Climate Change 2020

How can you tell when it is really cold out?  The politicians have their hands in their own pockets.

Measurements of the earth’s atmospheric temperature show that it is warming.  Physical and historical evidence like core samples of polar ice, a general warming during the Viking era, and ice ages show that atmospheric warming and cooling are cyclical.  Some scientists believe, however, that the current temperature increase is worse than previous warming cycles, and that it is worse now because of the amount of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants in the atmosphere.

Earth’s atmosphere is also warmed and cooled by natural phenomenon like solar activity, ocean currents, volcanos, and dust storms.  Still, some scientists have developed computer models which show that warming would continue if all these natural variables were removed from the calculation.  Their computer models also show that global warming will continue to worsen unless the discharge of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere is severely reduced or eliminated.  It is said that there will be disastrous ecological consequences if current levels of atmospheric pollution continue.

Some people, including a few scientists who dare to buck the system, question whether computer models are accurately able to predict future climate change.  The problem is that the programming used in creating computer models is so complicated that the results cannot be replicated.  That is, these tests cannot be replicated and repeated with the same result.  Therefore, it is difficult to show that the models are reliable with scientific certainty.  Unlike traditional research, computer models do not show that when “A” occurs, “B” will also occur in 999 out of 1,000 cases, and that these outcomes are not due to chance.

Nevertheless, computer modeling is being used increasingly because it faster than traditional research, and it has been shown to be predictive some of the time.  Think about the television reporting you see on hurricanes.  Computer models are used to anticipate the storm’s path and strength.  The information reported can differ to a certain extent depending on which model is used, and that may also be reported.  The behavior of the hurricane usually follows one of the computer models, but at times it does not.  Computer models are used by designers, businesspeople, and astronomers.  They have been applied to such widely diverse fields as predicting fish populations and election results.

It is a mistake to dismiss computer modeling as “junk science.”  It is also a mistake to give it the same weight as traditional scientific research, which can be replicated.  Put plainly, you cannot be completely confident in the scientific rigor of computer modeling.

Does that mean that computer modeling cannot be used in decision making?  No, it does not.  It is used in decision making all the time.  All I am saying is that it may not be wise to use computer modeling alone, without extensive corroborating evidence, when making decisions that will significantly impact the prosperity, security, and wellbeing of 325 million people.

What Progressives and Democratic Socialists like Alexandria Osasio-Cortez (and others) are telling us, fellow citizens, is that if the United States of America does not unilaterally and immediately take drastic action to stop polluting the atmosphere by burning carbon based fuels, the world as we know it will be destroyed in a decade.  I do not believe that.  There isn’t enough reliable evidence to convince me that is true, or that America could stop it from happening by herself.

The immediate prohibition of the use of fossil fuels would end to our ability to produce food and bring it to market.  It would be a risk to public health by curtailing our ability to heat our homes in the winter or cool them in the summer.  If efforts to reduce greenhouse gasses are not undertaken by all nations together in an “evenhanded” way, if America does it alone, we will become even less competitive with trading partners like China and India, who get major economic advantages from being huge polluters.

The American way of life would change dramatically … for the worse.  Americans’ ability to travel freely, commute to work, and recreate in our wonderful outdoor places would be severely diminished.  If you live in New York, how would you like it if you had to get the permission of a government bureaucrat to visit your family in Kansas, travel to California on business, or vacation in Florida?  What would the impact be on our standard of living if America unilaterally and drastically reduced its “carbon footprint?”  Once again, the policies of the Progressives and Democratic Socialists appear to be a high road to less freedom and prosperity.

One way to get more political power is to create a false public perception of a crisis that threatens our very existence, and then to obtain special, extra-constitutional powers for the government to deal with it.  From past experience, we know this to be a favorite tactic of the Progressives and Democratic Socialists who want to control every aspect of our citizens’ lives.

Climate change is real.  As an outdoorsman, I have observed evidence of it personally.  So, what are we going to do about it?  I will vote for candidates who say they will work for fair, evenhanded agreements with other countries to reduce everyone’s current, excessive dumping of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants into the atmosphere.  I will not vote for radical liberals who want to seize extra-constitutional power to force the American people into poverty and subservience to the government.

Where do you stand?  How will you vote in November?  It is important for you to inform yourself from impartial sources, and to make decisions from facts that can be proven.  Please be careful. Sources that should be impartial, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), often are not.