Boots & Badges
Letterwerks Sign City
"Where Fillmore County News Comes First"
Online Edition
Tuesday, September 27th, 2016
Volume ∞ Issue ∞

Climate change?

By Col. Stan Gudmundson

Fri, May 24th, 2013
Posted in All Commentary

By Stan Gudmundson

I recently read an article by a climate “researcher” who claimed that one of geniuses of the movement was the ability to link every climate related activity to global warming thereby making it virtually impossible for skeptics to refute. A mild winter last year and a non-mild winter this year for example. “Climate change” has caused conditions to be too hot, too cold, too wet, too dry, and on and on to the extent that, at last count, there are over six-hundred of these “too this” or “too that” reasons for us to believe in manmade climate change. In other words, the believers have all of the answers.

There is huge problem with that though. If the environmental movement claims to have all of the answers, it is no longer science. It is a religion. And it is a fanatical one at that.

Scientific study is based on the idea that scientists go where the evidence leads them. But that is not what has happened. The head of the Climactic Research Unit (CRU) at East Anglia University for example told colleagues that he would destroy data they had gathered rather than let others examine it. If scientific research is to be authoritative, then the data needs to back up a researcher’s conclusions and it has to be validated by others interested in following to where the evidence leads.

The CRU? It is purported to be IPCC’s “center of a lot of, like, really, really important environmental stuff.” Don’t know what the IPCC is? Maybe you should look it up.

Moreover, if you read the East Anglia e-mails you will be appalled to see how nonscientific their approach was. Called Climategate-1 and Climatgate-2, the unauthorized release of these e-mails were never meant to be seen by the public. This isn’t recent news but it is very revealing.

The earth’s temperature hasn’t changed in the last fifteen years. A climatologist recently conceded that they really don’t know what is going on but he is certain that there is a link between human activity and current trends. Now let me get this straight. On one hand he says he and his colleagues don’t know what’s going on and the other that he is certain? That’s kind of weird conclusion isn’t it?

As for other concerns there has been worry about Arctic ice coverage. Well, it’s not that bad. This year Arctic ice was within three percent of a thirty year average. But wait, there’s more. Sea ice in the Antarctic increased by 24 percent.

Sea levels are rising? Yes, as they have since the last ice age when the sea level was 120 meters lower than it is today.

Environmental genius Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in 2008 said that “snow is so scarce today that most Virginia children probably don’t own a sled.” This on top of IPCC’s British contributor David Vinters, who said, “within a few years, winter snowfall will become a very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” On the 18th of February an AP article claimed that “global warming ‘produces less snow and more blizzards.” As geophysicist David Deming says, “You can’t make this stuff up.”

And then there is CO2. “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another…. Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot,” (says) Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

“I have yet to see credible proof of carbon dioxide driving climate change, yet alone man-made CO2 driving it. The atmospheric hot-spot is missing and the ice core data refute this. When will we collectively awake from this deceptive delusion?” (maintains Australian) Dr. G LeBlanc Smith, a retired Principal Research Scientist.

For years, some in the scientific community have used what is called Redfield ratio to estimate how much CO2 the ocean’s plankton can absorb. But it turns out that this ratio is completely wrong. Actually plankton can absorb more than twice as much as thought. That ought to screw up a few computers models somewhere.

And if CO2 does really increase? “Studies done at Oak Ridge National Lab on forest trees have shown that increasing the carbon dioxide level 50 percent, to the 550 parts per million level projected to prevail at the end of the 21st century, will likely increase photosynthetic productivity by a further 24 percent. This is readily reproducible laboratory science. If CO2 levels are increased, the rate of plant growth will accelerate.” As a small farmer, I kind of like this trend. Actually, if this really happens, I’ll like it a lot.

As for scientific consensus about man-made climate change, U.S. Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA answers that, “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.”

Finally, there are Russian scientists who think earth will cool over the next couple of centuries.


Your comment submission is also an acknowledgement that this information may be reprinted in other formats such as the newspaper.


6:40:49, May 29th 2013

Doc says:
You are a cartoon character! If I see you in person I will burst out laughing.


12:42:18, Jun 4th 2013

EW says:
For someone that is always spouting religious rhetoric, you try to come off as a scientific expert in this latest babbling rant. Try applying those same principles to your own beliefs and see how many of those theories hold water. Maybe some of these opinions you can just keep to yourself in the future.... There is not a soapbox big enough for you.

Studio A Photography