Letters published Jan. 24, 2020
Visiting GOP speakers target climate change
On Jan. 14, the Republican Party of Columbia County put on a climate summit with two very brilliant scientists, Chuck Weise and Dr. Gordon Fulks. They agreed to come educate the county on the truth about anthropogenic climate change.
There was a great turnout with approximately 95 showing up to learn. There were even a few Democrats, including their chair, who showed up, rumor has it, to educate the scientists.
By the time Chuck and Gordon were finished with their presentation, it was wholly evident to me that what my research had already taught me was true; man-made global warming, or climate change, or whatever they call it next, is pure fallacy and a religion, not science.
Chuck and Gordon debunked the propaganda in several different ways.
In science, someone comes up with a hypothesis, and others try to disprove it to find the truth; with the global warming propagandists, a hypothesis came out and anyone who questioned it is labeled and attacked as if it is heresy. Global warming caused by man is a redistribution of wealth fraud and a religion.
The math used by the alarmists is wrong to begin with; their "facts" don't align with the data, carbon doesn't cause the earth to warm, water droplets do and they are controlled by the sun. The Earth has only warmed less than a degree in 100 years, the Earth's temperature goes in cycles, and we are still nowhere near the temperatures that we had in the past.
During the question and answer phase, the radical leftist chair finally showed his ignorance by bloviating left-wing propaganda talking points as if he didn't listen to the presentation, or didn't care. He proved once again that with some people, you can give them all of the information in the world, and their minds will not stray from their indoctrination.
Facts don't have feelings. I challenge everyone to watch the video when it is ready and is put up on the Republican Party's Facebook page.
The majority party in Salem is going to try and ram cap-and-trade legislation down our throats again in an effort to make Democratic Gov. Kate Brown the darling of the political environmental movement, so that she can get huge speaking fees for her pursuit of a national office in the future. They don't care that cap-n-trade will destroy Oregon and its citizens; they are hellbent on our destruction for their own profit.
Rep. Brad Witt, D-Clatskanie, will no doubt be a "yes" vote for our destruction as he is a yes man for Brown. Tell the governor no on cap-n-trade and lets fire Witt in November and elect Republican Brian Stout as our new state representative. It's time to have a representative that doesn't only represent himself.
(Editor's note: Rep. Brad Witt was a "no" vote on cap-and-trade legislation introduced in the 2019 legislative session. More on his perspective on that particular piece of legislation can be found here)
Give me a break on climate change nonsense
It is ironic that in the same Jan. 10 issue of the Columbia County Spotlight where you are pleading for subscribers to save the paper is the same issue that has an outrageous and disingenuous "opinion" article that ties the Australia fires to "manmade climate change."
Using meaningless terms like "scientific consensus" is a fallacy. There is no such term in the scientific world because scientific conclusions are based on provable facts and not consensus. The article states "experts" say the earth is continuing to warm. There are thousands of "experts" who say this is not correct and that we, in fact, are in a natural cooling cycle.
The article goes on to say that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases being emitted as a result of our actions (resulting in changing the climate). Well, CO2 only makes up 0.0391 percent of the atmosphere and it is essential for life. The rest of the components of the atmosphere are argon, helium, nitrogen and oxygen.
I would like to know what other so-called "greenhouse gases" are being emitted by man that are destroying the world's atmosphere.
Regarding the Australia fires, "manmade climate change" is not the cause of the fires. The article opines the false assertion that this year's heat and lack of rain is unusual for Australia even though the nature of Australia is drought and fires. According to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology the rainfall has been below average during the past three months in 2019 (their summer) but no worse than several previous years on record. Their graphs for New South Wales (1900-2019) show many years whereby the rainfalls have been below average equal to or less than this past year. In addition, the monthly average temperature for the same period in 2019 has been 100.4 degrees F. (38 degrees C). This is not a record high. The three years from 1899 to 1901 all saw average December mean maximum temperatures at 103.82 (39.9C), well above 100.4 F. Also consider that the measuring stations have been moved to the concrete/asphalt environment to airports (concrete heats) and you would expect the 2019 readings to be even higher, but they are not. There is no evidence that any climatic conditions contributed to these major fires.
The major wildfires occurring in Australia are basically manmade but not by the hoax "manmade climate change." Up until this past generation, major, catastrophic brush wildfires have been prevented through proper management. The Aborigines used to set preventative, controlled fires in the cooler months to reduce the potential for major fires. The setters in the 1800s continued this practice. This was a time-honored practice. Then, because of this generation's environmental radical's influence, especially starting around 2000, preventative fires were drastically reduced and the incidents of major fires drastically increased (graphs are available).
More restrictions were put in effect which basically closed the national forests and lands. Roads were closed, dams were decommissioned, and thinning was greatly reduced. Landowners were prevented from cutting down trees, especially the prolific Eucalyptus trees. Without controlling these trees and controlling the undergrowth vegetation during the cooler months you then have a tinderbox waiting to explode into a major fire.
The Eucalyptus tree contains a fluid which is a volatile organic compound. It sheds bark regularly. So, the ground around the tree is littered with the discarded bark, which is quite flammable. The trees are capable of surviving fires because they can accommodate loss of their outer bark. The tree burns along with the litter, then re-sprouts the next years. But now people live where the trees grow, and they are even planting them due to the "green" agenda. Thinning of these trees through controlled preventative fires is basically nonexistent.
The government has closed vast tracks of land and has outlawed mechanical removal of overgrown weeds, farmers are not able to clear land, and cattle cannot graze, which would reduce fuel loads. In some areas people can't even gather firewood alongside the road. With municipalities adopting so-called green policies to reduce CO2, which prohibit clearing of lands and creating fire breaks, leaving dense foliage (Eucalyptus trees, etc.) results in the perfect storm for a fire disaster. For instance, in Kinglake and nearby St. Andrews just north of Melbourne, these communities adopted a green philosophy and instituted restrictions on removing vegetation around houses and prevented citizens from cutting back trees, including Eucalyptus, near their property. Twenty (20) people died in the fires.
One other element is that 183 people have been charged in New South Wales province alone for starting fires. I don't think these peoples' actions were caused by "manmade climate change."
Humans cannot control the weather but can control the large accumulations of fuel. Fuel reduction burning and clearing are the only real defenses against large wildfires. The fuel must be removed. No fuel, no fire. Fires will happen but the severity will be mitigated.
Can you see a pattern here?
California, Oregon and Washington are all following the lead of Australia in committing the war on healthy forests, resulting in devastating fires and the death of humans — all based on the "manmade climate change" hoax. It is almost criminal. Of course, the environmentalists and politicians will blame the unprovable "manmade climate change" to absolve themselves of any responsibility.
And no, eating a Burger King fake, laboratory-created Impossible Whopper (which contains about the same amount of calories, 18 million times more estrogen than a real Whopper and uses chemicals to fake the taste and consistency of a real burger) will not do anything for the climate.
(Editor's note: With specific reference to the Australian Bureau of Meteorology, the agency has a specific section on its website devoted to climate change. Per that site, there has been more than a 2.5-degree C temperature shift in Australia's mean temperature anomaly from 1910 to 1919, with the greatest increase in mean temperature anomaly occurring in 2019.)
You count on us to stay informed and we depend on you to fund our efforts. Quality local journalism takes time and money. Please support us to protect the future of community journalism.