Survey after survey suggests climate change or global warming rates very low among present concerns of the American people. Yet President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry continue to promote fear of something catastrophic if the issue is not addressed immediately.
Joining the parade, a majority of Senate Democrats held an overnight talkathon to, as Sen. Barbara Boxer said, “wake up Congress” to the dangers of climate change. They proposed no new climate change legislation. Just a rehash of their same old talking points. Yet the mainstream media reported this trivial attempt to misdirect as important climate change news. Antithetically, the mainstream media seems to ignore climate change news that does not fit their template.
Subsequent to my “In defense of carbon dioxide” piece last month, critical of some EPA regulations, I found a few proclamations from compelling sources. You might not have seen these reported as news in the mainstream media:
1) The co-founder of Greenpeace said CO2 emissions were 10 times higher during the “Ice Age” than they are today, and that there is no proof human activity contributed to the approximate one degree Celsius (0.4 C since 1979 per IPCC) increase in global temperature over the past 100 years;
2) Current NASA scientists called the 17-year pause in warming a “coincidence.”
3) A group of 40 retired NASA Apollo scientists and engineers led by Hal Dorian, protesting the organization’s promotion of climate change alarmism, wrote even if we burn all the worlds recoverable fossil fuels it will still only result in a temperature rise of less than 1.2 degrees Celsius, and;
4) The Global Warming Policy Foundation reported the IPCC suppressed statistics showing climate is considerably less sensitive to greenhouse gases (including CO2) than climate models estimate.
Concurrently The Free Press published climate opinion articles from locals — some by skeptics though past editorials suggest they favor “warmists.” A breath of fresh air compared with the Los Angles Times declaring it would not publish opinion letters to the editor questioning global warming that they deem “factually incorrect.”