Is Climate Change A Hoax Or Reality?

Election 2016: Where does each candidate stand on climate change?:

Climate change and concerns over regulations on greenhouse gas emissions are some of the most controversial political issues facing the 2016 presidential candidates.

While some strongly deny the mainstream scientific consensus that the Earth is experiencing a period of global warming, many of the candidates in the running have different views on how to address the issue in a way that will protect the American economy, while still ensuring a brighter future for the planet and future generations.

Find out more here.

Of course, the hoax candidate thinks that climate change is a hoax.

The United Kingdom Believes That Climate Change Is Real

The United Kingdom has a Department of Energy & Climate Change:

The Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC) works to make sure the UK has secure, clean, affordable energy supplies and promote international action to mitigate climate change.

DECC is a ministerial department, supported by 8 agencies and public bodies.

Read more about what we do

One of their priorities is:

promoting action in the EU and internationally to maintain energy security and mitigate dangerous climate change as we chart the way towards a global deal on climate change in 2015

Does anyone know if the United States has something like this?

Thanks To Rush Limbaugh

Thanks to Rush Limbaugh I think I have this whole climate change thing figured out.

If you're like Rush and you don't believe anyone but yourself you can use Rush's technique and then claim it as your own.

The simplest way to understand climate change is to look out your window. That's it. If it is snowing, then climate change doesn't exist. Therefore it is only logical that if it is not snowing, then climate change does exist.

Here is an example. Today the midwest has blizzard conditions and has to deal with a storm named "Kayla". Therefore, for this area of the United States climate change is definitely real. Meanwhile for the citizens of Toronto, Canada, climate change is not real since it currently not snowing and the high temperature forecast for today is 41 degrees. And that is good old American degrees, not that weird foreign Celsius stuff.

It's nice, and so easy, being a simpleton.

Mr. Limbaugh, Please Help Me!!!

The sun is shining. I don't know what that means. I need Rush Limbaugh to tell me what to think. I trust Rush on this because he has no degree in any science field. I trust Rush because he has no college degree of any kind. I trust Rush because he is one of the one percent of scientists who do not believe in climate change. Oops, I forgot that he is not a scientist.

Help me Rush, please tell me what to think about climate change now that the sun is shining. I don't see any snow. What is going on?

But, It's Warm Today In NYC

It is above freezing in NYC today. Does that fact give Climate Change deniers pain in their brain? How much cognitive dissonance can they take?

Climate changers shocked and puzzled by snow in January:

So, how are the settled science climate changers, global warmers, global coolers going to explain last weekend's "snowmageddon" "snowcalypse" (not my words), where several more inches than normal of the white stuff temporarily buried a large section of the eastern United States? But...but...snow in January, snow in winter wasn't supposed to happen anymore, according to the Great Minds of Science who have built a nice money-making racket on denying reality.

There are no "climate changers." There are scientists and intelligent citizens, and we are not "shocked and puzzled by snow in January." We are concerned about the future of human life on this fragile planet of ours.

Papal Persuasion

On the television recently I heard that the pope was going to St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York. They also mentioned that the cathedral had recently been renovated for 200 million dollars. My first thought was about all the Catholic churches and schools that have closed down because of a lack of parishioners, students, and money. My next thought was about the pope preaching about the poor and the needy and all of that. His words seem hypocritical, since the Catholic Church seems to favor spending money on buildings rather than people.

After that, I began thinking about all the things the pope says about climate change. Did they use renewable energy sources when they updated the heating units in St. Patrick's Cathedral? I don't know. I can't seem to find that information online.

I did find some other things:

Church of the Resurrection Benefits from Solar Energy:

Solis Partners has announced that it recently installed a 125-kilowatt ground-mounted solar array for the Church of the Resurrection in the Burlington County township of Delran, N.J. This project marks the fourth solar installation that Solis has completed within the Catholic Diocese of Trenton, which spans Burlington, Mercer, Monmouth and Ocean counties.

Vatican installs solar panel roof:

Pope Benedict XVI has become the first pontiff to harness solar power to provide energy for the Vatican.

Roof tiles on the Paul VI auditorium - used in poor weather for the Pope's weekly audience with pilgrims - are being replaced by 2,700 solar panels.

The photovoltaic cells will convert sunlight into electricity, generating enough power to light, heat or cool the 6,000 seat hall, engineers say.

Conserving global resources has been a priority for the German-born Pope.

Will the U.S. Catholic Church Divest From Fossil Fuels and Buy Solar Panels Instead?:

Churches emit carbon dioxide just as most American buildings do.  If they are heated by coal, they may be emitting quite a lot of CO2.  Church leaders know this, and some are swinging into action.  Saint Eugene Catholic Church in North Asheville, NC, is putting 146 solar panels on the roof.  The panels will generate 22% of the church’s electricity.  Some 55% of North Carolina’s energy is generated by coal, which is extremely dirty and polluting.  34% is nuclear, which is low-carbon.  So this church is actually reducing its carbon emissions quite significantly.

Churches all over the country are doing the same thing Saint Eugene is, and their cumulative effect could be significant. If enough join in.  Studies have shown that solar panels are like yawning.  If a neighbor puts them on, you are more likely to do so, as well.  So, not only are the churches putting on panels, but that very act may encourage home-owning parishioners to do so as well.

Churches often also own vehicles, and they could go for electric ones or plug-in hybrids, another way of cutting down on their emissions.

We social scientists are more interested in what society actually does than in religious rhetoric.  We’ll be checking in.

