Question 13. Are there Political Influences Associated with Climate Change?[Quorvita]

A. Is There a Political Connection to Climate Change?

Politics affects everything, and politicians are notorious for the microphone. A United Nations study reported that newspaper articles on climate change went up 900 percent from 1988 to 2006. Almost all declared some negative consequence. The Wall Street Journal™ published about 800 percent more in 2019, than they did in 2000 because of the continued public interest.  There is no question that politics play a role in the climate change debate.

B. Why would Climate Change be Political?

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) was formed to fight global pollution, not to determine global warming or cooling. They directed their reports to governments and policy makers so that they could promote their goals in fixing any perceived “climate change” problem. The IPCC drafted documents on how to write reports to be more persuasive, requested authors to state opinions as facts, and to use emotions with climate consequences. They were also encouraged to undergo media training. Promoting a cause, writing with more emotion, and undergoing media training are hallmarks that are associated with politics rather than science.

C. What is the Definition of Pollution?

The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) defines a pollutant as a substance with toxic properties that is released into the environment.  CO2 is necessary for all plant life, just as much as air, water and sunshine.  Therefore in order to classify CO2 as a pollutant, the IPCC had to define pollution to include temperature and to include only CO2 molecules owned or controlled by man, i.e., fossil fuels.  The vast majority of CO2 (98.5%) comes from natural sources.  CO2 molecules from the ocean are the same molecules as those that come from fossil fuels.  Both must follow the same physical and scientific laws.  Human ownership or control has never defined a toxic substance. And temperature is a measurement and not a pollutant.  This definition relates more with politics than with science. 

D. Are there any Impediments to Climate Change Validation?

Most scientific publications disclose the equations and scientific principles that support the research presented. In the 9000 pages of IPCC reports, the scientific basis and equations for the underlying greenhouse effect were not presented. This makes verifying the information very difficult and requires reverse engineering techniques. Most scientific publications are scrutinized by the publisher with expert reviewers. However, the IPCC reports were submitted directly to governments for review. This procedure indicates that the IPCC reports did not follow the rigors associated with scientific publications.

E. What is the Evidence of Political Influences?

he 2016 Paris Agreement, which deals with greenhouse-gas-emissions, requires payments by wealthy nations. Even though the US is not the highest CO2 emitter, it does have to pay the highest amount.  China, who is the highest CO2 emitter, does not have to reduce emissions or pay anything until 2030. And India, the 4th largest CO2 emitter, must receive aid before having to reach their target goals.  This illustrates that the relationship between which country pays, the amount they each pay, and which receive money has very little to do with CO2 emissions. It is more about political wealth redistribution.  The Green New Deal, being proposed in the United States, has an estimated cost of $5.1 to $9.3 trillion dollars per year.  To put this in perspective, the entire United States spending for 2019 was $4.45 trillion.  The IPCC predicted that if all CO2 emissions from fossil fuels ended today, it would take 40 years to see an effect—assuming that the greenhouse effect actually functions as proposed.  These are political issues, not science issues. 

ANSWER TO QUESTION 13. [Quorvita]

The IPCC directs its reports to governments and policy makers.  It publishes guidelines on how to be more persuasive and to emphasize emotional climate consequences.  They classify pollutants as man-made only and ignore the very same molecules when they are made by nature.  The Paris Agreement set forth criteria for wealth distribution unrelated to reducing CO2 or climate change.  The answer is yes – a political agenda is a significant element behind climate change.