Climate Change: Fact, Fiction, or Somewhere in Between . . .

Climate change is a very “hot topic” these days.  Rather than use my blog to advance whatever position I might have on the subject (to quote Jack Nicholson’s character in Terms of Endearment, “I’d rather stick needles in my eyes.”), I have invited my good friend, Tony Jeric, to present in his own words an unbiased presentation of the current positions held by the preponderance of today’s scientists.  Tony has spent the last twenty years reading about “climate change,” and has amassed a wealth of information on the subject.  Here, in his own words, are his observations:

“In a survey of scientists, 97 percent said they believed that climate change was occurring.  If the term ‘climate change’ is taken literally, the answer should come as no surprise.  Climate has changed, is changing, and will always change.  But to many, it means that human activity is driving climate towards catastrophic warming.  Of all human activities, machine-emitted CO2 is considered to be the main culprit.  For the purpose of this blog, ‘climate change’ will be defined as catastrophic warming driven by machine-emitted CO2.  Using the above definition of ‘climate change,’ the 97 percent is actually a compilation of varying opinions and beliefs as opposed to a consensus. Space does not permit presentation of the evidence behind the various positions.  I will, therefore, limit this examination of the issue to outlining a presentation of positions.  

“First are those who take the position that ‘climate change’ is something that needs to be dealt with by ceasing 80 to 100 percent of machine-emitted CO2 as soon as possible.  Otherwise we will encounter disastrous runaway warming that cannot be stopped.  Closely associated with this first group are those who say the danger is imminent, but its harmful effects can be stopped at any point.  They contend, however, that there is a significant lag time for positive results to show up, so time is still of the essence.  It is important, therefore, to make the effort now to avoid far greater and more expensive misery later.  This group tends to view those who oppose their position as influenced by the CO2 emitting industries.

“Then, we have those who say ‘climate change’ is a long-term danger, and that we have time for appropriate technology to develop and replace CO2 power sources as cost-effective technology becomes available.  They contend that it is more important to spend limited resources on solving more immediate problems, rather than paying prematurely for a wholesale replacement of existing low-cost, reliable, mature power sources with immature, weather-dependent, expensive power sources.  

“Further along, we have a series of views that dispute the preeminent role of CO2 in a man-made warming catastrophe.  These proponents say that man is to varying degrees changing climate in a destructive manner through warming, but from a combination of factors. CO2 is only one of them, and is not necessarily the most important one.  They believe we should therefore carefully identify and prioritize causes before we take action, lest we waste resources through haste.  They also tend to view natural causes, rather than man-made causes, as having a greater influence on climate change than do the previous groups.  

“Skepticism grows with the final group.  They say that while man’s activities do influence climate to varying degrees, those effects tend to be most severe at a local level and hardly catastrophic on a global scale.  Global man-made influences are lost amidst the much greater effects from natural causes.  This group also claims that projected warming from additional CO2 has been greatly exaggerated.  Some will say the science behind ‘climate change’ borders on self-serving fraud.  Among this group one will also find those who actually see greater risk from glaciation (rather than from warming).

The group initially discussed tends to view all of the rest who disagree with them as ‘deniers,’ while the rest of those groups (to varying degrees) tend to perceive the first group as ‘alarmists.'”

So, where do you position yourself?  Or do you have yet another viewpoint not examined here?  We would love to know what you think.   Full disclosure:  “After following these issues for twenty years, I gravitate towards the middle of the last group—Anthony Jeric”—(Email: ajeric41@morrisbb.net)

 

NOTE: Joe Perrone Jr is the author of the highly-successful Matt Davis Mystery Series: As the Twig is Bent, Opening Day (a 2012 Indie B.R.A.G. medallion winner), Twice Bitten, and Broken Promises. All four are available in paperback and E-book. As the Twig is Bent and Opening Day are also in audiobook, with Twice Bitten and Broken Promises soon to follow.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider following my blog and telling others about it.

 

Advertisements

About AuthorJoePerroneJr

I am a former professional fly-fishing guide, and I write the Matt Davis Mystery Series, which presently consists of four books: As the Twig is Bent, Opening Day, Twice Bitten, and Broken Promises. The series is set in the real town of Roscoe, NY, in the Catskill Mountains, where I guided for ten years. I love fly fishing, movies, cooking (and eating), and music. To learn more about me and my writing, please visit my website at: http://www.joeperronejr.com.
This entry was posted in Guest Post and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Climate Change: Fact, Fiction, or Somewhere in Between . . .

  1. Michael says:

    I’m not certain, Joe, but I believe it is part of an underlying agenda. I remember when they (the government, their agencies, and bureaucracies) told us that fluoride would help our children fight tooth decay. That resulted in a concerted effort to put fluoride in the water supplies of nearly every American city. And they used up a bunch of it by adding it to toothpaste. The truth is that the fluoride was a waste by-product of the fertilizer industry, and contains elevated levels of arsenic. There’s a long trail of how the fertilizer companies got the government to approve this, but that’s another story for another day. (Climbing down from my soap box now.)

    Like

  2. Joe, I really enjoy your writing.

    Like

Comments are closed.