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.
