Hi Bryan
I envy you having that discussion.
I totally believe that the earth's climate is changing. I'm just not sure
of the why.
What convinced you that burning fossil fuels is a significant part of the
change?
Wynn
On Thu, Sep 22, 2022 at 8:05 AM R Bryan Waller <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I was a climate change denier until about 5 years ago.My wife and I hosted
a lunch to discuss that very subject.Two eminent University professors who
were in Victoria for a conference attended to advance the anthropogenic
argument and very well read lawyer with an additional degree in science
took the other side.By the end of that very pleasant lunch which extended
for several hours I was convinced that the burning of fossil fuels was
degrading our planet in a catastrophic way.Remember part of my history was
as a cattle rancher in Alberta where climate change was and continues to be
scoffed at.I am convinced in the science beyond any doubt.I agree Gore made
a fortune by being an alarmist and by exaggerating predicted outcomes.I
agree a balanced approach is warranted.I am however firm in my affirmation
that the science is irrefutable and we must do more…. much more.Bryan
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 16, 2022, at 9:48 AM, dsp.ea.large.messages@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
*From:* Wynn Payne <wynn.payne@xxxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* September 16, 2022 10:46 AM
*To:* DSP.EA.Large.Messages@xxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* Fwd: Conrad Black: A measure of dissent
Interesting followup to my question of yesterday.
Beware this is a right wing newspaper.
Wynn
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: *NP Comment* <npplatformed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 5:06 AM
Subject: Conrad Black: A measure of dissent
To: <wynn.payne@xxxxxxxxx>
Commentary from the National Post's Conrad Black
<https://link.calgaryherald.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5lLmNhbGdhcnloZXJhbGQuY29t/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047Ba838f8cc>
View this email in your browser
<https://link.nationalpost.com/view/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047hb381.4k8/35a73b72>
[image: Alternate text]
*Welcome to an exclusive weekly edition of NP Platformed, for subscribers
only. Was this newsletter forwarded to you? **Sign up for the newsletter*
<https://link.nationalpost.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cDovL25wcGxhdGZvcm1lZC5uYXRpb25hbHBvc3QuY29tL3AvMQ/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047B1facc7d5>*
and **purchase a subscription*
<https://link.nationalpost.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cHM6Ly9uYXRpb25hbHBvc3QuY29tL3N1YnNjcmliZS8/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047B4b6cfaf3>*
to the National Post to get it delivered to your inbox.*
Dwayne Senior/Bloomberg
More than 1,000 signatories, including climate scientists and other
experts, have endorsed a "World Climate Declaration," asserting that there
is no present climate emergency. The foundation Climate Intelligence
(CLINTEL) produced a one-page statement arguing that climate science should
be less political and more open about the many uncertainties in predictions
of global
temperature changes and more comprehensive in judging the costs and
benefits of proposed policy measures, especially radical reductions in the
use of fossil fuels. CLINTEL was founded in 2019 by geophysics professor
Guus Berkhout and science journalist Marcel Crok. Both men are Dutch and
Prof. Burkhout is an 82-year-old former petroleum engineer; Kroc is a
journalist who has frequently criticized what he regards as the
incompleteness and deliberate inaccuracy of alarmist reports about the
climate.
They are not convinced that CO2 is the principal agent of contemporary
climate change, but whether it is or not, they have concluded that
increases in CO2 emissions and the very modest rise in the world's
temperature over the last 90 years are not harmful to nature. Crok stated
in an email to the Epoch Times that, “The climate hysteria surrounding the
topic is totally unjustified (and) the ‘cure’ — getting rid of fossil fuels
ASAP and replacing them with renewables — probably will be worse than the
‘disease.’ ” They circulated their succinct summary and as of Aug. 23 had
received 1,152 signatures.
Crok acknowledged that advocates of proactive fossil fuel reduction had
objected to CLINTEL’s findings and had particularly made a point of the
fact that many of the 1,152 signatories are not now active climate
scientists and that many are retired. He said that both these claims ”are
true and very understandable,” by which he meant that the status of many of
the paper’s supporters is understandable, not the activists’ objections to
them. He explained that the majority of working climate scientists today
rely on government money for their income and that climate activists are so
zealous and aggressive, those who dissent from the conventional wisdom do
so at risk of their jobs. Crok made the point that activists dominate the
media and academia and almost never engage in direct debate with those who
consider the possibility that a less alarmist view than the conventional
wisdom is not just a cranky denial of “settled science.”
