Letters to Editor
From Issue: Volume XXII - Number 12
Global Warming is a sham perpetrated by the liberal progressive movement in the UN and the developed world to redistribute wealth, aka communism.
Here's how it works. Countries that pollute more have to pay billions in “carbon credits” to smaller, less developed countries as reparation for polluting the planet. The problem is China, India and Russia will not co-operate, but the recipients are more than happy to take US taxpayer money regardless of an irrelevant outcome. This is what Al Gore is deeply invested in along with Goldman Sachs. Its all about big money, not the planet. Hence the sham.
In 2005 after Hurricane Katrina, Al Gore publicly predicted that the end was near and we had 10 years to correct global warming. Since Katrina, America has not been hit by a major hurricane and we have endured the coldest winters on record worldwide. Global Warming stopped in 1997. The leftists know that and that's why the sham morphed into “climate change”. Think about it. The climate has changed for millions of years! The ocean gives off more carbon than all the worlds industries combined.
The 97% of scientists cited by another letter writer is a myth and grossly misleading. That figure has origins in a 2009 article in "Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union" by Maggie Kendall Zimmerman, a student at the University of Illinois, and her master's thesis adviser Peter Doran. It reported the results of a two-question online survey of selected scientists. Mr. Doran and Ms. Zimmerman claimed "97 percent of climate scientists agree" that global temperatures have risen and that humans are a significant contributing factor. The problem is, that survey involved responses from only 79 scientists.
Yet, you read the statement as if 97% of all the worlds scientists agree. The bigger laugh is that the debate is over. How convenient.
November 2011. A new batch of 5,000 emails among scientists central to the assertion that humans are causing a global warming crisis were anonymously released to the public and Forbes Magazine wrote about it.
Three themes emerged from the released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data. The new emails also reveal the scientists’ attempts to politicize the debate and advance predetermined outcomes.
And let's not forget the research grant money in the millions. Like I said, it's all about money.
Robert Van der Upwich