Dear Editor,
A recent opinion letter had one paragraph dedicated to CLIMATE CHANGE with the requisite warning of imminent death due to crop failures, relief that fossil fuels are being drastically reduced and the increased government spending on alternatives to the "deadly consumption of unsafe fuels". This particular brand of silliness seems to have taken over all other narratives because it's proudly stated as "settled science" . . . that there is a "consensus of scientists" that agree. That . . . that right there should raise an eyebrow or twelve and go a long way towards clearly showing that this is simply NOT SCIENCE. Science is never - ever - ever "settled".
There are a handful of scientifically defined "constants" - c: the speed of light in vacuum, h: the Planck constant, e: elementary charge, ∆νCs: the hyperfine transition frequency of cesium-133, k: the Boltzmann constant, NA: the Avogadro constant, Kcd: the luminous efficacy of monochromatic radiation of frequency 540 × 1012 hertz. And that's it as of today. Even these are open to reevaluation and change. But this . . . this right here . . . is all the scientific community has ever formally agreed upon as clearly defined and agreed to . . . nothing else . . . period.
Let's drill down on the whole - "that's the way it is, that's what's true because I SAID SO!!" - thing. I've never accepted that in any arena - math, physics, electronics, chemistry - never. If I can't see the data, evaluate the data for myself, recreate the experiment or circuit myself, I retain the right to question all I want to. And so do you. The biggest lie in the US - confirmed over and over and over and over - "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you!!" And helping us through climate change is just one more rung in our government's ever-so-helpful ladder.
A quick detour on doubt and self-verification. I grew up in a Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod home. I was confirmed when I reached 12 and was able to take communion for the first time. It was called the age of awareness at that time. So as part of the process, we were given an unconsecrated host (a communion wafer that's not been blessed) to eat so we would know what it tasted like. Pretty bland but edible. Of course, we were also taught that once consecrated it became "the body and blood of Christ" and I became just a bit horrified. It would turn into 2,000-year-old jerky??? I ignored the whole "through, with and under the bread" phrase that was added and just imagined what a horrible taste it would be and at the same time I was interested in just how this "magic" occurred.
About a month before my first communion my Mom purchased a Microscope kit for me. Man was that cool. It came with prepared slides of butterfly wings, fly wings, and various plants. Add to that looking at salt, pepper, and water droplets as X400 magnification - I was in heaven. And a plan hatched to just see how a "wafer" could turn into 2,000-year-old Jerky. I saved a piece of my unconsecrated host for a look-see under my microscope. My first communion came and went. I tasted absolutely no difference between a consecrated host and an unconsecrated host - none. What the heck??? So, the next month during communion I saved a very small bite of the consecrated host for "further evaluation". Just imagine my surprise when I saw no difference between the two samples. None, zero, zip, nada . . .
The first person I challenged in this scandal was my Mom . . . "What the heck Mom???
"You did what???"
So, I explained the experiment more closely. "Of course you did" she said, shaking her head. This led to a much deeper conversation with her, our pastor, and a much deeper understanding of the whole idea of "faith". Now - 60 years later, my religion is simply a matter of faith. There are no "ah-has"!!! We suspect the location of "The Tomb" but it's not certain. We believe with all our hearts that "He is risen." But only a couple handfuls witnessed the Risen Christ 2,000 years ago. We take it on faith. I take it on faith.
The moral here? You should challenge everything - even your strongest beliefs. Yet, with the certain death that awaits us all if we don't stop driving cars, turn off all our lights and air-conditioning, walk and bike more . . . the world is doomed!!! Doomed I say. Again, this is where the silliness begins.
Let's take a look at the length of geologic time that's being evaluated. The typical maximum I've found is 80 MILLION years. During that time lifeforms like the Dinosaurs became extinct, their life ended by a massive meteor that struck in the Yucatan Peninsula. Multiple species of plants and animals have come and gone. Various versions of humans have come and gone. Past that, a lot of things are simply unknowable until we learn how to skip through time. The last 500 MILLION years is when most lifeforms developed. There have been 5 defined Ice Ages with the latest being the one we are still emerging from - the "Quaterny". The Cryogenian - 717 MILLION to 635 MILLION years ago - is thought to have covered the entire earth and that it required an actual shift in the orbit of the earth to break it up. Obviously, the earth has a very long and rich geologic history with humans truly witnessing it over the past couple million years and actual civilizations and defined cultures only coming into existence within the past 5,000 years or so. So how can we scale this to better wrap our head around what we are looking at?
Let's try this. The age of the earth is roughly 4.5 BILLION years old. 80 MILLION years represents about 1.777% of the life of the earth. Comparing these 80 MILLION years to a part of a single year would look something like this. In a year there are 31,536,000 Seconds. 1.777% of that would be 560,649 seconds, 9,344 minutes, 155.73 hours or 6.49 days. So, assume we are an interstellar traveler, and we land in the middle of Canada on January 1st and stay for a week. Based on our measurements, what decisions would be made about the climate of this planet based on our week's stay??? What if we landed in the African desert?? Or Iowa??
