Climate Change ‘Police’ a Problem

climate change

Climate change is far from a settled scientific debate, and with increasing political influence finding itself into the discussion, scientists are being pressured to tow the line on the issue. One of the differences between “hard” science and other less definite scientific pursuits is the accuracy with which predictions can be made. A closer look at the situation reveals that climate change “police” routinely reject conflicting papers, harass opposing colleagues and have become a real problem for scientific objectivity.

Recently the Journal of Environmental Research Letters rejected articles which highlighted inconsistencies in climate temperature predictions. The reasons for refusing to publish the dissenting views began with an assertion that the papers did not meet the journal’s requirement and failed to: “significantly advance knowledge of the field”.

Resubmitted as a shorter perspective piece it was again rejected, this time on the basis that it contained errors. Professor Richard Tol from the University of Sussex asserts that the journal is known to make decisions inspired by the political climate. Tol went on to say that they are: “not the scientific journal that they claim to be.”

Regardless of the argument, the reality is that legislation influenced by scientific conjecture, when dealing with global agendas are only as good as the world is willing to make them. China has refused to play ball on the issue, and even with an economy roughly half the size of that in the United States, emits close to twice the CO2 as the U.S. or Europe.

The same climate change police whose voices scream about problems and dangers, say virtually nothing when jobs are outsourced overseas. Each year global emissions increase, elevated largely by growing economies such as China and India. While countries such as this continue to use more pollutant energy sources such as coal, the expansion of manufacturing demands a workforce. The cause and effect of which is migration into cities, which raises the use of electricity and automotive fuel.

climate changeTo put it bluntly, without China’s and other rapidly growing economic countries involvement, regardless of what scientist think or say, all efforts are futile. The debate and whoever is right are of no consequence as long as the planet’s biggest polluters continue unabated. Any “green” legislation, which always has a dollar sign attached, will be wasting hard earn money on a losing bet.

The situation can be likened to California’s strict emission standards. Californians pay out the nose for their smog checks, emission standards and “go green” initiatives. The problem is that the rest of the country has largely not followed in their footsteps, resulting in very little net gain on emissions reduction countrywide. The world shares the same air, and limiting a pollutant in just a handful of states is the same as a handful of countries; it does not work. Everyone will breathe China’s smog.

For all the back and forth about man-made climate change in the scientific community, implementing effective changes, no matter who is right, can only work if the world cooperates. Attempts to silent dissent by the climate change police might be working in scientific journals and peer review articles, but the real problems are much larger. To make a dent in the arguments supposed problem, the climate control police need to get a much bigger stick when dealing with the likes of China.

Opinion by John Benjamin Wilson

Sources:
The Telegraph
Physics World
Fox News
Delhi Daily News
The Independent
Daily Caller

One Response to "Climate Change ‘Police’ a Problem"

  1. John Amaruso   May 22, 2014 at 9:44 pm

    This article is contradictory and is filled with ‘conjecture’ of its own.

    For one, the politics of climate change may not be settled, but the science behind the general idea of climate change, even with its nuances and slight difference in opinion, is more than settled.

    97% of the world’s scientists agree that climate change IS happening, and that man made pollutants do contribute to its rapidly increasing pace, no matter what a bunch of politically motivated lawmakers want to say or believe.

    Now- you say climate change ‘police’ are causing a problem, yet argue that other countries(China) aren’t doing anything to solve the problem. So wouldnt the solution be China needs climate ‘police’? You are arguing for something your article has set out to oppose.

    Nonetheless, Isn’t that right there enough reason for the world, whether or not China or whoever wants to sign on, to continue strengthening the mission to slow down or prevent further climate erosion and damage?

    You bring up the incident of the journal rejecting a ‘dissenting’ paper. Ever think a scientific journal would reject a paper that says the sun revolves around the earth? The same erroneous claims are being made by a handful of scientists (mostly bought scientists) at the tail of business and special interests.

    Sure, its painful, having to take responsibility for our actions. But losing your home to a wildfire or earthquake or rising ocean levels or unprecedented hurricanes is pretty painful too.

    The facts are in, the politics are not, and this article rejects both and claims authority over a continually tossed around falsehood.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.