Latest posts by Nancy Thorner (see all)
- Phyllis Schlafly, Champion OF Investors, Defender of Vigorous U.S. Patent System - February 12, 2018
- Heartland Institute Focuses on New Game Plan for Success - February 8, 2018
- Take Stock in America: Trump’s Way of Governing - February 1, 2018
The scientific debate over global warming is not over. According to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, only 20% of likely U.S. voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over, while 63% disagree and say the debate still continues, and 17% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.) Neither is it true, despite numerous news reports, that 97% of scientists agree human activity is causing a climate crisis that demands we move on to government directed “solutions” to the crisis.
A poster produced by The Heartland Institute can be downloaded here with the faces, names, and titles of 58 experts who are current and former professors of climatology, geology, environmental science, physics, and economics at leading universities around the world. [NOTE: Because of its size in downloading, the Heartland Institute can send you a free copy delivered by mail (only in the U.S., please) by writing to: Global Warming Poster, The Heartland Institute, One South Wacker Drive #2740, Chicago, IL 60606.]
For additional information to counter those who are trying to force the general public (and school children) to accept climate change as a catastrophic future happening, the Nongovernmental International Panel of Climate Change (NIPCC) has produced a series of comprehensive research reports and easy-to-read summaries addressing all aspects of the scientific debate over global warming.
The co-founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman, shocked academics by insisting the theory of man-made climate change was not scientifically credible. According to Coleman, what ‘little evidence’ there is for rising global temperatures points to a ‘natural phenomenon’ within a developing eco-system. In an open letter attacking the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, John Coleman wrote:
- “The ocean is not rising significantly.”
- “The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar Bears are increasing in number.”
- “Heat waves have actually diminished, not increased. There is not an uptick in the number or strength of storms (in fact storms are diminishing).”
- “I have studied this topic seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid.”
To be listened to, and with good reason, is Patrick Moore, who as a co-founder and leader of Greenpeace for 15 years, is now chair and spokesman for Allow Golden Rice . Mr. Moore was clear and direct in his article of March 20, 2015, “Why I am a Climate Change Skeptic.”
I am skeptical humans are the main cause of climate change and that it will be catastrophic in the near future. There is no scientific proof of this hypothesis, yet we are told ‘the debate is over’ and ‘the science is settled.’
My skepticism begins with the believers’ certainty they can predict the global climate with a computer model. The entire basis for the doomsday climate change scenario is the hypothesis increased atmospheric carbon dioxide due to fossil fuel emissions will heat the Earth to unlivable temperatures.
In fact, the Earth has been warming very gradually for 300 years, since the Little Ice Age ended, long before heavy use of fossil fuels. Prior to the Little Ice Age, during the Medieval Warm Period, Vikings colonized Greenland and Newfoundland, when it was warmer there than today. And during Roman times, it was warmer, long before fossil fuels revolutionized civilization.
The idea it would be catastrophic if carbon dioxide were to increase and average global temperature were to rise a few degrees is preposterous.Recently, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announced for the umpteenth time we are doomed unless we reduce carbon-dioxide emissions to zero.Effectively this means either reducing the population to zero, or going back 10,000 years before humans began clearing forests for agriculture. This proposed cure is far worse than adapting to a warmer world, if it actually comes about.
A sure sign that the push by government and other environmental organizations isn’t working, despite frantic efforts to convince the American people that global warming if unchecked will produce all manner of future catastrophic happening for Mother Earth, is that advocates of global warming have started to call for the arrest and punishment of those they label as climate-change liars.
It is indeed a credit to the American people that many aren’t stupid enough to buy into the manmade climate change crisis narrative being advanced by the Obama administration and other legislators at the state and national level. It is telling that those who do believe in manmade global warming, including Al Gore, refuse to debate experts who disagree with them, preferring instead to label and further sensor those who challenge them as global skeptics “skeptic.”
Should the enactment of agenda-based political policies mandating the use of renewable energy while curtailing the use of fossil fuels continue to be legislated at the federal and state level, the end results will be higher costs for energy and for all goods we purchase and periods of blackout when existing energy supply cannot meet demand. To most Americans the continued obsession over the effects of manmade global warming when in reality man has little if any ability to control the climate, should be a no brainer.
It you are not yet convinced that climate change (global warming) is mostly natural and not man-made, here are 100 reasons released by the European Foundation that should convince all but the most ardent Climate Change believer that man cannot control the climate. Consider that man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.
Through the process of elections, American citizens can replace administrations and legislators who advocate for faulty and unrealistic measures that breed economic disaster. But what about our children, who, through no choice of their own, are being schooled in a global warming doctrine that is linked to a political agenda that is all about power and control. Bravo to the state of West Virginia, but it is unrealistic to believe that Illinois will respond willingly in a similar way. West Virginia has altered its standards for teaching science to introduce doubts about what is incorrectly being described as the “scientific” consensus on climate change that is occurring and greatly influenced by human activity.
Parents must know what their children are learning and reteach faulty information if necessary. Attend school board meetings to confront your school administration about Common Core Curriculum guidelines for Science, Math, Language Arts, and History. By all means contact your state legislator to advice that Global Warming (also known as Climate Change) is at best a hypothesis which would only further exacerbate the dismal economic conditions that now exists in Illinois if followed through. The bill Scott Drury is proposing for Illinois must be stopped. It is bad for Illinois and must not become law.
Read Part 1 here.
[First published at Illinois Review.]