By Mike Jonas
In your editorial “The Political Climate” in The Times, 20 May 2019, you discussed the Australian election result in the context of climate. The commentary was all one way – damning of Scott Morrison and the winning Liberal-National coalition:
…Australia has just endured its hottest ever summer and storms and dengue fever are turning up in new locations…
…The coalition – which has been, to say the least, inactive on climate change…
…It appears that the coalition attempt to portray climate change as a series of economic losses has paid off…
…There is no question that climate change is a serious issue confronting Australia and little doubt either that the coalition government is not taking it seriously…
…Mr Morrison recently responded with casual dismissiveness to a report from the United Nations which concluded that the world was sleepwalking towards an extinction crisis. Australia is does not meet its share of reducing global emissions and it is deflating to see a prime minister rewarded for such a short-sighted position…
Well, you clearly have not been paying attention. The United Nations, by its actions, makes it clear that there is no crisis. The international agreements that it has promoted impose no restrictions whatsoever on countries like China and India. Those countries are free to pump as much CO2 as they like into the atmosphere, and the rate at which they are doing so makes a mockery of any idea that Australia can have any effect by cutting its CO2 emissions. If there really was a crisis, then it would be vital for those other countries to cut their CO2 emissions too.
It would seem that the Australian public have been able to work out a few things for themselves in spite of the relentless public bullying by the climate activists, the ABC (Australia’s national broadcaster), the left-leaning newspapers (like yours, evidently), and various other influential institutions. Yes, it is bullying – anyone who dares to question the mantra comes under immediate and ferocious attack. In this inhospitable environment, the public has very sensibly made use of their ultimate weapon – their vote. As it was put very succinctly by Jo Nova (an Australian climate realist) recently:
Bullying works in public, but people vote alone.
Instead of trying to bully people into submission, it might be a very good idea for The Times to invite prominent people from all sides of the climate science debate to quietly and calmly explain their positions, so that the public would have a real opportunity to decide things like whether the science of climate really is settled, whether the climate models have any predictive skill, whether advanced nations cutting their CO2 emissions can have any measurable effect on the global temperature, and whether the cost of cutting CO2 emissions is higher than the cost of fixing any problems if and when they arise.
And also, of course, how 77 came to be 97% of 3,146 (I’ll let you look that one up for yourself).
I think you would be surprised by the strength of the arguments that have so assiduously been repressed by so much of the UK media for so long.
– – –
Anyone who can forward this letter to the editor of The Times, please do so.
via Watts Up With That?
May 25, 2019 at 01:00AM