All who have been called “science deniers” or “climate deniers” should be proud of the label. Such a label shows they will not be intimidated by bullies.
This week’s editorial is just another example of bullying from climate change devotees. Not only does it insult an enormous portion of the American people, it is based in half-truths and clever manipulations of data.
Let’s address the incredibly insulting claim that, somehow, Donald Trump “turned his supporters against science.” The editorial offered no proof of this except to push the fallacy that man-made climate change is scientific fact and that anyone who is a skeptic denies science.
In fact, the argument that 97 percent of climate scientists agree humans are responsible for global warming is a fallacy.
The studies that came up with that number arrived there by dubious means, at best. The most recent study done by John Cook, who runs skepticalscience.com, claimed by surveying published scientific papers he confirmed 97 percent of scientists agreed climate change is man-made, according to Forbes.
The problem is when his study was challenged, it was found that only 1.6 percent of the scientific papers Cook surveyed stated that humans were responsible for at least 50 percent of global warming. Cook’s study required the papers he surveyed to state humans are responsible for at least 50 percent to be considered an “explicit endorsement,” according to Forbes.
The fact of the matter is man-made climate change is not scientific fact. It is irresponsible for an organization like Scroll that, as the editorial claims, believes “in fighting for truth” to continue to push an inaccurate claim.
Renowned atmospheric physicist, founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project and anthropomorphic climate change skeptic, S. Fred Singer, believes the number of skeptical, qualified scientists is around 40 percent, according to the National Association of Scholars.
“I would like to see the public look upon global warming as just another scientific controversy and oppose any public policies until the major issues are settled, such as the cause,” Singer told NAS in an interview.“If mostly natural, as NIPCC concludes, then the public policies currently discussed are pointless, hugely expensive and wasteful of resources that could better be applied to real societal problems.”
Singer founded the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change. It was responsible for publishing Climate Change Reconsidered, an 880-page report on scientific research that disputes models of man-made global warming, according to NAS.
It is true the earth has warmed over the last 150 years, with no significant change in the last 15 years. It has warmed a grand total 0.8 degrees Celsius, according to Forbes.
That amount of warming is hardly anything to worry about, especially for the president of the United States. Even if it is man-made, Singer said he believes it could be beneficial instead of harmful.
“My reading of the work of leading economists is that a modest warming would increase GNP and raise the standard of living of much of the world’s population,” he told NAS. “Conversely, expending huge sums to ‘combat climate change’ would slow economic growth, diminish standards of living and increase poverty — in addition to being completely ineffective and wasting resources.”
Scientific consensus is a myth; climate change is not “the great issue of our time,” and bullying will not work.