The activist leadership rely on their domination of the media to discredit
the dissent as coming either from parties financially interested in
traditional energy sources, or eccentric or even mad contrarians. Many
commentators, however, have pointed out that these decades of mistaken dire
predictions of imminent climate disaster are bound to incite skepticism.
The climate disaster has supposedly been imminent for over 50 years.
Former U.S. vice-president Al Gore, who has made himself a
centimillionaire from his decades of doom-laden climate jeremiads, produced
his film "An Inconvenient Truth" 20 years ago. It made a number of alarmist
claims, including whole cities under water and frequent super-hurricanes,
that never materialized. It has been well over a decade since the Prince of
Wales warned us that the end was nigh and that we would all be doomed
within "less than 100 months" without drastic conservationist measures. It
has been more than 15 years since then-British prime minister Tony Blair,
otherwise a sensible man, wrote to European leaders warning that, "We have
a window of only 10-15 years to take the steps we need to avoid crossing
catastrophic tipping points."
Of course, the fact that all of this has proved to be nonsense, as many
people at the time evidently believed it to be, does not mean that there is
no truth to any of it. Not a single person in the world approves of the
pollution of the air and water, and in many countries, great and gratifying
progress has been made in cleaning up the environment. But it is becoming
increasingly obvious, especially in western Europe and more recently in the
United States, that the sensible majority of citizens will not tolerate the
unsustainable increases in the cost of normal life inflicted on all of our
societies by a headlong rush into sustainable energy. Fossil fuel,
carefully contained and incentivized to have as little damaging impact as
possible on the environment, is about to make an irresistible political
comeback. The appointment this week of climate skeptic Jacob Rees-Mogg as
Britain's secretary of state for business, energy and industrial strategy,
which is responsible for energy and climate policy, is a portent of this.
The eco-zealots have refused for 30 years to acknowledge that we
absolutely do not have any precise predictions of where present climate
trends may lead. It is hard to argue with CLINTEL’s statement that “the gap
between the real world and the modelled world tells us that we are far from
understanding climate change.… Climate models have many shortcomings and
are not remotely plausible as global policy tools."
The CLINTEL paper continues to attract learned supporters and it warns
that, “Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs,
not on sound self-critical science.” What we need is research; the current
bum’s rush toward the suppression of petroleum-based energy is a
potentially mortal self-inflicted economic assault conducted by a
ramshackle spontaneous coalition of authentic conservationists, naturalist
fantasists, credulous faddists, resourceful Marxists and a generality of
anti-capitalists. No country has been more profoundly afflicted by this
planetary blunder than Canada, and no large country is less offensive to
the environment or better placed to lead serious objective research to
assure that humanity responds constructively to climate issues. It is
needless to add that the current federal government has not only missed the
policy bus; it has embarked on a dysfunctional policy leading away from
where we should be aspiring to go: achieving adequate knowledge to enact
the best policy.
*We'd like your feedback. Write to us at **npplatformed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx*
<npplatformed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>* or hit reply to send us a note.*
Connect with us on:
<https://link.nationalpost.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZmFjZWJvb2suY29tL05hdGlvbmFsUG9zdC8/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047B5db5a42c>
<https://link.nationalpost.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0dGVyLmNvbS9uYXRpb25hbHBvc3Q/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047B2378ba56>
© 2022 Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized
distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited. 365 Bloor
St East, Toronto, ON, M4W 3L4
You received this email because you are subscribed to NP Platformed
by National Post, registered as wynn.payne@xxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe
<https://link.postmedia.com/manage/5r6/one-click-nl-redir-communities?email=wynn.payne@xxxxxxxxx&list=NP_PLATFORMED_PAID%20NEWSLETTER>
• Unsubscribe All
<https://link.nationalpost.com/oc/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047hb381.4k8/89a25542&brand=postmedia>
Terms & Conditions
<https://link.canada.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jYW5hZGEuY29tL2Fib3V0dXMvdGVybXNvZnNlcnZpY2UuaHRtbA/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047B1d38fce6>
• Privacy Policy
<https://link.nationalpost.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5wb3N0bWVkaWFhZHZlcnRpc2luZy5jb20vcHJpdmFjeS1zdGF0ZW1lbnQv/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047B56ce8248>
• Contact us
<https://link.financialpost.com/click/29070865.5912/aHR0cHM6Ly9idXNpbmVzcy5maW5hbmNpYWxwb3N0LmNvbS9jb250YWN0/5aa050ad3f92a450996ef047B6f8faf36>
© 2022 Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved.
