29 July (WMI Central) – A recent press conference with the Union of Concerned Scientists and officials from the Forest Service was such a scripted mess of gobbledygook that I was stunned into disbelief over the statements being made by these so-called experts.
by Karen Warnick
Now that’s not to say that some of what they said made no sense, or that some of these people are not experts, but it was so blatantly obvious where this discussion was going that I had to look up the Union of Concerned Scientists.
They are a nonprofit advocacy group of environmentalists. In their own words: “The Union of Concerned Scientists puts rigorous, independent science to work to solve our planet’s most pressing problems. Joining with citizens across the country, we combine technical analysis and effective advocacy to create innovative, practical solutions for a healthy, safe and sustainable future.”
Here’s some of what I found that others say about them:
• The UCS is regularly criticized by conservative and right-wing groups for being left-wing and liberal. David Martosko of ActivistCash.com asserts that the organization harbors a pro-regulation and anti-business agenda.
• The UCS is also often criticized by skeptics of global warming. In 2007, the conservative think tank Capital Research Center accused the UCS of waging a “jihad against climate skeptics.”
• In 1997, UCS organized a petition that warned of “global warming” and advocated U.S. ratification of the Kyoto treaty. It was signed by 1,600 scientists, and so UCS declared that “the scientific community has reached a consensus.” But when a counter-petition that questioned this so-called “consensus” was signed by more than 17,000 other scientists, UCS declared it a “deliberate attempt to deceive the scientific community with misinformation.”
• On Oct. 30, 2006, the Union issued a press release claiming that high-ranking members of the U.S. Department of the Interior, including Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Julie MacDonald, systematically tampered with scientific data in an effort to undermine the protection of endangered species and the Endangered Species Act.
Regardless of the groups’ past actions, the idea that you can blame large fires on “global warming,” or climate change as they now like to call it, and not anything else is ridiculous.
Sure, higher temperatures and drought have an effect on causing fires, but there are other factors to consider including, but not limited to, past Forest Service policy, the waste and fraud within the Service and government, the lack of working with local governments (with some exceptions), and the biggest kept secret of all; geo-engineering.
The military and government have admitted to trying to control the climate and there is plenty of evidence out there that they are indeed doing so by spraying chemicals into the atmosphere.
One of those chemicals is aluminum particles that have a severe drying effect. Tests of soil and water throughout the country have shown higher than normal amounts of the particles to the tune of thousands of times higher. Several scientists and experts claim that these particles are drying out the forest.
Now suppose that this wasn’t happening. Would our fires be as severe as they are? Would they be as numerous as they are, even with the effects of drought and warmer temperatures?
One of the experts at the conference stated that studies show that our trees have been affected by drought and temperatures and fires in the past. One thing is certain; we live in an ever-changing, ever-evolving ecosystem that adjusts itself to outside stimuli.
How can we actually prove that man is solely responsible in only one way; burning fossil fuels? Anytime any group points its fingers in only one direction, they become suspect of having motives that aren’t in everyone’s best interests.
Here’s another thing that’s certain; this press conference had a specific agenda and until we have a many-sided discussion of many kinds of “experts,” we won’t get any factual, accurate answers.
We will continue making judgments on scanty facts and continue to find out years later that we were wrong.
How much more damage will we do to this planet because of our specific interests, in our quest for more money, in our refusing to hear other opinions, in suppression of the truth, and in our own ignorance?