Bloomberg, Weixin Zha, Brian Parkin: By 2030, the eastern German town of Poedelwitz will likely be razed to get at the rich veins of coal beneath its half-timbered houses. The reason: Chancellor Angela Merkel’s effort to steer Germany toward greener energy, which has unexpectedly meant booming demand for dirty coal. “This is unparalleled destruction of the environment,” says Jens Hausner, a farmer who has seen 17 of his 20 hectares consumed by digging equipment that looks like something out of a Mad Max movie. In a bit more than a decade, the hulking machines are expected to claw through the town’s 13th-century church and 40 or so remaining homes. None of this will lead to a significant reduction of atmospheric carbon dioxide. From a scientific point of view, none of this matters. Its all politics, pure politics.
James Lovelock, PhD in Medicine, Chemist, Independent Scientist, Environmentalist. While working for NASA in the 1960s, concerned with detecting life on Mars he presented the Gaia hypothesis which proposes that living and non-living parts of the Earth form a complex interacting system that can be thought of as a single organism. He came to think that use of fossil fuels would produce catastrophic man-made global warming. In September 2017 he announced that he changed his mind. Environmentalism has gone too far; renewable energy is a disaster; the planet is not going to end any time soon; and, by the way, the answer is nuclear… When some man-made climate change Alarmists learn about Lovelock's new thinking, they dismiss him as being "old." With far less scientific credentials and accomplishments, they now claim to know a lot more about man-made global warming than does this outstanding scientist they once held in high esteem.That's how Alarmists Belief Systems go.
John Holdren, Science Advior to President Barack Obama: The essence of the energy-climate challenge: • Without energy there is no economy, • Without climate there is no environment, • Without economy and environment there is no material well-being, no civil society, no personal or national security The essence of the challenge is that the world has long been getting most of the energy its economies need in ways that are now seriously disrupting the climate its environment needs.
Seth Wynes, Kimberly Nicholas: Current anthropogenic climate change is the result of greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere, which records the aggregation of billions of individual decisions. Here we consider a broad range of individual lifestyle choices and calculate their potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in developed countries. We recommend four widely applicable high-impact (i.e. low emissions) actions with the potential to contribute to systemic change and substantially reduce annual personal emissions: having one fewer child, living car-free, avoiding airplane travel and eating a plant-based diet. These actions have much greater potential to reduce emissions than commonly promoted strategies like comprehensive recycling or changing household lightbulbs.
Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center: Real science seldom leads to a “consensus.” For example, after decades of being told that the “scientific consensus” on nutrition was that fat and cholesterol led to heart disease, now we are hearing “never mind.” Unfortunately, the avoidance of dietary fat led to a shift to carbohydrates, which in turn contributed to today’s obesity epidemic. Likewise, following the warmist’s prescriptions to outlaw carbon, our most efficient and cheapest energy source, will stunt economic growth in the developing world, leaving billions of people in disease and poverty; and will increase energy poverty in the U.S. and prevent job growth, all to achieve a meaningless reduction in the temperatures projected by computer models.
John Holdren was President Barack Obama's Science Advisor: In the 1970s he talked about serious man-made global cooling. Since then, he talks about serious man-made global warming. In 2016 they issued a document saying that they would/could reverse climate change. If the climate gets warmer, they would cool it down (by stopping use of fossil fuels) and if the climate gets cooler, they would warm it up. Nothing close to this has ever been done. Here, he talks about the perversity of scientists discussing the "settled science" of man-made global warming. This has tremendous consequences for the global economy and well being of people everywhere. May the red team - blue team man-made global warming discussions begin.
Lisa Friedman, The New York Times: The average temperature in the United States has risen rapidly and drastically since 1980, and recent decades have been the warmest of the past 1,500 years, according to a sweeping federal climate change report awaiting approval by the Trump administration. The draft report by scientists from 13 federal agencies, which has not yet been made public, concludes that Americans are feeling the effects of climate change right now. It directly contradicts claims by President Trump and members of his cabinet who say that the human contribution to climate change is uncertain, and that the ability to predict the effects is limited. “Evidence for a changing climate abounds, from the top of the atmosphere to the depths of the oceans” ...
Al Gore, NPR (National Public Radio): His 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth, which was basically an adaption of his PowerPoint presentation about the effects of global warming, was a surprise box office success. Now he has a new documentary, called An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power. [The fossil fuel industry] financed a major cottage industry of climate denial with pseudoscientists who crank out these phony pseudoscientific reports. Trump has surrounded himself with a rogues' gallery of climate deniers, coming out of the fossil fuel industry.
David Wallace-Wells, New York Magazine, Aiko Stevenson, Huffington Post: Although climate change may now rank alongside ISIS as the world’s most feared security threat according to a new Pew report, the horrors that global warming will unleash in the future, are far “worse than you think” warns David Wallace-Wells. In his sobering piece in New York Magazine, he says that “even within the lifetime of a teenager today .. parts of the Earth will likely become close to uninhabitable, and other parts horrifically inhospitable.”
John Holdren, Science Advisor to President Barack Obama: “The world needs ultimately to completely decarbonize,” We know without any doubt that the climate is already changing in ways that are not explainable by natural influences and that are precisely explainable as a consequence of the heat trapping gases that we have added to the atmosphere by fossil fuel burning and deforestation. We know that damaging impacts are already occurring all around the world. John Holdren, Think about what Holdren says: "World Must Act Now to Reverse Climate Change" If the climate gets colder, we must heat up the planet. If the climate gets warmer, we must cool down the planet. Is this sensible, feasible????