Comments about ‘Letter: Climate change is a myth’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Nov. 23 2012 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mountanman
Hayden, ID

It's utterly amazing that so many journalists and others inundate us regularly with scare stories demanding that the United States take fierce anti-warming action while scarcely ever pausing to mention the possible futility of it all — or the cost
Those costs will get us if we don't fight back, and those saying so aren't just radio hosts of the kind that make leftists urge censorship. They are people like William Nordhaus, a Yale economist. He has calculated what would happen in the long haul if the world were to implement an anti-warming plan like Al Gore's and has some numbers to share: Costs would outweigh benefits by $21 trillion. Nordhaus does think some strategies could be effective, but there are reasons any effort might be of little avail. If India and China do not join the parade, nothing is accomplished by any American program, and the Chinese have not been spotted signing up. If the warming trends aren't bad, it's all a lot of hollering about very little, and some climatologists say the trends are mild.

ECR
Burke, VA

In the debate over climate change and how greenhouse gases have contributed to it, it is interesting that one of the world’s largest fossil fuel producers apparently agrees with those who claim that climate change is impacted by man. From their own website we read:

"At Chevron, we recognize and share the concerns of governments and the public about climate change. The use of fossil fuels to meet the world's energy needs is a contributor to an increase in greenhouse gases (GHGs)—mainly carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane—in the Earth's atmosphere. There is a widespread view that this increase is leading to climate change, with adverse effects on the environment.

"Guided by our Seven Principles for Addressing Climate Change, Chevron is working internationally and at the U.S. federal and state levels to contribute to climate change policy discussions. Our stance reflects a balanced approach to addressing climate change through short- and long-term measures. As we work to reduce GHGs, our collective challenge is to create solutions that protect the environment without undermining the growth of the global economy."

There seems to be agreement from both sides of the debate.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

What I find ludicrous is the notion that because God put oil and coal on the earth for us to use, that they can not be misused to the detriment of mankind.

Presumably, God provided nuclear. It is very possible that mankind could use that to end our existence.

I dont know for sure either way. But using religion to support ones position makes the least sense of all.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

Mountanman,

The economics and multinational participation are both excellent points. But first we must get beyond the "I have listened to Rush and he says there is no global warming" mentality.

We solve nothing by burying our heads in the sand and ignoring problems. We will do best if we go in clear eyed and head on.

one old man
Ogden, UT

It is said that God uses only natural things to work his will. It is said that God will someday end the world.

Could it be that all He needs to do is sit back and let humans do all the work by filling the atmosphere with pollution?

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Twin lights. Rush Limbaugh has nothing to do with my knowledge of CO2 supposedly causing global warming. I learned all I need to know about this issue in the 4th grade:
#1: The climate is always changing, always has and always will! The ice age ended because of global climate change and there were no SUV around then and the explanation by some of "fluctuating dinosaurs" is ridiculous to say the least.
#2: I learned about photosynthesis. Plants absorb CO2 out of the atmosphere and in the presence of sunlight, synthesize sugars and release O2 back into the atmosphere. Thus the earth (by intelligent design) cleans itself. The higher the concentration of CO2, the faster the photosynthesis.
#3: Follow the money! Al Gore's estimated net worth is $10 million and still growing as a result of his selling the "evils" of CO2.
#4: Natural erupting volcanoes, naturally decaying plant material and natural forest fires produce more CO2 in the atmosphere than all the SUV put together.
Therefore, count me as a practical non-believer.

John Charity Spring
Back Home in Davis County, UT

Mountanman is correct. The global warming theory is not based on any facts whatsoever. It is a scam invented by Al Gore and other left-wing extremists who have learned that they can make vast sums of money by frightening the ignorant masses.

Anyone who has studied history knows that the climate has been changing ever since there was a climate to change. The history of the Vikings in Greenland and Iceland just one of many examples.

The ignorant public must finally reject the leftist fear-mongers. Al Gore has been enriched enough already.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

Mountanman,

Please, please think about your statement “I learned all I need to know about this issue in the 4th grade”

The folks who study this for a living also graduated fourth grade. They have advanced degrees in the field and devote themselves to it as you do to your field.

The points you bring up are all things that they would incorporate (along with a thousand others) as part of their studies.

Follow the money? Sure. In the tobacco arguments we followed the money as well. It led back to the invested interests (tobacco companies) funding “research” to deny the problem existed.

Al Gore is worth $10 million? For our largest oil companies, that is pocket change. Seriously, who has the most vested interest AND the most money to spend. It isn’t Al Gore.

The concept that there is a worldwide (multi-corporate, multi-national, and multi-university) conspiracy is beyond belief. In most things, you can’t get three people to keep a secret for long.

Simply put, the likelihood of a conspiracy where all these scientists around the world fall in line is just beyond belief.

one old man
Ogden, UT

But when a person's education ends at the fourth grade level, it's questionable how much value their opinions might have.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Mountanman is incorrect. The idea that global warming is not occurring is not based on any facts whatsoever. It is a scam invented by fossil fuel companies and other right-wing extremists who have learned that they can make vast sums of money by fooling the ignorant masses.

Anyone who has studied history knows that the climate has been changing ever since there was a climate to change. The history of the Vikings in Greenland and Iceland just one of many examples. But there has never been a time in Earth’s history when so many humans share the planet and its limited resources.

The ignorant public must finally reject the rightist fear-mongers. The coal and oil companies have been enriched enough already.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

@Mountanman
Hayden, ID
Twin lights. Rush Limbaugh has nothing to do with my knowledge of CO2 supposedly causing global warming. I learned all I need to know about this issue in the 4th grade:

[Then you didn't listen very well when they taught you in 4th grade that the temperatures on Venus exceed 400 degrees due to an atmosphere being made up mostly of CO2 - a greehhouse gas. Mr. Moutaman = F. ]

As as for the letter writer --

OK let's follow the money....

I follow it right back to Big OIL, and Coal - their Government subsides, and $Hundreds of Billions in annual profits.

Who stands the most to win?
Who stands the most to loose?
And will these Oil $Billionaires just stand back and do nothing about it?

Oldest play in the book.

Reminds me of Big Tobacco telling us for years and bribing their own "Scientists" and conducting their own "Studies" that proved tobacco didbn't cause lung cancer, emphasima, or other diseases.

Rush Limbaugh STILL insists smoking tobacco is GOOD for you.

I can't understand why Conservatives fall for the same old business trickery time after time.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Ahhhhhh.

Finally, Russel Bender comes out of the woodwork! I thought for sure he'd voice his opinion on the Presidential Election. He might be a few weeks late, but at least he "blessed" us with his old take on Global Warming. For years now Russel has written in complaining about the Spanish Fork windmills, Obama, and how foolish it is to take care of the environment because God gave it to us to use.

With folks like Russel, why do we even need scientists, doctors, and other experts?

ugottabkidn
Sandy, UT

I suggest old Russell pull an ice cube from the freezer at home and set it on the kitchen counter then explain to us all why it melts. I would suggest that it might be that it is warmer on the counter than it is in the freezer. Maybe now he can explain why the ice caps an glaciers are much smaller than when Russell took his last science class. I would suggest it's warmer. If you want to argue cause, fine but to suggest the planet is not changing is nothing more than foolishness. I have seen it.

one old man
Ogden, UT

LDS Lib says, "I can't understand why Conservatives fall for the same old business trickery time after time."

Could it have something to do with their collective level of intelligence?

Mark B
Eureka, CA

If we follow Russell and M-man's advice to "follow the money", it will surely lead us to the boardroom of Exxon Mobile. And that's where it stays, taking out a few bucks for buying off cheap scientists, because they DON'T pay any taxes.

Demo Dave
Holladay, UT

Mr. Bender needs a reality check.

Really???
Kearns, UT

Utah used to be known as a place that valued education. We were taught to study things out and then make a decision. Now, it seems that people make decisions based on their favorite radio talk show hosts.

I was taught that we were to be good stewards of the land in which we live. Isn't it time that we all work to make this beautiful land in which we live more tolerable for everyone?

Bubble
SLC, UT

Since 1991, there have been 13,950 scientific peer-reviewed article written on global climate change.

24 of them - 0.17% - reject global warming or endorse a cause other than CO2 emissions.

The reference in this letter to the data released a month or so ago stating there has been no warming over the past 17 years is a reference to an article written by climate change deniers who purposely misinterpreted recently released data. The article and misinterpretation have been thoroughly debunked.

Has the climate changed before? Yes, it has. And when it has, it has led to massive extinctions and changes in the surviving flora and fauna.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Slap-down the 47%,
Shun the Latinos and other ethnic minorities,
Fight women's rights,
pull the educational rug out from under the young people,
and like comments like this one -
Spitting in the eye of Scientists...

...yet Mitt Romney and the rest of the GOP dream up wild excuses that Americans are the one's being stupid and believe Obama is Santa Claus.

Gov. Bobby Jindal said it best -- REPUBLICANS themselves need to stop being the Party of Stupid...
or Gov. Haley Barbour when he suggested the GOP give themselves a "proctology exam".

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

And then folks wonder why the GOP keeps losing Presidential Elections?

You can't always take the unpopular stand and play the "victim" card as the GOP has a long history of doing. Eventually, you gotta adjust and just accept what scientists, educated people, tolerant people, women, and middle-class people believe/want.

If the GOP is really going to win in 2016 they need to reject the Russel Bender mentality. Keep this up and the Demos won't need to even campaign in 2016 in order to win. You folks are merely hanging yourselves denying man-made climate change.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments