Letters to the Editor, June 11
Global warming is back
Of course, it never went away. Despite claims from science deniers, there never was a slowdown — just the illusion of a slowdown in air temperature increase. But the first few years of this century did not show a slowdown significantly different from the previous three decades, and that even ignores the fact that the trend in ocean heat gain never slowed down.
We now have experienced a full 12 months in which each month has been the hottest such month on record. We are so back on track that even science deniers have stopped using this false argument. They're searching for some other claim to dispute what is really happening, and some gullible voters seem to be falling for it, hook, line and sinker.
Supported by funds from fossil-fuel corporations, science deniers are supporting candidates who place short-term profits ahead of future life on this planet. Leading the pack, Donald Trump is arguing that global warming-induced rising oceans threaten his Irish golf course — while publicly denying that global warming is happening! Here's hoping our Rogue Valley heat hasn't dulled people's critical thinking abilities!
Climate warming advocates attack the oil industry as polluters. It is the people who buy and use the oil products who are the polluters.
This is not an innocent error. It is a deliberate effort to vilify the oil industry, an industry responsible for our material well-being as a society. It is a surreptitious effort of the left to take over the oil industry. “Climate change” is the perfect vehicle for achieving this if enough people can be convinced.
Who benefits? Government-paid climate scientists, for one. Companies who get a government subsidy are another.
Consider the following about climate change science:
1. True scientists welcome the criticisms of skeptics and don’t label them as “deniers.” Skeptics are the lifeblood for advancing scientific discovery.
2. Science advances by induction, not deduction as used by the “climate scientists” to fit their predetermined conclusions and political agenda.
3. “It’s settled science” say the climate scientists, while at the same time new knowledge accumulates that changes the “settled science.”
For another perspective read the books: “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels” by Alex Epstein and “Climate Change, The Facts,” edited by Alan Moran
Gordon W. Dickerson
A while ago, just for fun, I emailed Sens. Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden, asking their views on term limits.
I could well imagine their staffs falling about and all but losing their lunches laughing, before settling down to the serious business of answering my query. No, that's not right, they probably had canned responses all ready to go.
In any event, the pious responses from these two loons, or their staffs, claimed that while they, themselves, were all in favor of term limits, they did not believe as a matter of principle (!) that the Congress should be involved in initiating any such statute, or constitutional amendment, or any other action which would result in limiting the terms of professional pols such as they.
Perhaps the lesson to be learned is not to depend upon the pols to term-limit themselves, or to attempt futile amendments, but to exercise our votes to expel the creatures from office before they have succeeded in fully feathering their nests in D.C.
C. S. Chase
Conservatives have noticed
The essence of conservatism is conserving, a view several Republican House members have taken to heart. Many live in Eastern Seaboard states and recognize the danger posed to their constituents by rising ocean levels. Florida’s eastern cities are finding that high tides, not just storms, bring coastal flooding.
So it’s not surprising to find that Florida House Republicans have been among the first to acknowledge the global warming problem and form the House Climate Solutions Caucus. Because any House member joining the caucus must bring one member of the other party, this is a solidly bipartisan group. It now contains 16 members.
This caucus is backing HR 424. This resolution states, “it is a conservative principle to protect, conserve, and be good stewards of our environment,” and “the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review states that the effects of a changing climate are ‘threat multipliers that will aggravate stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social tensions.’ ” HR 424 encourages “Expressing the commitment of the House of Representatives to conservative environmental stewardship.”
Addressing global warming is now a genuine bipartisan interest. Representative Walden and other conservatives should reconsider any opposition to such action they once might have had.