Manmade climate change is nowhere near settled science

To The Daily Sun,

I read the two letters in the Aug. 14 edition of The Daily Sun about renewable energy and, shudder, climate-deniers. Tony Boutin discussed the environmental affects of wind and solar that the "climate as settled science" and the "green new deal" folks don't want you to fret about. He cites information about the environmental impact of wind and solar that may cause more harm to our environment than will our new clean energy technologies. Shhh, we must not discuss that. Settled science, don't you know. Move along, nothing to see here.

James Veverka wrote the other letter and claims that anthropogenic climate change denial stems from "delusional heuristics." Yes, he is serious. He also cites some article from a "cognitive scientist" entitled, "The Role of Conspiracist Ideation in Climate Denial." I am not making this up. James is asserting that those of us who question the impact of manmade global warming on the climate are feeling out of control and are trying to "regain control through mental gymnastics." You can't make this stuff up and Mr. Veverka didn't. He found it in "The Guardian." Now remember, it used to be called anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

Here is the key to searching for the real truth with regards to understanding our climate and how it is changing. Read the research on this topic from scientists who aren't paid by research grants. Joe Bastardi, Dr, Richard Lindzen, Anthony Watts, Dr. Fred Ward, Chris Schoneveld, PhD., Dr. Roy Spencer, Patrick Moore, PhD., Madhav L. Khandekar, PhD., Dr, Richard A. Keen, Jon P. Kahler, MS., Hans Jelbring PhD., Viv Forbes, BScApp, Prof. David Dilley, Joseph S. D'Aleo, MS., E. Calvin Beisner, PhD., and many thousands of other climate scientists and meteorologists understand that the case for harm from catastrophic global warming is growing weaker as we learn more about the Earth's climate system. Also, that the predictive power of climate models has been proven to be abysmal. Please check out the "Skeptical Environmentalist," Dr. Bjorn Lomborg's book, "Cool It." It is an honest and dispassionate look at this issue. Open and honest dialogue about important issues that affect mankind is a wonderful thing. It really is. Please try and embrace that concept, James.

The endlessly repeated phrase, 97 percent of scientists agree that AGW is real, is as phony a repeated lie as the left has come up with since, well, the Russian/Trump collusion lie that some Sun writers still apparently believe to be true. Or the monstrous lie that President Trump called neo-Nazis "fine people" regarding his statements about the Charlottesville Robert E. Lee statue issue. It has been repeated so many times by the left-leaning press that millions now think it is the gospel truth. The left-leaning "fake news" press are reprehensible and corrupt. Merely paid mouthpieces for the Democrat Party.

The fact is that these scientists know that "the Earth has supported abundant life many times in the geological past when there were much higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere," according to an article in Camp Constitution on Feb. 6, 2018. It is a story about Rebekah Mercer, American Museum of Natural History trustee, who was attacked by the left for being a climate realist and Trump supporter. That being just one of hundreds of attacks from the left since Trump was elected president. The first less-than-peaceful transition of power in U.S. political history? Certainly appears so, doesn't it? Why don't more climate scientists who challenge leftist orthodoxy come out in the open, you ask? Well, because climate science is being used as a political weapon to vilify and marginalize those scientists. Joe Bastardi asks the common-sense question, to paraphrase, if climate science really is settled science, than why is there a steady flow of money to continue the research to try and prove that it is settled? Climate change will continue on forever, and apparently so will the money for more research, as long as there is the AGWoOx to be gored.

Most rational and reasonable scientists who have not been bought off know that this crazy Green New Deal would cost trillions and not make a dime's worth of difference. Joe Bastardi understands that and so do many thousands of other scientists. They also know that renewable energy sources like wind and solar have decades to go, if ever, before they can replace fossil fuels. And an argument can be made that they are not more environmentally friendly anyway. So once again, Tony blasts the left with facts and the truth, while James blasts the right with his own mental gymnastics mumbo jumbo. I guess because that is all he's got on his side.

Does James care that climate-related deaths during the fossil fuel era have plummeted despite a fourfold increase in population? Does James care that the world poverty rate is plummeting and prosperity is skyrocketing due to the expansion of fossil fuel use? It doesn't appear that way, because the left needs a carbon tax to help fund all of the free stuff the Democratic presidential hopefuls want to give to their voting blocs. After all, you can only bleed the rich for just so long.

Russ Wiles

Tilton