Gazette Editorial Supports Responding to Climate Change

A September 28 Gazette.net editorial argues for the need to respond to climate change, regardless of whether or not it is being principally caused by human activities.

Regardless of its source, climate change is occurring.  …

The implications for governments of all sizes are far-reaching. That’s why it’s encouraging that Maryland, through the Department of Natural Resources, is trying to be proactive.  …

About 450 state-owned facilities and 400 miles of state highways are in areas that will be vulnerable to flooding from sea level rise or coastal storms in the next century, according to testimony DNR Secretary John R. Griffin gave last month to a congressional committee. The department is “shifting away” from conserving land that is less than 2 feet above sea level because of predictions that such land likely will be underwater in 50 years, Griffin said.  …

All of this points to the need to continue to be proactive. Debates on the origin of climate change and global warming shouldn’t affect the need to take wise measures to address the very real issue.

One Response to Gazette Editorial Supports Responding to Climate Change

  1. Commissioner Richard Rothschild says:

    The article states, “Debates on the origin of climate change and global warming shouldn’t affect the need to take wise measures to address the very real issue.”

    WRONG WRONG WRONG,,, The question is not whether climate change is happening… The climate is ALWAYS changing.

    Self appointed climate change aficionados demonstrate little aptitude in their ability to formulate the intellectually correct questions: (1) To what extent is climate change happening? (2) Are fluctuations in excess of historical cyclical norms? (3) If so, are the changes detrimental or beneficial to humans? (4) If the changes exceed normal fluctuations, are they substantive enough to be problematic? (5) If problematic, are the contributing factors that “push” climate change primarily natural or anthropogenic? (6) If natural, what is the cause? (7) If anthropogenic, to what extent, and exactly what is the cause.(8) Assuming we know the cause,what abatement or adaptation techniques will be most cost effective? (9) etc. etc. (10) There are too many contra-indicators (black swans) that conflict with existing CO2 theories. Correlations are weak, and wash-out time of CO2 exceeds 100 years.

    The article speaks of sea level rise flooding MD. Latest satellite data indicates sea level rise measured in inches, NOT feet. And, assuming the MDP’s assertions are true, and MD land is sinking, the current RGGI initiatives will have no impact. Of course, a legitimate cost benefit analysis will clearly demonstrate that building 2 foot high sea walls would cost billions less than the current course of action.

    Clearly, the current initiatives are FUTILE. The State of MD is operating in a post modern scientific environment. Our current approach will bankrupt Maryland counties; drive us into a third-world lifestyle; and arrest our freedoms. It is IMPERATIVE that we understand exactly what we are doing BEFORE taking any action.

    LET ME SAY THIS ANOTHER WAY: If you don;t know what’s making you sick, you better think twice before having surgery… especially if the surgery is life-threatening.

    We have ample data that serves as contra-indicators of current assumptions and theories.. The left simply chooses to ignore it because the current hysteria serves as an enabler in their attempts to arrest free market capitalism and concentrate control of the factors of production (land-labor-capital) into the hands of government as part of their Obamaesque “social equity” agenda.

    Ironically, using the IPCC assumption, even if Maryland eliminated 100 percent of its GHG emissions, the impact on temperature would be less than 1/1000 of a degree. Perhaps that is why the State’s propaganda omits any reference as to what a “successful” outcome of it’s ill conceived policies would look like. There is no pot of gold at the end of the state’s oppressive agenda.

    CONCLUSION: The writer is WRONG. Debates on climate change allegations most certainly should continue until a true scientific consensus is reached as to causes and cures.

    -Commissioner Richard Rothschild, Unwavering Conservative Leadership

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,264 other followers