NASA Scientists in Letter to Congress – Climate Change a Non-Issue, Not Real
B. Hussein Obama affirmed in his most recent State of the Union address that the science on climate change is settled. He seems to have that part right, it was the second part of his comment that was wrong.
Real experts, not politicians making claims or United Nations-paid pretenders say that man-made global warming, also called Anthropogenic Global Warming or AGW is not a threat to anyone and may or may not exist. If it does, the level to which it can possibly impact the earth is so small as to be inconsequential. They estimate its impact to be a maximum possible temperature rise of 1.2 degrees over the next three hundred years.
That is the opinion of a group of scientists, who were among those that helped but Neil Armstrong on the moon and who now volunteer their time and considerable talents to reviewing the science of “climate change.”
Their group is called “The Right Climate Stuff” research team and they number in excess of 20 scientists who are primarily retired members of America’s manned space program. They formed and began their investigating work in 2012, and have issued reports in 2013 and 2014.
They have also written to and offered their services to Congress in an effort to rein in the madness of the “Chicken Little” administration.
Their website lists the following six points as part of their response to the baseless ferver the Obama regime is applying to what they see as a non-issue from a scientific point of view, but what is a huge issue from a political and economic standpoint. Their website, therightclimatestuff.com provides detailed information as to their findings and objections to the hysteria. They offer the following six points as part of that information:
- The science that predicts the extent of Anthropogenic Global Warming is not settled science.
- There is no convincing physical evidence of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming. Most of the alarm regarding AGW results from output of unvalidated computer models. We understand scientific arguments regarding how doubling CO2 in the atmosphere over a hundred years or more (if possible) can have a small direct warming effect, but we question the accuracy of feedback simulations in current models computing climate system responses that amplify CO2 effects. Efforts to estimate climate sensitivity to CO2 based solely on physical data have large uncertainties because many factors affect global temperatures, and CO2 levels rise in the atmosphere after the earth warms due to other factors. While paleoclimate data clearly show CO2 levels rise and fall in the atmosphere hundreds of years after temperature rises and falls due to other causes, the evidence is very weak to support claims of a catastrophic rise in global temperatures caused by CO2 emissions related to human activity.
- Computer models need to be validated before being used in critical decision-making. Our manned aerospace backgrounds in dealing with models of complex phenomena have convinced us that this rule must be followed to avoid decisions with serious unintended consequences.
- Because there is no immediate threat of global warming requiring swift corrective action, we have time to study global climate changes and improve our prediction accuracy. While there are many benefits due to some global warming, the major threats appear to be associated with a net loss of Greenland and Antarctica ice sheet mass that would contribute to a gradual sea-level rise. The history, current trends, and specific causes of ice sheet melting and ice accumulation by precipitation must be better understood before determining how best to respond to threats of accelerated sea-level rise.
- Our US government is over-reacting to concerns about Anthropogenic Global Warming. More CO2 in the atmosphere would be beneficial for forest and crop growth to support the earth’s growing population, so control of CO2 emissions is not an obvious best solution to hyped-up concerns regarding AGW. Eventually the earth will run out of fossil fuels and alternative energy sources will be required. Market forces will (and should) play a big role in this transition to alternative energy sources. Government funding of promising research and development objectives for alternative fuels appears to be a better option at this time than expenditures of enormous resources to limit CO2 emissions.
- A wider range of solution options should be studied for global warming or cooling threats from any credible cause. CO2 effectiveness in controlling global average temperatures or sea levels has not been established. More reliable and greater control authority may be available from engineering solutions that would accommodate the beneficial aspects of more CO2 in the atmosphere.
While this is what many of us have believed all along, our beliefs are not enough to counter the strong-willed attack that is under way towards implementing the United Nations government that is a large motivation behind this farce, with taxation, property seizure and benefits to be gained by those behind the scheme.
UN agenda 21 and climate change go hand in hand. Many of us have felt the negative impacts of the EPA on our lives already and they are only just getting started. Once they get a firmer grip on our lives, restrictions will be the order of the day. Freedom will become a legendary story handed down from generation to generation.
The Democrats in the Obama regime, along with complicit sellouts from the Republicans will be working later this year to stuff climate change down our throats. This report and contact information for the organization is something that all of us should have in our quiver as weapons against the misinformation campaign. It’s not rocket science, it’s more important than that.
Their website is therightclimatestuff.com
Rick Wells is a conservative Constitutionalist author who contributes to conservative media outlets. “Like” him on Facebook and “Follow” him on Twitter.