The Science behind Climate Change
Not all scientists agree that Climate Change is anthropogenic (man-made). Even scientists who served on the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), state that the theory has become more like a religion than science. Many of them hold that while the temps in the world have risen 0.6 degrees C (1.08 degrees F) over the last 30 years, that there have been many warmer periods throughout history, and no catastrophe happened. The science is not definitive on either side. (Check other perspectives from solid scientists.)
In the 1940s it was a scare of a coming ice age, then in 1975 the cooling period reversed and temps started to rise, then the alarmists started talking about global warming. When people talk about greenhouse gas most of the time they have no idea what a greenhouse gas is. Most would tell you that CO2 is the most abundant greenhouse gas on the planet because this is what is repeated in the media. This is simply not true. Water vapor constitutes 95% of greenhouse gas. While only 3.618% is CO2,0.360% is CH4, 0.950% is N2O, and 0.072% is O3 and other gasses(CFC’s).
With these facts it does not make sense that CO2 is the “greenhouse gas” of climate change. This is one of several reasons why scholars from major universities in the USA and other countries, (some of whom served on the IPCC), are not convinced of the “reality" of climate change. I merely suggest that the “science” that has been used to “prove” anthropogenic Climate Change is based on mostly opinion, not science, and therefore, needs more experimental proof, not just computer projections before we concede the fact that Global Warming is man-made. We cannot affect the economy in a drastic way by creating a Carbon tax without being 100% positive of such a fact. We should use clean energy, and develop clean energy, but do not kill the economy with ridiculous measures like the one California just passed this last week! Please click this link to see and laugh/cry/worry with me.
My position on Climate Change
Climate is constantly changing and has for millennia. Since the cause of climate change due to human intervention is highly controversial and not definitive my position is as follows:
I support reasonable efforts to reduce carbon emissions, implementation of current technology, and research into new clean technology regarding clean renewable energy sources.
I support conservation and stewardship of our resources.
Conservation and Research of clean technologies just make sense whether climate change is a reality or not, and the results will be the same….. A cleaner planet!
I do not pretend to know that a catastrophe is near. I think that if we put our minds to work and research the most promising technology, we will be able to avoid one altogether, if one is imminent.
In order to maintain our economy and the economy worldwide we still need fossil fuels...for now at least. We should limit use of fossil fuels where we can. At the same time, we should not penalize their use because many businesses and service providers depend on them to do their job and tend the basic needs of the population.
As a scientist myself, I neither support the theory of Anthropogenic Climate Change, nor do I refute it. I simply believe that there is not enough evidence to draw a definitive conclusion either way. That fact leads me to the policy of conservation of our resources, promotion of the use of renewable energy, and development of new technology. All this to promote a clean environment, without placing extra tax burden, and regulations on family and business.
If you have any questions regarding this issue, please contact me on the contact page.
By: William Lee
Independent of party ties!
Citizens for William Lee