Two weeks ago, Nielle Hawkwood wrote to explain that I had no right to question socialism (which I said nothing about in my letter) or the authorities that have decreed climate change to be manmade. Appeal to authority is a common argument used in politics; it is not scientific argument. Scientists appeal to facts, logic, and analysis not authority. If scientists never questioned authority we would still believe that the Earth was flat and the center of the universe. I have a solid science education and the ability to think for myself. I do not need any authority to tell me how to think. I stand by my statement that anthropogenic climate change is a fraud and here are some of the reasons why:
• The actual temperature increases have been far lower than predicted.
• The areas of higher humidity which were predicted to warm first and most did not.
• The energy re-radiated out in to space across the greenhouse gas spectrum has not changed while the theory predicted an increase in absorption.
• Past periods of warming have been very beneficial to human civilization yet this time somehow it will only be detrimental.
• Most temperature monitoring stations are in the continental US. An audit has shown that more than 80 per cent of the stations are too close to secondary heat sources to meet specifications. The proximity to heat sources means that these stations read erroneously high. Why are the proponents of this theory still using data that they know to be wrong?
• Even with erroneous readings the unadjusted temperature data shows that we have not recovered to the temperatures experienced in the 1920s and 1930s. How is this for a slogan “CO2, so dangerous it has made it almost as hot as it was 90 years ago”?
• Present times only become the “hottest ever” after the data has been adjusted. Global warming advocates are adjusting recent heat contaminated readings up and historic data down; even though there is no reason to believe the historic data is inaccurate. There is no engineering or scientific justification for how the data is being treated. A comparison of the unadjusted trends to the adjusted tends clearly illustrates the magnitude of the fraud that is going on.
Nielle states that the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that climate change is manmade. While this is another appeal to authority, it carries weight because it is an appeal to scientific authority. Unfortunately, when people have looked for the basis of this claim they find that the overwhelming majority of scientists take no position on climate change. This is hardly surprising since most scientists research areas other than climate change.
The statement is a lie. Joseph Goebbels said, “A lie repeated often enough will be accepted as the truth.” From Lenin to Goebbels, Neille covers all of her political bases. She obviously paid a lot of attention in social studies class; it is a pity she did not pay more attention in science class.
Richard Suffron
