Today: 25.Jun.2017

Paul Driessen, Senior Policy Advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow: This recaps testimony by four scientist witnesses at the recent House Science Committee hearings on assumptions, policy implications and scientific principles of climate change. Junk science is being used to justify demands that the United States and world eliminate the carbon-based fuels that provide 80% of the energy that makes modern industry, civilization and living standards possible – and that are needed to lift billions more people out of poverty and disease.

Harold Doiron, Mechanical Engineer, retired from US Space Program: We need to focus climate research on getting rid of the unnecessary "official" uncertainty regarding the GHG climate threat, by outlawing unvalidated climate simulation model output for use in public policy decision-making, and only trust validated observation-based models that are in compliance with The Scientific Method.

Geert de Vries, physicist: Since 2010 I said that nuclear power should not sail under the false green flag that advertises its nil-CO2 output. That is because CO2 does not do what it is accused of, and one day people will find out. Then nuclear will lose the traction that came with the nil-CO2. And nuclear will once again be saddled with the old bugbears nuclear waste, radiation danger and proliferation. Until recently I expected that day to be another decade or more in the future.

Calvin Beisner, Cornwall Alliance: Selling nuclear by its lack of CO2 emissions has been a dumb idea all along, and the Greens are certainly not going to continue “supporting” it once it becomes clear we really must begin using a lot more of it.