«

»

Print this Post

Time to stop this climate hysteria

October 2019

Regarding letter writer Carol Bell’s letter (Climate crisis must be faced, 3 October, Barrie Advance): How smoggy is the sky in her world? This climate hysteria has to stop. Look, we all want a clean environment with smog-free air, clean water sources and our trash properly and safely disposed of, but all this talk of an impending apocalypse is irresponsible and putting undue stress and fear in our children.

Bottom line, what comes out of the smokestacks of factories and the tailpipes of cars is a lot cleaner than it’s ever been and getting better through better improved technology that has resulted in better emissions controls, improved fuel efficiency, use of cleaner energy sources like natural gas and nuclear and just a greater consciousness about our impact on the environment.

Toronto used to routinely have numerous smog days each summer, but these have been pretty much eliminated. I grew up in Burlington and remember back in the 1980s looking across Burlington Bay and seeing the smog hanging over Hamilton. That brown haze is now gone.

Burlington Bay/Hamilton Harbour also used to be a very polluted body of water and is now much cleaner.

My point is we are already doing a good job of cleaning up the environment, all without an economy-killing carbon tax. Can we do better? Absolutely and with continuing advances in technology, we will get even better.

I’m sure some day electric cars will be able to travel the same distances on a single charge as a gas-powered car, be re-chargeable in the time it takes to pump gas and be affordable to most families, but we’re not there yet.

Let’s stop terrorizing our kids with an impending apocalypse that will likely never come. How do I know? I remember discussing global warming in my high school geography classes; in the mid-1980s. Al Gore predicted in 2006 that the polar ice caps would have completely melted by 2014 at the latest. They are still here in 2019.

How many more times are the climate alarmists going to keep crying wolf?

Now there have been reports of some recession in the polar ice caps but remember, there have been two ice ages in Earth’s history. Twice the polar glaciers advanced and retreated; both long before humans walked the earth and certainly before the industrial age when we started burning fossil fuels. Are we just in midst of natural a recession?

Right now, Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg is on a world tour, paid for by her activist handlers, to lecture the rest of us on how we have destroyed her future and falsely perpetuate the doomsday hysteria. While I do admire her environmental enthusiasm and social awareness, the science is NOT settled; the climate does change, but human influence is only a small part of it.

We are NOT in a climate emergency and we will all be fine in 12 years.

Unfortunately, she doesn’t realize that she is being used and manipulated by environmental activists who only care about their own agenda and will use her with little care for her emotional well being, discarding her when they are done.

My advice to her is after her current tour, I think she should go back home, go back to school and spend time with her family and friends. The world WILL be fine.

About the author

Bruce Forsyth

Bruce Forsyth served in the Royal Canadian Navy Reserve for 13 years (1987-2000). He served with units in Toronto, Hamilton & Windsor and worked or trained at CFB Esquimalt, CFB Halifax, CFB Petawawa, CFB Kingston, CFB Toronto, Camp Borden, The Burwash Training Area and LFCA Training Centre Meaford.

Permanent link to this article: https://militarybruce.com/time-to-stop-this-climate-hysteria/

5 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. J Austin

    You might benefit by moving your attention from the personalities involved to a review of the science behind the ‘hysteria’. The scientific results are all based on physical measurements of quantities such as the concentration of different gases in the atmosphere. Global measurements of temperature, sea level and ice coverage are all done from specialized satellites which use sensors that are much more sophisticated than the ones produced forty years ago by the lowest bidder for Canadian Patrol Frigate program. This is a vast trove of information that has led to an almost unanimous position taken by reputable scientists.

    The only ‘climate emergency’ is inaction by politicians who are largely financed by producers of carbon-based energy. They are only important because some of the remedial actions have long lead times and should be started now. If you have spent any time at sea, you will know that inertia is a factor in control of a warship. Similar effects affecting our economies and industrial base are in play right now. A significant amount of sea-level rise is all ready in progress and would not stop if aliens blasted the oil refineries and coal mines out of existence tomorrow. That isn’t going to happen and places like Nova Scotia are going to get a bit smaller by 2050.

    Change is coming in the form of technological disruption. We all know that AI will replace a lot of drudge work and that robots will take over assembly. On the whole our society will become more affluent because of it. I wonder if you are aware of the development of thermonuclear fusion as a disruptive force in the near-term. The ITER project (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) is within about five years of operation. There are many additional fusion research projects and most show at least some promise. Most noteworthy is the fact that private investors are now funding fusion research. Production fusion reactors will be built in about ten years and will be composed of the most successful technologies from many of the research projects. Some of the good ideas are being generated by Artificial Intelligence. Electricity generated using fusion will be cleaner, safer and more reliable than any current technology and will drive world financial markets away from products that can not compete with fusion. Those products include carbon-based fuels that currently require multiple billions of dollars for refining, not to mention facilities to extract crude oil from oil and tar shales. New refineries and extraction plants cost billions of dollars and require decades of operation to repay investments of capital.

