Last week EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt stated that:
- “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do, and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.”
I can only applaud Pruitt’s thoughtful comments. But in fact there is not just uncertainty as Pruitt said, but actual evidence that there are no significant effects of rising human-caused emissions or atmospheric CO2 levels on global temperatures. The Climate-Industrial Complex (CIC) has responded to Pruitt’s comments with all its usual propaganda concerning 97% of scientists, sea level rise, scientific “consensus,” etc., all of which are either incorrect, misleading, or irrelevant to the CIC’s assertion that human activity is the primary contributor to global warming.
The Particularly Troublesome Aspect
The CIC response suggests what a serious problem the CIC has created by its climate alarmist propaganda. They have told the public, politicians, and the press that “global warming” (alias “climate change”) is primarily due to human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide, and that if this continues at current levels that this will result in catastrophic global warming. Since carbon dioxide from human sources comes primarily from human use of energy, they claim that such use must be restricted if not ended.
There are many problems with this argument. First, most CO2 originates primarily from sources other than humans. Second, the CIC has never proven that this hypothesis is valid science even though they are the ones arguing for huge public expenditures to implement their desired policies. Third, climate skeptics have shown that every alarmist argument is contradicted by science. Fourth, a recent study concludes that the basic alarmist hypothesis is scientifically incorrect by showing that increases in atmospheric CO2 levels have no statistically significant effect on global temperatures. Fifth, the governmental actions the CIC proposes would have no measurable effect on global warming, and probably none at all, at a very high cost to taxpayers and ratepayers, particularly less well-to-do ones.
The Underlying Cause
The major problem arises from the fact that the CIC has been making scientifically invalid statements about climate for decades and is unwilling to admit that they have been wrong. Unfortunately, this misleading propaganda has persuaded many people, particularly Democrats in blue states. These attempts to mislead the public may well have huge adverse effects on the climate issue, the future of blue/red politics, public trust in the press and public officials, serious damage to the economy and the environment, and even whether science will continue to be judged by using the scientific method. But how can there be a rational discussion of what is basically a scientific issue given the overwhelming level of misinformation promulgated by the CIC? This has to be one of the very unfortunate effects of the CIC’s long campaign to promote climate alarmism. There is a great need to find a solution, but it will be very difficult.
Pruitt has made an important beginning, but much more unequivocal statements from public officials together with references to the abundant evidence available for it will be needed if decades of misleading CIC propaganda are to be overcome.