Since 2007, I have read thousands of articles on climate change and alternative energy sources. Today, I am skeptical that man-made pollution has replaced natural variation as the cause of climate change.
There are reportedly 31,478 American scientists who dispute the alarmist pronouncements of the United Nation’s International Panel on Climate Change report. For example, the peer-reviewed Climate Change Reconsidered II report, the Global Warming Petition Project and the science-based opinions of Fred Singer of the University of Virginia, Syun-Ichi Akasofu of University of Alaska Fairbanks, William Gray of Colorado State University, Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and Alfred Sloan of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, among many others.
Recent testimony before Congress highlighted differences in opinion on the topic. In February, ecologist and Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore told a Senate panel, “There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years.”
Perhaps the question we should ask climate change advocates is what will be the true cost for Washingtonians to convert 100 percent to reliable and sustainable forms of clean energy. I believe those numbers would be alarming.