Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

McKinley Comments On Climate Slammed

August 4, 2013
The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register

Editor, News-Register:

It amazes me when I read something like Mr. McKinley's letter about "The Cooling World." It shows how little he understands about the subject. It was most unfortunate that the authors of the original articles in Newsweek and the other sources spoke of the cooling of the planet. The better word would have been climate change. You are being a bit misleading to not have acknowledged that the new term is indeed climate change.

Bogus? Really? Like it or not, we have experienced rapid "changing global climate with ominous descriptions of extreme weather events." The ice in Greenland is all but gone and the polar caps are melting away. In fact, a few weeks ago a chunk of the northern ice cap the size of Chicago fell off. It is deteriorating at a far greater rate than anticipated. All that fresh water dumping into the salt-watered oceans is causing havoc on the balance of life in the ocean. The changes in the ocean streams have changed and that is causing a change in the weather patterns. These things are hard on the whole eco-system.

The information of the 70s isn't flawed, it was embryonic. We have learned so much more since then. The whole scientific process is one of changing and learning.

Did we throw out all of Newton's work when Einstein came along and pushed it forward? No, and we should not point to things of the past and ignore the facts of the present.

Mr. McKinley is apparently using the list that was generated in 1997 to come up with the "tens of thousands of scientists" he quotes in his letter. That list of scientists only has 1 percent of individuals who have a background in climatology. A closer check and you find that most of the signatories, when Google searched, show that they have no information other than they signed the petition. The origin of this paper was by Art Robinson of the "The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine." One of the major backers of the "study" was Exxon-backed George C. Marshall Institute. It is no wonder that this list would be supportive of denying climate change.

If Mr. McKinley has any other names that agree with his flawed opinion, please share that with your constituency.

It is just bad business if by complying with efforts to clean up the air that we breathe, we would hurt business. It simply does not. No power company is going to shut down a money making plant to avoid making changes to clean up the air. If they do, the board of directors should be fired. Time after time, after the creation of the EPA during the Nixon administration, companies have had to comply with changes. I remember when Union Carbide was expelling unused or residual chemicals into the air in the Kanawha County, W.Va., area where I was raised. I had to take out my contact lenses when I entered the valley. It felt like sand in my eyes. My car was spotted with ash when I would get up in the morning and pock marked from the acid rain. Carbide ranted at Washington but finally complied. The precipitators were about $1 million in 1970s money and the burden was on the company. Keep in mind, at that time you could pass on all expenses to your customers so there was really no cost to the company, just up-front money. Well in a few years another article stated that within that time frame, Carbide had recovered enough from the precipitators to more than pay for the cost. Everything else was profit.

The president's EPA policies are misrepresented as "anti-coal" policies. They should be called "Pro-breath" policies.

Mr. McKinley's article/email is like reading all those emails we all get stating those horrendous things. You can always tell it is full of lies and innuendo by the way they are written. You see things like, "It's widely acknowledged" or, "Sources say" or, "I have been told that" and so on. There is not one thing to back up the congressman's comments except from organizations backed and supported by the energy industry. That makes it a conflict of interest.

One could go on and dissect the false statement and innuendos from his letter but why? If you are interested check out the comments yourself. Mr. McKinley is counting on you not to check out his statements. That is why he can just throw out anything he wants and get away with it.

Shame on you; you are supposed to be working for us Mr. McKinley, not the energy companies. It is past time for you to be voted out of Congress and replaced by someone that can represent us

Thomas M. Stalnaker

Glen Dale

 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: