Letter to the Editor: Reader responds to guest opinion piece on climate
To the editor:
The first ten lines of a recent Sunday Guest Opinion by Mses. Burrow and Rogers, entitled “Climate Literacy,” imply that an editorial of scientific substance might follow. Regrettably however, follow-on text proved to be tired, media-hyped, rhetoric revealing a mindset about the absurd “existential threat of climate change,” a mindset involving ideology and fantasy, not reality.
Paradoxically though, Burrow and Rogers accurately tell us that “a prosperous future, building a climate-literate population, is one of the biggest missed opportunities,” a fact with which most readers will probably concur. Also, these authors convincingly state that: “it is time that governments realize their failures and support quality, compulsory climate education as a core, integrated subject in school curricula.” Imagine that! Any reasonable person will likely agree with such long-overdue replacement of climate drivel that has been taught in our government schools for decades, climate change gibberish offering no compelling physical evidence that the world is warming dangerously or in an unusual manner.
To buttress the aforementioned Guest Opinion, the authors write about the need to “stabilize the Earth’s atmosphere . . . in line with the aims of the landmark Paris Agreement of 2015.” Yet government-captured, so-called climate scientists, are the primary peddlers of climate change babble while ordinary common sense tells us that attempting to stop climate change is about as inane as trying to stop a hurricane, or is as futile as trying to make birth control retroactive! Climate is always changing, always has, always will; stasis is not an option with climate and no competent scientist or academician has yet to offer physical evidence that Earth’s climate has remained constant over the time Earth has had an atmosphere and oceans. To illustrate, current research shows that Earth was warmer than it is now for most of the past 8,000 years!
Again, the authors mention, as one basis for their opinions, the 2015 Paris Agreement ascendant from a 1992 United Nations climate change treaty called the Rio Earth Summit. Briefly, the Paris Agreement aims to eliminate use of all hydrocarbons (coal, oil, and natural gas) by the year 2050. The stated path to achieve this goal involves creating a legal framework to avoid human-caused global warming. Yet, there has been little statistically significant global warming for decades now, human-caused or otherwise. In reality, the true unwritten purpose of the Paris agreement is to redistribute wealth around the globe with the appearance of doing something to enhance the environment while simultaneously and drastically drawing down the treasuries of western countries.
In summary, the Paris Agreement has been designed to change energy infrastructure, energy markets, and energy polices for the entire world. It would commit the United States, for example, to completely replacing our energy system, thereby degrading our whole economy, while sending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to third-world dictators and thugs to compensate them for alleged climate-related crimes. Yet this agreement, based upon junk science, would have virtually zero impact on Earth’s climate. Instead, such energy system restructuring would result in frequent nationwide electricity blackouts, perpetual poverty, disease, and early death especially for the poor.
In closing, an essay will occasionally get written with far more faith and conviction than with technical knowledge. However, unlike faith and conviction, science is neither religion nor intuition.
M. S. Medeiros Jr.