Now seems like as good a time as any to touch on the latest news in climate change.
1: Here’s an article by Natural News pointing to a classic climate change theory acknowledged by NASA known as the Milankovitch Theory. This theory explains that changes in the earth’s orbit have, supposedly, triggered past ice ages. There’s no doubt that all kinds of natural phenomena (sun, clouds, ocean currents, volcanic eruptions) effect the climate, resulting in warming or cooling; scientists have known and reported this for decades. But the Ice Age, for example, occurred well before the Industrial Revolution, so man can’t be blamed for that. Yet climate alarmists want to convince us that natural phenomena are insignificant compared to human activity. But just the opposite is true, as we can discern from world history.
The article includes a relevant quote from the National Academy of Sciences: “… orbital variations remain the most thoroughly examined mechanism of climatic change on time scales of tens of thousands of years and are by far the clearest case of a direct effect of changing insolation on the lower atmosphere of Earth.”
2: An article written by Dr. Thomas D. Williams highlights the action taken by over 500 scientists and others who work in the climate field. They sent a European Climate Declaration to the United Nations asking for real dialogue and debate concerning the science of climate change. I’m glad we finally have voices of reason being recognized, and I hope they can calm the fears perpetrated by alarmists on the left.
Among their request, they say, “Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.”
Imagine that- more science and less politics! And demanding accountability for uncertainties and exaggerations… about time someone called them out.
Concerning climate models, they say, “The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose. Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions on the basis of results from such immature models.”
Perhaps the best and most important quote explains reality: “There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and adapt.”
I certainly hope this meeting of high-level professionals and scientists comes to fruition. Time will tell.
3: Here’s a short video from Reality Check about why climate alarmists should NOT be taken seriously, and it explains what the climate change agenda is all about. Sadly, students were found confessing their eco-sins to plants, while other students screeched, demanding government action to save them from imminent doom and a future that may not exist. The host compares the climate alarmist movement to ‘The Boy Who Cried Wolf’, and I think that’s a great analogy. These people have been predicting world-wide extinction for decades, but have been dead wrong. These people should not be taken seriously by anyone.
4: The following documentary from 1978 is a prime example of the left’s failed doomsday predictions. Hosted by Leonard Nimoy, he warns of a coming ice age, informing us just how fragile and overpopulated our planet is. Back then, the alarmists were concerned about the advancing arctic sea ice, record snow, and brutal cold. They believed the Milankovitch theory proved, with confidence, that we were heading into another ice age. Nimoy asks us to “imagine the disaster the future might bring”, as if imagining an imaginary catastrophe is helpful, and then says there would be an energy crisis “beyond anything we could imagine”. Frightening! He goes on to claim that the snows of Buffalo would never melt, California and Florida would be blanketed by snow, Colorado would resemble the arctic tundra, glaciers would advance from the Sierra Nevada to the San Joaquin Valley, food production would plummet, and food prices would soar out of sight.
Then Nimoy asks the million-dollar question, “What can we do to stop it?” As if we have a responsibility to prevent the climate from changing. Do these people expect climate conditions to remain unchanged forever? Nimoy suggests some options, such as using nuclear energy to loosen the polar ice caps and covering sea ice with black soot to melt them. Brilliant!
But I love the opening response from Dr. Stephen Schneider, climatologist from the National Center for Atmospheric Research. He questioned whether or not taking action is prudent: “We can’t predict with any certainty what’s happening to our own climatic future. How can we come along and intervene, then, in that ignorance? You could melt the ice caps. What would that do to the coastal cities? The cure could be worse than the disease.”
5: Personally, I’m disturbed by the damage this hysteria is causing. Children are having mental breakdowns because they can’t cope with the fear. For instance, we have 16-year-old Greta Thunberg from Sweden- a rising celebrity- being used by the left for their political agenda; they’re indoctrinating children, instilling fear in them, and they, in turn, blame adults for their hopeless future, demanding government take away our freedoms for the greater good. This article articulates how this is a form of child abuse.
6: Many of the solutions proposed by the left can be worse than doing nothing. Here we find out that battery powered cars, such as the Tesla, produce more carbon emissions than some diesel cars because they rely on coal and lithium-ion batteries.
7: Studies show that the earth’s magnetic field and cloud cover accounts for a large amount of climate change, and not only that, but carbon dioxide is a natural ingredient in life and is invaluable for plants and trees growth!
8: There is some good news from the American Thinker. We’ve learned that Michael Mann, the guy who created the fraudulent global warming hockey stick appearing in Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, lost a lawsuit and was ordered to pay the defendant’s costs. Why? Because he refused to disclose the data supporting his claims. Can we say, ‘anti-science’?
9: An obvious point that seems worth mentioning is that planting trees is good for the environment.
10: This last article is from NASA, and they’ve announced that the dreaded ozone hole is the smallest on record. Remember when the shrinking ozone hole was part of the global warming narrative? Well, that’s been thoroughly debunked and is rarely brought up anymore.