Liberal government is accused of investigating climate change deniers
Liberal government is accused of investigating climate change deniers. If you have a different opinion on climate change the government is deciding what is real and what is not.
The media has reported that billboards from the Friends of Science Society and a few others have come under fire for spreading fake global warming news, the punishment for that is ? Well we will never know since the government has stopped investigating the matter.
Living in a free society one would expect some diversity of opinion such as from nonprofit organizations from different sides of the political spectrum. But that is not the case with the Trudeau government, that has become obsessed with climate change. The Canadian government has taken it upon itself to agree on our behalf for the need for draconian limits on carbon emissions nationwide. The proposals varied from taxes on a carbon “cap and trade” system, but the assumptions on which they were all basing them were the same — and they seem somewhat premature. No one seems too concerned with the costs that a blanket limit on emissions in Canade could inflict on millions of desperate people trying to pull themselves out of poverty.
The main assumption was that most of the warming has been caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide. But scientists have not yet reached a consensus on that. And according to Professor Alvaro Vargas the average temperature has risen a bit less than 1 degree Celsius in the last 100 years. While greenhouse gases have risen substantially since the 1950s, half of the warming took place in the early half of the 20th century — according to professor Phil Jones of the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, in a study titled “Global Temperature Record.”
The second assumption is that all CO2 is poison. Actually, about 40
percent of it is reabsorbed by plants and trees, as a paper by Stephen
Pacala in the journal Science has shown. The statistics on carbon emissions
usually disregard the percentage that is reabsorbed.
The third assumption is that the climate-change models used to predict
global warming are consistent. Actually, as a recent pamphlet by the
National Center for Policy Analysis demonstrates with the use of clear
graphics, those predictions have varied widely in recent years.
Finally, everyone seemed to assume that government imposition works
better than voluntary action. They kept citing the case of the European
Union, where a cap and trade system establishes a general limit on carbon
emissions and allows companies to exchange carbon “rights.” However, in the
last 10 years the rate of growth of carbon emissions has been much lower in
the United States, where there is no federal limit, than in Europe. There
was even a reduction of 1.3 percent in carbon emissions in the United
States last year.