Letter: Slandering an alternate view

Posted 4/10/19

It is slanderous to claim my husband “thinks climate change is a hoax” when the real hoax is claiming that government can stop climate change.  The earth’s climate has changed …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Letter: Slandering an alternate view


It is slanderous to claim my husband “thinks climate change is a hoax” when the real hoax is claiming that government can stop climate change.  The earth’s climate has changed considerably from time to time and most likely will change in the future.  Calling anyone a “climate change denier” or “thinking climate change is a hoax” is akin to calling them idiots.

This demonization is clearly done to avoid addressing these valid questions:

Are politicians deceiving us by only talking about gases such as CO2 and methane while ignoring the major atmospheric greenhouse constituent — water vapor?

Don’t water vapor and clouds have a greater impact on climate and weather than CO2?

Isn’t the bulk of the recent slight warming due to solar and oceanic variations and cycles?

Given that CO2 in the atmosphere has probably been as much as 20 times higher in the past and all plant life does better as CO2 is increased — where is the danger?

Why are we being misled about increased extreme weather, sea level rise, polar bear populations, future temperatures, drought, wildfires, degraded health, glaciers melting, etc.  Who benefits from climate change being a problem that government can fix?

We saw fascist type government-private collusion and use of state resources to suppress discussion during the Obama administration, but there has been none from the Trump administration. 

Socialistic type government control only leads to tyranny and fascism.  This causes the total destruction of an economy, as we have seen in the Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Mao’s China, North Korea, etc.  Do you want this for your kids?

Socialism is not a product of Fox News, but the mantra of the current Democrat presidential candidates.  Beware!

Karen Farr
Port Townsend


3 comments on this story | Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment
Tom Camfield

The real question is "Who benefits from the DENIAL of climate change?" Polluting industry and wealthy plutocrats who seem to consider the suffering of the multitude insignificant.

Meanwhile, whatever your husband thinks (for whatever reason) or you attempt to explain away with weak, wandering reasoning does not trump the findings of nearly all of the world's scientists—in my opinion. Are you implying that 97% of existing lifetime professional scientists are idiots? I'll continue to put my money on knowledge and the ongoing advancement of the sciences (including medicine) that already have brought our society so far down through the millennia.

Tyranny and fascism, by the way, already are suddenly. upon us---and socialism ceerainly had nothing to do with it. Democrats all the while, also are not the ones despoiling our planet, disdaining the sick, dying an starving. "Democrat" and "socialist" by the way are not synonymous. It's just the Democrats lean more in the direction of social well-being than loud-mouthed autocracy

It may be true that plants benefit generally from a lot of CO2, but we humans are not mindless carrots.

Wednesday, April 10, 2019
Kimberly King

I understand that the phrase "climate change" means different things to different people and groups. I am afraid that until the weather catastrophes we hear about elsewhere become manifest here, until people experience them directly, until they personally experience air pollution, drought, resulting forest fires, extreme storm events - and thereby gain empirical knowledge that something is very wrong in the local weather patterns - there will be those who will insist that "climate change" or "global warming" is a hoax perpetrated by some vast amorphous and unknowable power base who seeks world domination via climate-change fear-mongering.

Climate change modeling has been part of the Pentagon's and major insurance companies' analysis for years. Climate change is a national security issue - extreme weather patterns affect our readiness (last month SAC Air force Base in Omaha, NE experienced near incapacitation due to the unprecidented bomb cyclone of snow and rain, and vast flooding that hit a huge swath of the midwest, - a prime and fearsome example of how the climate is changing).

I have empirical knowledge of climate change. I have experienced personally what happens to individuals, and industries such as farming. I lived in Los Angeles, and have spent time in Bejing, Xian, and other major cities. It is immediately apparent to the eye and lung that the millions of cars, buses, trucks, motorcycles, airplanes, coal-fueled electricity throw up a sickly pall in to the air creating a permanent and deadly haze. (Remember "SMOG"?) That sickly pall, day after day, year after year, decade after decade ascends in to our atmosphere creating an extra layer of what could be understood as heat-absorbing insulation, trapping heat from the sun that becomes part of our global patterns. The seas warm, the land warms, and the resulting complex interplay of these phenomena create severe weather patterns that play themselves out in mega droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes.

I don't think our coal and petroleum industries want us to understand that. Their livelihoods depend on providing cheap, convenient fuel for our cars, buses, trucks, motorcycles, airplanes, electrical grids. These industries have spent billions of dollars over decades lobbing congress, creating a counter-narrative to what is actually occurring in our weather patterns, what is now a reality.

If you don't trust the science, wait a little. You'll be able to experience it yourself.

Friday, April 12, 2019
Justin Hale

Kimberly, remember what Pogo said.

Friday, April 12, 2019