    Why would anyone who respects their fiduciary duty to investors recommend investments (pipelines, upgraders and refineries) that will be bankrupt halfway to full amortization? (Donald Trump is irrelevant because he won’t live that long). I see people objecting to the use of jet planes for travel as short-sighted. Let Justin Trudeau put a few more hours on two of the oldest airliners operating in Canada, it isn’t that big a deal. The 737-200 and 300 use engines (JT8D) that emit visible smoke trails. Wear them out and recycle the metals when they reach the end of their service lives. New trains, automobiles and even airliners will operate more efficiently, travelling closer together at higher speeds with greater safety.

    Hydrogen manufactured using off-peak fusion and unmarketable solar and wind power will become the new portable fuel source. Electricity storage is all ready more efficient and cost-effective than ever before. Electric vehicles don’t require ignition systems, exhaust systems and deliver power on-demand to drive wheels. Built with fewer moving parts, electric vehicles are more reliable and less expensive to repair on a fleet-wide basis. Would you purchase a new car or truck manufactured using designs from the 1950’s? No airbags, crush zones, padded interiors, collapsible steering wheels, modern rubber compounds or high-tech frills for the ‘real man’, right?

    1. Bruce Forsyth

      Hi John,

      Thanks for stopping by and for your opinion. Although I’m not a scientist, I do read a lot and pay attention to things. As I mention in the article, I remember discussing global warming in high school in the 1980s. This is not a new issue and with the constant scolding that we only have XX number of years until doom is getting to be a bit of a “boy who cried wolf” type of issue. Yes, we do need to be good stewards of the planet, and we are doing a better job than web used to, but the hysteria of a “climate emergency” is getting a little boring. The science is not settled, despite what some may insist. More precisely stated, while science may not lie, like with DNA for example, how scientists interpret the results can vary in other instances. This is why you can have forensic analysts come to two separate conclusion with the same evidence.

      I do know about hydrogen energy, which is something that we should pursue as an alternative, but we will still be using fossil-fuels for the foreseeable future. As for pipelines, they have been safely transporting petroleum and natural gas for years. Are pipelines perfect? No, but they are a better alternative to rail and transport trucks.

      Cheers,

      Bruce

  2. J Austin

    Check your claimed Al Gore quote.

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ice-caps-melt-gore-2014/

    I don’t know who would fall for the disappearance of both polar ice caps. Antarctica is a giant rock. It has mountains that would be glaciers almost anywhere.

  3. Colin Robinson

    Dear Mr Bruce,
    First, thankyou for your long and hard work on the history of the Canadian armed forces. I’ve just been re-reading the discussion over the admirals censured for opposition to unification; your article on Rear Admiral Landymore is among the reachable summaries of that regrettable period.

    Secondly, however, I have to respectfully disagree over the likely effects of climate change in the next century.

    The question is no longer whether humans have caused major climate change or not; the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is no longer just trying to answer this question, rather trying to estimate what effects climate change as a whole will have.

    On the polar ice caps, for example, I would cite the case of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which is much diminished, or the disappearing glaciers in my country; the Fox, for example.

    The climate change modelling has advanced in the last few years, but even now with CMIP 6.5, the estimated effects by 2100, for example, are dire. Canada, and also my own country New Zealand, will in some ways be fine; crop use will move north, and the Northwest Passage will open, as it already doing so. But much of the rest of the world is predicted to dry up, and literally in some cases become desert.

    Not sure if you are interested, but an updated 2100 assessment is linked below my signature.

    Kind regards
    Dr Colin Robinson
    Nairobi

    https://johnmenadue.com/gaia-vince-the-heat-is-on-over-the-climate-crisis-only-radical-measures-will-work-the-guardian/

    1. Bruce Forsyth

      Hi Colin,

      Thanks for stopping by and for your opinion. Although I’m not a scientist, I do read a lot and pay attention to things. As I mention in the article, I remember discussing global warming in high school in the 1980s. This is not a new issue and with the constant scolding that we only have XX number of years until doom is getting to be a bit of a “boy who cried wolf” type of issue. Yes, we do need to be good stewards of the planet, and we are doing a better job than web used to, but the hysteria of a “climate emergency” is getting a little boring. The science is not settled, despite what some may insist. More precisely stated, while science may not lie, like with DNA for example, how scientists interpret the results can vary in other instances. This is why you can have forensic analysts come to two separate conclusion with the same evidence.

      Cheers,

      Bruce

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>