Climate Change
Man-made climate change due to the "pollutant" carbon dioxide (CO2) will destroy civilization! We must take drastic measures to save the planet now! This has been the multi-decade international campaign of some scientists, Hollywood types, leftist politicians and the media, popularized by the 2006 documentary film with Al Gore, "An Inconvenient Truth". The upcoming 5th Assessment report [AR5] of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is being trumpeted as further proof (they are now 95% sure of man-made global warming). The Gray Area actually believes that humans are doing harm to the environment, but the facts don't support that climate change is affected by humans. This is not just from the 2009 "climategate" scandal, but a growing number of scientists also agree. This will come as heresy to the leftists who have built their belief systems or careers on this campaign, but it is nonetheless true - facts don't support the claim. The Global Warming Primer, Second Edition, by the NCPA provides counterpoints to the film's message. "The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas, exhaled at high concentrations by each of us, and a key component of the biosphere's life cycle. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are today." The Earth has had cyclical weather patterns since its creation. Ice sheets covered and retreated around the globe four times. We are currently in the 5th warming cycle over the last 400,000 years, and it is the least severe, according to "The Big Picture" at www.climate4you.com. There is scientific data ad-nausea-um on the subject of climate change at that site. So why the high volume messaging that man-made climate change exists - follow the money and the political advantage that comes from it. Government funding for academic research, growth of government bureaucracies, excuse for raising taxes, tax payer funded subsidies and a big lure for charitable donations. So, as you read the left and right positions on climate change below, remember, the truth is "petroleum saved the whales", "coal saved the forests" and "wealthier is healthier".

Demonstrators Take to the Streets in Support of Science

4/23/17
from The Wall Street Journal,
4/22/17:

First ‘March for Science’ part of movement among researchers toward greater public activism.

As Diana and Brendan Sun waited for a subway Saturday in New York, they carried signs urging people to “thank a scientist” if they had ever used a cellphone, computer, or television or taken medicine for diabetes, a cold, or high blood pressure. The mother and son were on their way to the first March for Science, one of a number of rallies intended to defend perceived global attacks on science. The demonstrations—led by scientists and originally proposed online—are part of a movement among researchers toward increased public activism. The Suns were among the tens of thousands who attended the more than 500 rallies world-wide. Among the movement’s goals: to push for evidence-based legislation and to communicate to the public the social and economic impacts of scientific research. Dr. Sun, a dermatologist, and her son also hoped to change the public’s perception of scientists, who have long been portrayed as villains in movies and books like “Frankenstein,” they said.

Anna Parker, a masters student in zoology attending the march in Laramie, Wyo., said she hoped the march would spark conversations among people of different political leanings about the role science has in local communities, including its part in job creation. She said she fears the proposed cuts to research funding will limit her ability to work as a scientist. “I’m not going to be marching against Trump. I’m going to be marching for science,” Ms. Parker said. “I hope that comes through.”

In advance of Saturday’s events, the organizers of the March for Science stressed that the rallies weren’t an indictment of the Trump administration or any one political party. Representatives from scientific organizations like the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Society for Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans in Science, said during a press conference Wednesday that decades of federal funding cuts for research, scientific misinformation, and world-wide attacks on the free exchange of ideas were drivers for the movement. The march is “international…therefore it can’t just be about Trump,” said Rush Holt, the president of AAAS, a March for Science partner, in an interview. Reducing the marches to that “diminishes the significance,” the physicist and former Democratic congressman added.

Participants and speakers at several of the rallies also said the gatherings weren’t partisan, but they sharply criticized a Trump administration proposal to slash the budgets of federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health and the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as its stance on climate change.

At the events in New York and Washington, D.C., some attendees carried signs with pro-environment, pro-science and anti-Trump messages. Some demonstrators said they were concerned about the Trump administration’s immigration policies and how they could affect research and the country’s ability to continue to be a leader in science in technology. When the New York march passed by Trump International Hotel & Tower in Midtown Manhattan, protesters booed and chanted “Lock him up.”

Along the march route in New York, where some vendors sold anti-Trump merchandise, James MacDonald, an actuary, carried a sign in support of President Donald Trump. Mr. MacDonald said the protesters were pretending the march was about science, when it really was in opposition to the president and his policies.

More From The Wall Street Journal (subscription required):



365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )
Leave a Reply
Name*
E-mail*
Comment