‘Trust but verify’: In response to Dr. Surapaneni – Herald Review

When I read her article in the Aug. 2, 2020 newspaper, the first thing I thought of was that the temperature, in a given day, was the hottest! Well July 6, it was 114 degrees and on July 29 it was 114 degrees. Thats hot folks, and we wonder how we can survive? Oh, by the way the years were 1936 and 1917.

This is a classic example of a person, with high credentials, attempting to scare us. Why? Why do you introduce COVID-19 into a discussion of climate change? I contend she is an Alarmist and trying to scare us even more. One of our presidents said, trust but verify. Well, I did that with the following books.

There are a number of good books that debunk the majority of these Alarmists on climate change like, The Moral Case for Fossil Fuel, by Alex Epstein; The Politically Incorrect Guide (PIG) on Climate Change; Apocalypse Never, by Michael Shellenberger; and False Alarm, by Bjorn Lomberg.

Only one country has asked the question, What will this cost us? New Zealand estimated if we do nothing it will impact our GDP by 3-4%; it will cost us 16-30% of GDP for 20 years to fight this.

I love it when people state, we must reduce our carbon footprint. Do they understand what that means? If you turn off all coal and gas power plants and rely solely on wind and solar, you must cut your electricity use by as much as 66-82%. In 2018, wind generated 37% and solar generated 18% of potential output. This data came from an article in the spring 2020 issue from the American Experience. Think about that when it is 90 degrees or worse yet when it is -20 degrees and at night. Are you really ready for that?

The next Alarmist theory is we must reduce our CO2. Ive asked people what percent of the atmosphere is CO2. They said between 2-5%. According to Wikipedia, the earth atmosphere consists of 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen and .04% CO2. You should then ask the next question, where does CO2 come from? Ninety-eight percent of CO2 comes from water, specifically the oceans. So, if you assume human activities are responsible for this 2%, well we then can only be responsible for .008% of CO2 generation.

I know of approximately 50 climate change or global warming models that are out there and, to date, not one of them models are correct. Some are off as much as 100%. Why is that?

We, humans, are not that powerful. We tried to seed clouds, to no avail, and can only track weather issues. We cant stop a tornado or hurricane, but we can give them names.

Remember the 70s, when we were cooling off and the cure was to reduce our carbon footprint? Now with global warming the cure is to reduce our carbon footprint. Whats the real issue?

Trust but verify.

Joe Maurer

Grand Rapids

Original post:
'Trust but verify': In response to Dr. Surapaneni - Herald Review