[additional comments] Many scientists disagree that fossil fuels are a principal cause of global warming and believe, instead, that fossil fuels are a very minor contributor to global warming. Most scientists believe that the principal contributors to global warming are from natural effects.
[Note: This post was submitted by Bob Endlich to the Las Cruces Sun-News as an Op Ed column in response to a weekly column by Algernon D’amassa, this one saying that Hurricane Harvey was made worse by human activities. It was declined by the Sun-News editor, because he was afraid that it would generate too many responses from the alarmist camp. We believe that this is nothing more than “soft censorship” another way to describe censorship, accompanied by a nonsensical explanation. Ed.]
Algernon D’Amassa is wrong by saying Hurricane Harvey was made worse by humans, mentioning sea level rise, warmer seas, and stronger storms.
No data show that Hurricane Harvey was made stronger by the use of fossil fuels; in fact, ready availability of, and use of, fossil fuels made a dangerous storm less so, as explained below, comparing Harvey with Galveston’s 1900 Hurricane.
[This post was originally published on cfact.org on 29 July 2017 and authored by Paul Driessen. Previous to this publication, Bob Endlich gave a presentation to the CASF at our 16 August 2014 meeting on a similar subject. Mr. Driessen’s post complements Mr. Endlich’s presentation, which was entitled “21st Century Snake Oil.” ]
It’s time to really cut, cut, cut ethanol and other renewable fuel mandates – maybe to zero.
The closest thing to earthly eternal life, President Ronald Reagan used to say, is a government program.
Those who benefit from a program actively and vocally defend it, often giving millions in campaign cash to politicians who help perpetuate it, while those who oppose the program or are harmed by it are usually disorganized and distracted by daily life. Legislative inertia and Continue reading “Biofuel justifications are illusory”
Trump’s Paris decision challenges bad science, economics and energy politics behind treaty
In the wake of President Trump’s exit from the Paris climate treaty, reactions from other quarters were predictably swift, nasty, sanctimonious and hypocritical.
Al Gore paused near one of the private jets he takes to hector lesser mortals to say the action will bring “a global weather apocalypse.” Billionaire Tom Steyer got rich selling coal but called the President’s action “a traitorous act of war.” Actor-activist Mark Ruffalo railed that Trump has “the death of whole nations on his hands.” Michael Moore said the action was “a crime Continue reading “More rational policies in our future?”
Skeptical modelers show a more realistic view of past, present, and future climate change that follows mostly natural temperature patterns. These models indicate a more benign climate outcome than do the IPCC models. Since they are able to bound the problem of cause and effect, they dramatically reduce the wide uncertainty range of expected global temperature increase due to atmospheric CO2 concentration.
When Alarmists say “climate change is real!” I think yes it is, but “real . . . what?” My perhaps flippant answer to that question is real normal, real natural . . . among a few. I think human caused climate change is real small. These are some of the real issues that I want to explore here.
The first point is that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) climate models are actually not real at all. In fact based on the real data, they are turning out to be fairy tales. Based on the real data, more realistic models are now being developed by very qualified groups and individuals. The improvement in modeling results over those by the IPCC appear Continue reading “A Brief Look at Climate Models Developed by Skeptics”
Trump was 100% right (not just 97%) to show real leadership and walk away from Paris
I can guess why a raven is like a writing-desk, Alice said. “Do you mean you think you can find out the answer?” said the March Hare. “Exactly so,” said Alice. “Then you should say what you mean,” the March Hare went on. “I do,” Alice replied. “At least I mean what I say. That’s the same thing, you know.”
“Not the same thing a bit!” said the Hatter. “You might just as well say, ‘I see what I eat’ is the same thing as ‘I eat what I see’!” “You might just as well say,” added the Dormouse, ‘I breathe when I sleep’ is the same thing as ‘I sleep when I breathe’!” “It IS the same thing with you,” said the Hatter.
Can you imagine stumbling upon the Mad Hatter’s tea party, watching as the discussions become increasingly absurd – and yet wanting a permanent seat at the table? Could Lewis Carroll have been having nightmares about the Paris climate treaty when he wrote Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland? Continue reading “Exiting the Mad Hatter’s climate tea party”