Kudos to Catholics taking action with renewable energy.

Science Or The Pope?

Sometimes I get the impression that no one listens when scientists speak, and that everyone listens when the pope speaks. Why is the pope so important?

Scientists and Pope Francis agree that climate change is real and that it is a threat.

Democrats hopeful pope's visit will end climate change denial in Congress:

Pope Francis’s arrival in Washington on Tuesday has reinforced hopes that one of the last great bastions of climate change denial – the US Congress – may be on the verge of crumbling.

As the pope touched down in the US from Cuba, Democratic leaders in Congress and environmental campaigners were optimistic that Francis would keep the focus on his core themes of the global economic order, poverty and environmental degradation over the next six days, and so widen the emerging fractures in the Republican wall of denial.

Republicans, meanwhile, remained wary, and expressed hope that the pope would steer clear of controversial issues on his first visit to the US.

Sheldon Whitehouse, the Democratic senator from Rhode Island, said he believed the call to action from a popular pope made it increasingly difficult for Republicans to continue to dismiss the science on climate change. “I think this whole edifice of climate denial is crumbling,” Whitehouse told the Guardian.

Pope Francis Makes Biblical Case For Addressing Climate Change: ‘If We Destroy Creation, Creation Will Destroy Us’:

“Creation is not a property, which we can rule over at will; or, even less, is the property of only a few: Creation is a gift, it is a wonderful gift that God has given us, so that we care for it and we use it for the benefit of all, always with great respect and gratitude,” Francis said.

Francis also said that humanity’s destruction of the planet is a sinful act, likening it to self-idolatry.

“But when we exploit Creation we destroy the sign of God’s love for us, in destroying Creation we are saying to God: ‘I don’t like it! This is not good!’ ‘So what do you like?’ ‘I like myself!’ – Here, this is sin! Do you see?”

Scientific opinion on climate change:

The scientific consensus is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and that it is extremely likely (at least 95% probability) that humans are causing most of it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.

97% of the scientists surveyed agreed that global temperatures had increased during the past 100 years; 84% said they personally believed human-induced warming was occurring, and 74% agreed that "currently available scientific evidence" substantiated its occurrence.

Do people pay more attention to what the pope says about this issue than the scientists? Does the media pay more attention to the pope on this issue? Do the politicians?

It's good that the pope is talking about this and that he is causing some people to think about the issue of climate change. I don't understand why people pay attention to him in general. I don't understand what makes him so special. I don't think that climate change is important because of what God thinks. I don't think that climate change makes us sinners.

I wish more people trusted the science. I wish more people paid less attention to the pope.

Exxon And Climate Change

Exxon's Own Research Confirmed Fossil Fuels' Role in Global Warming Decades Ago:

Top executives were warned of possible catastrophe from greenhouse effect, then led efforts to block solutions.

This Is Not Good

Young Americans’ Growing Distrust of Science - Harvard Political Review:

Perhaps the most prominent example of Americans failing to recognize a well-tested and proven scientific consensus is in the field of climate change and global warming. According to over 18 different scientific bodies and 97 percent of peer-reviewed climate studies, scientists agree that climate change is happening and is very likely due to human activity.

Despite the overwhelming evidence and scientific consensus amongst experts in the field, climate cynicism persists. According to the 2015 Harvard Public Opinion Project, 23 percent of young adults when asked to describe their view on climate change selected the choice: “Global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven.” Among self-described Republicans the proportion is even higher, at 42 percent of respondents.

Let's Do Something

Climate-smart cities could save the world $22tn, say economists:

Putting cities on a course of smart growth – with expanded public transit, energy-saving buildings, and better waste management - could save as much as $22tn and avoid the equivalent in carbon pollution of India’s entire annual output of greenhouse gasses, according to leading economists.

The Global Commission on Climate and Economy, an independent initiative by former finance ministers and leading research institutions from Britain and six other countries, found climate-smart cities would spur economic growth and a better quality of life – at the same time as cutting carbon pollution.

The finding upends the notion that it is too expensive to do anything about climate change – or that such efforts would make little real difference. Not true, said the researchers.

“There is now increasing evidence that emissions can decrease while economies continue to grow,” said Seth Schultz, a researcher for the C40 climate leadership group who consulted on the report.

“Becoming more sustainable and putting the world – specifically cities – on a low carbon trajectory is actually feasible and good economics.”

$22tn means 22 trillion dollars. I didn't know that.

In the United States the Republican Party opposes these kinds of initiatives. My hope is that the Republican Party goes the way of the dinosaur before all of us do.

The Yale Climate Opinion Map

This is interesting. Many people think that climate change is real. When will politicians realize that proposals to deal with climate change will get them elected?

Thick As A Brick

Sarah Palin responding to the responders:

The response to my op-ed by global warming alarmists has been interesting. Former Vice President Al Gore has called me a “denier” and informs us that climate change is “a principle in physics. It’s like gravity. It exists.”

Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it.

However, he’s wrong in calling me a “denier.” As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.

Logic? What is this thing called logic?

Obviously, Al Gore is claiming that Palin denies the existence of global warming. (Gore says “global warming is not a political issue but a moral one.”) So, of course Palin chooses to base her argument on the existence of climate change. Somehow this all makes perfect sense to Palin and to all those who have bought her book and think she is the next saviour of the country, if not the world. How ironic.

If Palin can make such a simple error of logic, why should we believe her when she claims to understand the science of both climate change and global warming?

Update:
In case you are wondering what a climategate is, take a look here.