Home | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Public Notices | Subscriber Services | 928 Media Lab | Real Estate Search | Galleries | Obits | Yellow Pages | TV Listings | Contact Us
The Prescott Daily Courier | Prescott, Arizona

home : opinions : opinions August 01, 2014


7/28/2013 6:00:00 AM
POINT-COUNTERPOINT: Climate change major concern? NO

Glenn Helm


President Obama's speech at Georgetown University outlined the Climate Action Plan. The speech seemed disconnected from the reality of millions of Americans out of work, a crushing deficit, a dysfunctional tax system, mixed foreign policy, and reforms of the health care system. The speech denigrated climate skeptics by stating, "We don't have time for a meeting of the flat earth society," but was completely lacking in any substantial or factual arguments supportive of the concepts of climate change.

Does Obama believe that we have no input in a scheme that will potentially and massively re-order our future? Does he own the questions as well as the answers? I believe climate change is and always has occurred, but is now being capitalized to the worst possible scenario, marketed by a virtual army of climate advocates exploiting climate change as a pretext for their political agenda. I also believe the term "scientific consensus" is used as a method to stifle debate.

A subservient media has suppressed most petition projects. In 2008, the Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine initiated a petition project that has been signed by 31,000-plus validated scientists and others who are skeptics.

In November 2008, thousands of emails and documents were obtained from CRU, the British Climate Research unit, which is the major depository of world climate data, and resulted in the "climategate" scandal.

In "Lies & Damned Lies" M. Coffman wrote, "The general picture of the series of emails is one of collusion, exaggeration of warming data, manipulation of data and embarrassing information, and organized resistance to anyone who defies them." The political and redistribution goals of the climate change exploiters is best illustrated by a statement made by Dr. Ottmar Edenhoffer, lead author on the International Panel on Climate Change: "We redistribute de-facto the world's wealth by climate policy ... one has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy."

A summation of the climate change debate was written by Patrick Michaels in "A Climate of Extremes" Cato Institute. "Something about the global warming debate has changed, and changed for the worst," he wrote. "The debate itself has become a climate of extremes. Truth and fact no longer matter, outrageous exaggerations go unchallenged, unscientific speculation is unquestionably accepted, and non-believers lose their jobs."

It's been said that the best lies always carry an element of truth.

Glenn Helm has lived in Prescott for 10 years, served 6 years in the U.S. Army with the Military Police, and was with the L.A. County Sheriff's Department and city police for 14 years.

Related Stories:
• POINT-COUNTERPOINT: Climate change major concern? YES


    Recently Commented     Most Viewed
Editorial: To get results, you must act (5 comments)
No settlement in Riley v. Prescott lawsuit (5 comments)
Letter: US inaction invites immigrant overload (20 comments)
91-year-old facing lower income, higher bills seeks solutions (10 comments)
Column: Chicago-style politics spread worldwide (24 comments)


Reader Comments

Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: A Bunch of Hypochrites

I love how the liberals pull on our heart strings, worrying about the horrible planet that we are going to leave to our children because of questionable global warming. Yet, they have no concern about legitimately spending their children into the grave and burdening them with over $16 trillion in debt.

Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: a bc

"In 2008, the Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine initiated a petition project that has been signed by 31,000-plus validated scientists and others who are skeptics."

Yeah, that petition sports something like 200 actual climate researchers, a tiny fraction of the actual climate science community. This was done in 2008? I wonder how many of them would sign that petition today with current data in hand. And why should I accept the signature of a botanist on the subject? A PhD in one area doesn't automatically give you special knowledge in others. You might as well poll policemen for their opinions, oh but wait, you were one, so maybe not. "Petition projects" are not science. Lots of people polled believe in UFOs or gods. Does this make them real in any scientifically meaningful way? You may want to rethink your use of this quote tidbit, "...unscientific speculation is unquestionably accepted..."

Ooh, "climatgate". A final report from the most comprehensive inquiry by the Independent Climate Change Email Review led by Sir Muir Russell, commissioned by UEA to examine the behavior of the CRU scientists concluded that there was no evidence of wrongdoing by the researchers. No scandal, but it does show the lengths (or should I say depths) climate change deniers will go to sow doubt. They can't convince on the science, so they attack the scientists.

You’ve given us nothing to support your counterpoint. No science about why we shouldn’t be concerned about climate change, only some vague conspiracy theory, a lame petition and fake scandal. Why not provide some actual data or science next time?


Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Former cop, current pilot

Asking a police officer to understand anything beyond how to enforce policy is about as responsible as boarding an airliner and believing the stewardess is the one that will get you safely to your final distention.

Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Sadie Gupton

Irresponsible journalism? Are we to believe then, that responsible journalism requires that the public be given only the information that you personally agree with, so as not to "confuse" us poor, misinformed people with the other side of a debate? Is that not what one might consider propaganda? I thank the editors of this paper for presenting both sides of an issue fairly and equally and for trusting that their readers are intelligent enough to form their own conclusions.

Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Bad Buddha

This is not a convincing argument. We are seeing cherry picked factoids and discredited arguments.. Were all the scientists too busy determining that the earth is only 6000 years old and cavemen rode around on dinosaurs to supply someone with credentials to provide a credible counterpoint. This is the weakest defense of the skeptics viewpoint I've ever read. Since when do men who have a law enforcement background become experts on anything besides law enforcement? Unless of course we consider bloviating.

Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Zig E.

Now I guess I'll go ask my barber what he thinks is the cause of climate change. After all his opinion has to be as relevant as that of a retired cop. Then we should go ask scientists the best way to confront armed criminals and make entrance to barricaded homes. And maybe the baker at Safeway could explain the inner working of the NSA and how that does or does not interfere with privacy rights. Damn my Bursitis is acting up - better make an appointment with my roofer and get his take on it. The point/counter point idea is great, but only makes sense if experts on the subject are presenting the two sides points.

Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Sheesh Deluxe

When will we hear from the scientists who DON'T believe the sun is the center of the solar system?

Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Lena Sanchez

97% of climatologist and scientists can't be wrong!
Has anyone else noticed that the same 3% to 5% of those who hide their heads in the sand on climate dangers are the same ones who believe the NRA bologna and fight against background checks for common sense ownership and bought into the fake Kenya Obama birth certificate? My oldest (54 yrs) son being one of those as he like his gun toys. Ability to see what is in front of them has left their heads.


Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Peter, Yavapai County

Recent measurements at NOAA show that current atmospheric CO2 levels have now reached 400 ppm and are climbing much more rapidly than ever before. This extreme level of atmospheric CO2 growth is understood to be the accumulated result of human industry since 1850 specifically, the burning of fossil fuels for industry. In other words, humans are currently generating CO2 much faster than the natural environment can absorb it.

Does this matter? No one can absolutely know the answer to this question. But it is understandable that reasonable folks (and their children), might be concerned or even alarmed.

If we change nothing, what will happen? If we continue with the status quo, we can expect the human population will continue to grow to 9,000,000,000. We can expect that all of these humans and their offspring will mine and burn coal, tar, oil and gas to fuel their automobiles and power plants, just as we do today. And we can expect that politicians and highly paid entertainers will continue to spin the climate data to serve their personal agendas, as they always have.

If we maintain the status quo of human population growth and fossil fuel use, we can reasonably expect the level of atmospheric CO2 to continue its dramatic rise for hundreds of more years, or perhaps indefinitely. But is it wise to maintain this status quo? We might bring our children into this discussion, since they and their offspring will inherit the consequences of the decision we are currently making.

We now know that global warming, global cooling and global climate change have always occurred and are in fact, inevitable. We also know that human wisdom is not inevitable. But if we focus on factual information instead of political agendas, wisdom will have a fighting chance.




Posted: Sunday, July 28, 2013
Article comment by: Science Disagrees

Having a Point-Counterpoint article like this is irresponsible journalism, because it increases the the confusion and misinformation among the public, which leads to nothing being done.

There is Zero debate about whether or not climate change is a concern if you ask climate scientists.

Thanks Glenn. I know you were a cop, but when it comes to the climate of a planet, I think I'll side with NASA and every national & international science organization in the world.



Page 1  - Page 2 -  



Article Comment Submission Form
Comments are not posted immediately. Submissions must adhere to our Use of Service Terms of Use agreement. The email and phone info you provide will not be visible to the public. Rambling or nonsensical comments may not be posted. Comments are limited to 1300 characters or less. In order for us to reasonably manage this feature we may limit your comment entries to five(5) per day.
Submit an Article Comment
First Name:
Required
Last Name:
Required
Telephone:
Required
Email:
Required
Comment:
Required
Passcode:
Required
Anti-SPAM Passcode Click here to see a new mix of characters.
This is an anti-SPAM device. It is not case sensitive.
   


Advanced Search

HSE - We want to hear from you
HSE- Rants&Raves
Find more about Weather in Prescott, AZ
Click for weather forecast



Quick Links
 •  Submit site feedback or questions

 •  Submit your milestone notice

 •  Submit your letter to the editor

 •  Submit a news tip or story idea

 •  Place a classified ad online now

Find It Features Blogs Milestones Extras Other Publications Links
Classifieds | Subscriber Services | Real Estate Search | Galleries | Find Prescott Jobs | e-News | RSS | Site Map | Contact Us
© Copyright 2014 Western News&Info, Inc.® The Daily Courier is the information source for Prescott area communities in Northern Arizona. Original content may not be reprinted or distributed without the written permission of Prescott Newspapers, Inc. Prescott Newspapers Online is a service of Prescott Newspapers Inc. By using the Site, dcourier.com ®, you agree to abide and be bound by the Site's terms of use and Privacy Policy, which prohibit commercial use of any information on the Site. Click here to submit your questions, comments or suggestions. Prescott Newspapers Online is a proud publication of Western News&Info, Inc.® All Rights Reserved.

Software © 1998-2014 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved