Over the past several years, the Reporter-Herald has printed a long series of my letters and guest opinions, which exposed certain truths about the so-called “climate change crisis,” while at the same time warning the public about the real dangers that would occur if our nation were to cut back on fossil fuels.
As everyone is acutely aware, shutting down our usage of fossil fuels is one of the Biden administration’s primary goals, and thus it should be no surprise that costs of transportation fuels, as well as costs of everything dependent on transportation, have risen precipitously over the past 18 months. It also should be no surprise that the agriculture industry has begun to falter, as fertilizer (much of which is made from natural gas) becomes scarce, and as farmers can no longer profitably operate their diesel-powered machinery.
This is a serious issue, folks, as it portends empty grocery store shelves and increased incidents of death from starvation, if the Biden plan is allowed to proceed. And what is to be gained from all this pain and suffering caused by shutting down our fossil fuel industry? As best I can tell, the answer is absolutely nothing!
As a nation of innovators, we are blessed to have highly accurate records of atmospheric temperatures, observed from three satellites over the past 42 years, with data managed by professors of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama. (See J.R. Christy, “Testimony before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology”, Feb. 2, 2016.) These satellite records indicate that today’s global mean temperatures are less than 0.5 degrees Celsius warmer than at any time in the past 42 years. These modest increases in global temperature occurred while the U.N. climate computer models, used by most climate alarmists, predicted changes many times larger.
Anyone serious about climate change should obtain and study the book “Evidence-Based Climate Science,” edited by Don Easterbrook. Data from reputable scientists are presented on all aspects of Earth’s climate, including frequencies and intensities of hurricanes, tornados, floods, droughts, wildfires, glaciers, ocean levels, and temperatures as recorded over the past 140 years. The preponderance of data reveal that none of these climate events have changed significantly, either for better or for worse, over this time frame. However, one such event is an outlier: The decade of the 1930s was “the hottest by far” in the U.S., with slightly lower temperatures across Canada and Europe, as covered in Chapter 2 of Easterbrook’s book. Official records show that 23 state high temperature records were set in the 1930s, with only six state records occurring in the past 25 years (www.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/scec/records).
Also pertinent is Tony Heller’s presentation at the 34th annual Doctors for Disaster Preparedness conference (July 9, 2016), which focused on his extensive research involving newspaper temperature records across the U.S. during the period of 1934 to 1936. Heller’s results for July 1936 included approximately 5,000 heat-related deaths across 86 cities in the U.S.; temperatures of 106 degrees F across New York City and surrounding area; and temperatures exceeding 100 degrees F over the entire Midwest and East Coast (except New England). Observed high temperature records for the month of July 1936 included 109 in Maryland; 110 in New Jersey; 111 in Pennsylvania; 112 in Michigan; 114 in Indiana; 118 in Nebraska; 120 in Arizona and South Dakota, and 121 degrees F in Kansas and North Dakota. How did anyone survive the climate crisis of the 1930s?
Carl G. Langner, PhD, P.E., is a 14-year resident of Loveland. For nearly 45 years he worked as an engineer, primarily designing and installing offshore pipelines. He studied climate change issues for the past 20 years and he served four years on the Thompson School District Board of Education.