Philip Leith: Climate Scientists Clearly Don’t Believe Their Own Tales of Doom

To be referred to as a scientist suggests that someone has studied science, passed exams relevant to their subject and continued to work, exploring that particular field. Most people would consider a scientist as an intelligent human being.

Climate scientists are constantly warning us that if the global level of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions is not cut the world will suffer badly.

We will experience extreme heat leading to intense heatwaves, droughts and wildfires.

There will be more intense, even supercharged storms with the inevitable flooding and wind damage.

Low lying regions will be submerged as the ice caps melt.

I recently travelled to Las Vegas in Nevada. Outside temperatures were 42 degrees Celsius in the shade. There was no cool breeze outside, just a hot wind akin to being in front of a giant hairdryer. Inside, particularly in the cavernous casinos, it was cool and comfortable. Any transport I used had air conditioning.

Outside the city there were solar panels and wind turbines. There was also one installation where fields of mirrors focus sunlight on receivers located on centralised solar power towers. The receivers generate steam to drive adapted steam turbines. It sounds like an amazing idea but the one I passed is apparently slated for closure. Perhaps that is because the concentrated energy beam is a lethal death ray for any birds!

The roads were almost constantly full. A few Teslas but mainly petrol or diesel powered cars and trucks.

The USA relies on hydrocarbons for over 80% of its energy.

A few years ago I was in China and witnessed a similar scenario.

India isn’t there yet but will be, so perhaps will the African nations one day.

I am not a scientist but the evidence I can see suggests that global emissions are on the increase.

We have British based climate scientists that are constantly badgering about Britain’s energy use and how we have to reduce our emissions.

Britain accounts for around 1% of global emissions.

I can’t see the rationale that if Britain reduces its emissions (and impoverishes itself by doing so) the rest of the world will follow, assuming that would halt climate change.

Because the rest of the world is evidently increasing their use of hydrocarbons, if British based climate scientists genuinely believe that we are heading for disaster they should be screaming from the rooftops about what we need to do to protect our country and our people.

There should be a plethora of scientists on TV and writing columns in newspapers calling for things like flood defences and reservoirs to divert and save the massive amounts of rainwater expected for when we need it. Desalination plants to cope with prolonged summer droughts and provide a means to put out wildfires. Giant greenhouses where temperatures can be regulated (and carbon dioxide can be fed to the crops) to protect our food supply. Switching to animal breeds that can cope with extremes and providing shelter for the cattle, again to protect our food supply. Building regulations that take into account not only the need for retaining heat in winter, which they already do, but getting rid of heat in summer.

But none of them say any of this, all we hear is the need for wind turbines, solar panels, electric cars. Everything that has a government subsidy or is predominantly made in China. One has to wonder where the money comes from to pay these scientists.

Philip Leith is a retired Professor of Law at Queen's University Belfast and an author specialising in law, technology, artificial intelligence and intellectual property. This article was sourced HERE