What about Climate Science?

The first question most visitors to Climate Realism Canada’s website want answered is, “What is your position on climate science? Do you agree with the scientific consensus about dangerous anthropogenic global warming or not?”

Our answer is neither “yes” nor “no.” Let’s answer the question as clearly as possible point by point: 

• 1 • We believe in the scientific method where ideas are supported by data and clear logic. When a scientist conducts an experiment they state their hypothesis, they describe their methodology precisely and they present supporting data. Other scientists can then replicate or repudiate the theory. Precision rather than consensus is the hallmark of the scientific method. The notion that you can simplify the debate about climate into two camps, “believers” and “deniers,” is a perversion of science, it is unreasonable, and it is Orwellian

The Earth’s climate system is wondrously complex. For any scientist – or any group of scientists – to claim that they have figured it out is both naive and arrogant. See, “Is climate science really science?

If there was a poll of all scientists and other experts, which there hasn’t been, and they were asked the question: Does mankind have an effect on climate? It is likely that nearly all of them would answer “yes.” However, there would be little consensus about the mechanisms and their magnitude because they are complex and not easy to figure out. The urban heat island effect is a factor, as is deforestation, agricultural practices, and of course, pollution. 

• 2• Is there evidence that human generated carbon dioxide is causing, or will cause, catastrophic global warming? A close reading of scientific papers and reports from the IPCC does not justify undue concern. There is no climate emergency.

• 3• Do we believe that the climate is changing and weather events can be catastrophic? Yes, of course. Climate change and catastrophes have been happening forever and will continue. Canadians should be prepared for natural disasters of all sorts. 

• 4• Are recent changes in the Earth’s climate unprecedented and primarily caused by humans? No, they are statistically inside the norm. If anything, the climate is more benign now than through most of the long history of our planet and mankind is suffering less than at any time previously. See good news for everyone!

We believe that, irrespective of people’s ‘beliefs’ in global warming, Canadians need to discuss policies that will safeguard the environment and benefit our citizens. Taxing fossil fuels as a means to ‘stop the climate changing’ cannot be justified scientifically, economically or socially. CRC-RCC is all about realistic policies.  

• 5• Is carbon dioxide pollution, and is it bad? Not in the least. Carbon dioxide should not be confused with carbon monoxide and soot that are pollution. We breathe carbon dioxide out and it’s plant food. We need to recognize and tackle real pollution. 

• 6• Are the computer models developed by government-funded climate scientists showing ‘global temperatures’ shooting up in the future a sound basis for policy making? No. They have proven to be unreliable and many world-renowned scientists are skeptical of their value.   

• 7• Is the hypothesis of dangerous anthropogenic global warming correct? Climate Realists believe that the answer to this question is less important than answering: What energy and environmental policies are going to benefit Canadians and the rest of the world? 

If one was forced to give a one word answer it would “no.” Discoveries over the last several decades indicate the theory that the climate is changing primarily due to human-generated carbon dioxide is incorrect. Other mechanisms are more significant.  

Which of the above points do you agree or disagree with? How you answer depends on your understanding of science, technology and economics. It should not be a matter of politics or ideology. 

If you base your answers on the stories routinely reported in the popular press it is unlikely you are aware of how climate science is extraordinarily complex, fascinating and how new findings are being published every day. The details are confusing! We advocate that children are taught not to be afraid of the future and the media should report on the details of climate change honestly. 

Politicians need to have a sound grasp of climate science before formulating energy and environment policies that have an adverse effect on the welfare of Canadians.

Climate Realism News:

Many people use the phrase “climate change” to mean “concern about the environment” and few journalists report on actual scientific findings. 

At one time it looked like wind and solar might be the solution, however in Canada they are costly for both taxpayers and the environment.

You do not need to be a climate scientist to understand that our government policies should not be grounded on theories that are far from robust.

The way in which science is presented by the United Nations climate panel differs from what scientists are actually finding.

There is good cause to be anxious about natural disasters. But they will not be prevented by increasing taxes on fuel.

How did we get to a point where many believe that carbon dioxide is a pollutant? It’s a long story, but one that is important to understand. 

Many have seen the movie An Inconvenient Truth. Its argument was based on a graph of past and projected global temperature change, but was it correct?

You will have not seen it reported in the news but a gripping drama has been unfolding over the last twenty years. 

Under the cover of environmentalism there are well-funded groups who are attacking key industries and damaging the wellbeing of Canadians.

Sorry to bring you bad news… but things are pretty good! But unless politicians enact realistic policies life will get worse.

Current policies in Canada increase the tax burden, do nothing for the environment and are false virtue. Canadians need better.