Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

FELDSTED -- That is not science; that is fudging valid temperature data to meet a political objective


How dare you (Greta Thunberg), with your lack of experience, lecture world leaders on climate change? Many of those world leaders are elected and answer to the people who elected them, not to you, not to the United Nations, or the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).      

Many of us are appalled that the IPCC would choose to frighten school children with implausible predictions of pending catastrophe resulting from climate change.

We are disgusted with the lack of critical analysis and poor judgement of schools and teachers -- who have chosen to regurgitate IPCC propaganda rather than using climate change as an opportunity to create real dialogue and debate on what the causes of climate change are -- and how can we best respond to minimize and offset the results of climate change on widely dispersed populations.   

The main proponents of climate change alarmism, Dr. Andrew Weaver (Canada) and Dr. Michael Mann (USA) have taken Dr. Tim Ball (Canada) to court for slander because he dared to contradict and question their findings. After years in court, both actions for slander were dismissed and in the latest case Dr. Mann, inventor of the infamous hockey stick warming chart was ordered to pay Dr. Ball’s entire legal expenses.

Both top IPCC scientists are found to be of questionable character and ethics.


Canada’s environmental agency neglected to include surface temperature readings from 1850 to 1949 in their calculations because they did not fit the IPCC model outcome. That is not science; that is fudging valid temperature data to meet a political objective.  

Over 500 eminent climate scientists have written to the IPCC pointing out that there is no “climate emergency”. The “emergency” has been created through unethical manipulation of computer models and temperature data.

Controlling climate is more than simply slowing the rate of global warming. If it was possible, we could control the rate of arctic ice melt, create rain in deserts, soak forests to reduce wildfires, increase the growing season in northern and southern hemispheres and modify the torrid heat of the tropics. The fly in the ointment would be deciding which is the most important change to make.

The IPCC is fixated on an unproven theory that man-made carbon emissions are the sole contributor to warming of the earth and that we must reduce carbon emissions to save the planet ... that is suspect and highly improbable.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide promotes plant growth while reducing carbon dioxide levels restricts plant growth. Without robust plant growth, mankind will die.

The IPCC is promoting a simplistic solution to a highly complex natural phenomena we do not understand. We have records of the effects of climate change for tens of thousands of years, but little knowledge of what drives the changes.  
   
Following the unproven theories is not a rational way forward.

Only 500 years ago, the world was flat, and the sun revolved around the earth.

350 years ago, we had no knowledge of gravity.

150 years ago, electricity, computers and radio had not been invented.

100 years ago, we did not have television.

50 years ago, we had no cell phones.

Smartphones, tablets and GPS devices have been around for less than 30 years.

Scientific theories require constant examination to support or refute their validity. The IPCC has refused to permit examination of its theories, attacking anyone who questions its conclusions.

Our Environment Minister, Catherine McKenna,
dismisses critics of global warming prediction out of hand, sneering at ‘climate deniers’.

Demanding that the IPCC provide evidence of how its theories were developed, and examine all the causes of climate change, is not denying climate change. We recognize our climate continues to change but reject the IPCC version of the cause.

The IPCC is politically, not scientifically driven.


The Way See It ~~ John Feldsted
Political Commentator, Consultant & Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It seems the call for blood donors is being responded to, however ... “This effort is a marathon, not a sprint” says Canadian Blood Services

A week and a half ago I wrote the commentary ... “ While the national inventory is currently strong, an increase in blood donor cancellations is a warning sign of potential challenges to maintaining a health inventory of blood ” It was written as a result of talk about a potential blood shortage that would occur if people stopped donating due to the COVID-19 virus. It seems the call to Canadians was responded to, however, as I was told this afternoon ... “ T his effort is a marathon, not a sprint ”. As it now stands now, donors are able to attend clinics which are held in Vancouver (2), Victoria, Surrey, and in Kelowna, so I asked if there any plans to re-establish traveling clinics to others communities - for example in Kamloops, Prince George, Prince Rupert, Revelstoke or Cranbrook, and perhaps further north at perhaps Ft. St. John? According to Communications Lead Regional Public Affairs Specialist Marcelo Dominguez, Canadian Blood Services is still on

FEDLSTED -- Rules will have to relax-- the question is how and when

The media has created a fervour over the mathematical models that allegedly help governments predict the future of Coronavirus infections in the general population. Mathematical modelling has limited use and value. We need to understand is that the data available on Coronavirus (COVID-19) infections in Canada is far too small for statistical reliability. The data available for the whole world is useless due to variables in how nations responded to Coronavirus infections. There is no commonality in steps taken to combat virus spread and no similarity in the age demographics of world nations, so the numbers you see on the daily tracking of world infections are not useful in developing a model of infection rates that can be relied on. Mathematical models of the future spread of Coronavirus are better than nothing, but not a whole lot better.  Mathematical models must include assumptions on virus spreads, and various factors involved. As they are used in projections, a small erro

When necessary – and only when necessary – the Family Maintenance Enforcement Program can attach (garnish) wages

Alan Forseth ~~ Kamloops, BC ~~ May 15th Earlier this week (Monday May 13 th ) the BC government announced it would be establishing a new Crown agency to oversee the Family Maintenance Enforcement Program (FMEP).   They indicated that on or before the end of October, the provision of family maintenance services would transition from a contracted service provider, to the newly created Crown agency. Apparently, this was to ensure that family maintenance enforcement services for vulnerable British Columbians continue uninterrupted. Seeing this story, reminded me of a woman ( we’ll call her Mary Brown ) who had email me some time b ack about this very thing, and questions she had about how maintenance enforcement was imposed and enforced. She said to me, “ I’m just curious if you can get any statistics of the homeless men and woman, that have children, that they are paying family maintenance in support of their children”.  “I am not about to sugg

Labels

Show more