Everyone who uses electricity. Thank goodness for natural gas, it will lessen the impact, but we will still pay big time.
Even though the evidence shows CO2 is having little, if any impact on climate but a huge beneficial impact on agriculture, we live in an upside down world where black is white and up is down. The Goebbelization of society continues.
Larry Weitzman is a resident of Rescue.