My point? We are attempting to evaluate a global, long-term climate model based on a profoundly limited data set. A data set that spans 80 MILLION years and represents less than 2% of the geological history of the planet. See why I call it silly???
Then there are the whole "record-breaking temperatures"!!!! meme. In our recorded history, you can find an inventory of Roman wine from grapes grown in northern Scotland - a land unable to support such a thing today because it's just too cold. You can read ship logs recounting a frozen Thames River in London as well as the canals in the Netherlands (hence the story of "The Silver Skates"). The "little ice age" that plagued the Northeastern US in the late 1700s, the dust bowl years and the prolonged period of heat during that period.
Bottom line . . . the climate is in a continual state of change. The sun's radiance changes. Our orbit changes. Our tilt along our axis changes. Our CO2 levels change and have been twice as high during the past 80 MILLION years as it is today. The planet changes. The thought that humans could greatly affect the climate is also simply silly. Do we have obligations to be good stewards? Sure - how many remember the weeping Indian? But to believe that 1) - we can replace fossil fuels with batteries when a battery-powered truck only could travel 75 miles between charges 2) - that we can replace the power generated by a nuclear plant with solar panels that only get 4 hours of direct sun on average per day in Iowa 3) - that windmills that are created with carbon-based fuels, mined with carbon-based fuels, have their blades derived from carbon-based fuels, are transported and installed with equipment that can only run on carbon-based fuels - that these windmills can REPLACE carbon-based fuels - THIS . . . THIS RIGHT HERE . . . is past silliness . . . and well into the realm of FOOLISHNESS.
So folks . . . do the math. Dig for facts. Question everything and everyone. Find the truth - the actual, rock bottom, no kiddin' truth for yourself.
Death by climate change . . . pure silliness . . . just sayin'.
Bill Keller
Comments
Submit a CommentPlease refresh the page to leave Comment.
Still seeing this message? Press Ctrl + F5 to do a "Hard Refresh".
Does anyone recall back in the early 80’s when it was said we were going into the next Ice Age? How about in 1995 when the scientists said within 20 years the east coast cities would be under 2-3 feet of water. Show me. The sky is not falling, the world is not coming to an end. Many scientists are just coming up with the conclusions they are paid to make. How many times can someone be lied to before they catch on????
Always remember, PEOPLE WILL GIVE UP THEIR RIGHTS WHEN THEY ARE FRIGHTENED. The recent covid episode is a prime example of that.
Later
Dave
https://www.asnotseenontv.org/fallofthecabal/
Mr. Kelly, let me ask you this question. If a doctor, heaven forbid, told you that you have cancer. He/She told you that, untreated, you would die in 6 months. He/She then says there are ways to successfully beat this type of cancer, in the stage that it's in. But, you knew that the doctor didn't have your same political beliefs and you didn't trust the type of science they prescribed to. Would you choose to die in 6 months, or make the changes that the Democratic Doctor/Scientist told you do?
50 years that's all the history of climate data you need?? Man you are so shallow and wrong. My living data goes back to 1977 when I complained how hot it was Wally N. told me about the summer and winter of 1936 --Hottest and coldest in memory. An April blizzard in '77. Drought in '83 - My corn yield 66 bu/A. another in the '90's (forgot exactly when). Then the flood of '92 - rain rain for days on end and no sun. My corn yield was was normally 150 bu/A. was then 115.
Weather is never the same day to day month to month. Climate Change? has nothing to do with it.
Hydrocarbons have nothing to do with it. Climate has four seasons - Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter. This repeats year after year.
There is not danger that the Earth will burn up due to Global warming / climate change. Ain't going to happen.
Without China, Russia and India ruining their economies in the name of "earth saving" we are only hurt ourselves China is building 7 plus coal fired power plants a week. You are so ill-informed.
To help ourselves and guarantee reliable/cheap energy we should go Nuclear following France's program.
Once again, you demonstrate that you don't know the difference between Climate and Weather.
Also, the April blizzard was in '73.
For once you correct my error. It was '73. We were living in Ames at the time. My Father visited us on that eve. I tried to get him and my stepmother to stay over night. No go. He insisted that he had to get back to the farm to care for his hogs. Dad, I said, reconsider - this is a dangerous storm that came up un-expectantly. Not in his DNA - I got to take care of my livestock. The Farmer in him was strong - as it is in me. He got to Toledo - safely and stayed over night. Thank divine providence. The pigs survived with no problem. By the way I remember climate systems as: Tropical, Sub Tropical, Temperate, Polar. Looking up same the results: Tropical.
Dry.
Temperate.
Continental.
Polar.
You are still ill-informed.
Regards,
John
One more comment. The year I reference '77, as you stated was not the year of the blizzard,but the year of the drought. My Father was still farming then and the yield was sub part, but he was able to survive, because he had no debt. He had many profitable years before - he was a good manager and agronomist for his education. The following year he gave me management of the property. I will be in forever gratitude for his generosity.
Regards,
I do know the difference between weather and climate. I had to have a good knowledge of weather and it's dictates on aviation as I was a professional aviator for more than 50 years with almost 18,000 hours in the air with no mishaps.