Midnight EST on Wednesday is the deadline for commenting on the wildly alarmist draft National Climate Assessment. As I explained earlier this month here, commenting is pretty easy. Registration is simple and the commenting website works well.
As far as I can tell, one need not give their real name or email address when registering. Given the vindictive nature of alarmists, this may be useful.
Comments are being collected by the US Global Change Research Program, which runs the National Climate Assessment. Supposedly all of the comments will be published an answered at some point.
The draft is divided into about 30 chapters and each is separately available to download for commenting.
I recommend picking an interesting chapter then zeroing in on what are called the Key Messages. Each is just a few sentences and most chapters have just 3 to 6 of them.
To comment on a Key Message one needs to use the “text region” button and include the page and line numbers.
Almost all of these Key Messages are based on questionable computer modeling and saying this is a good comment.
Simply put, they are falsely stating alarmist speculation as though it were an established fact, which it is not.
Computer projections are not physical facts and one can simply say this as a quick comment. No elaborate essay is needed.
Here are some examples of alarmist Key Messages:
“Extreme precipitation events are projected to increase in a warming climate and may lead to more severe floods and greater risk of infrastructure failure in some regions.” Chapter 3: Water.
“Increasingly, the energy system is affected by climate change and extreme weather events, threatening more frequent and longer-lasting power outages affecting critical energy infrastructure and creating fuel availability and shortage imbalances, with cascading impacts on other critical sectors, potentially affecting the Nation’s economic and national security.” Chapter 4: Energy.
Other examples of clearly alarmist Key Messages are given in my two previous articles:
Comment now on the draft National Climate Assessment (here)
Wild speculations stated as facts in the draft National Climate Assessment (here)
There are 118 Key Messages like this so finding a few to simply call out as alarmist should be easy. Most of the chapters are about either a sector of the economy or a region.
Sectors include things like water, energy, transportation, etc. The geographical regions of America range from the Caribbean to Alaska and Hawaii, plus the contiguous ones of course. So just pick something that is personally interesting.
You do not have to be an expert or a scientist to comment because the alarmism in these Key Messages is obvious. They are simply projecting catastrophe based on worthless computer models. Point that out in simple terms.
Here is an example of a simple comment on a Key Message, one that I use repeatedly:
“Comment: This entire message falsely states speculative attributions and projections of impacts as established physical facts. These attributions, projections, and risks appear to be based primarily on the use of questionable computer models. That climate change will have negative impacts has yet to be determined and appears increasingly unlikely.“
It is also worth mentioning that the draft NCA4 violates the Information Quality Act requirement that federal agencies ensure and maximize the “quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information disseminated by the agency.” All 13 member agencies of the USGCRP are responsible for IQA compliance.
The draft NCA4 exhibits neither quality, objectivity, utility nor integrity. This needs to be said repeatedly. To begin with, there is neither objectivity nor integrity, as these errors have been pointed out repeatedly during the Obama series of National Assessments, yet they persist.
As a result there is no quality or utility; in fact, this alarmism is worse than useless. It is downright dangerous.
All comments are going to be published, so the more the better. Now is the time to stand up to climate alarmism and be heard. Hopefully, the Trump Administration will listen.
Read more at CFACT
I don’t know who you are, miner49er, but if you were a celebrity, you could change the world.
Here’s my submitted comment #141893
Climate change is a false premise for regulating or taxing carbon dioxide emissions. Political leaders who advocate unwarranted taxes and regulations on fossil fuels will be seen as fools or knaves. Nature converts CO2 to limestone.
Climate change may or may not be occurring, but is NOT caused by human fossil fuels use. Temperature records relied upon by researchers are corrupt for many reasons. They used weak proxies for periods prior to 1850. Actual temperature readings were tampered with. Evidence such as ice cores suffer poor chain-of-custody, and were altered by ambient conditions.
Temperature changes cause changes in ambient CO2; not vice versa. Temperature caused by naturala forces cause changes in CO2. since 95% of CO2 air emissions are emitted by rotting vegetation, of course such en=missions will be higher at higher temperatures.
There is no empirical evidence that fossil fuels use affects climate. Likely and well-documented causes include sunspot cycles, earth/sun orbital changes, cosmic ray effects on clouds and tectonic plate activity. The further point here is that earth naturally recycles all carbon dioxide.
Fossil fuels emit only 3% of total CO2 emissions. 95% comes from rotting vegetation and other sources. All the ambient CO2 in the atmosphere is promptly converted in the oceans to calcite (limestone) and other carbonates, mostly through biological paths. CO2 + CaO => CaCO3 (exothermic). The conversion rate increases with increasing CO2 partial pressure. A dynamic equilibrium-seeking mechanism.
The organisms that convert dissolved CO2 to calcite all have short lifespans. At the most basic level, they include cyanobacteria and sea butterflies. Higher levels include corals, bivalves and other crustaceans. An acre of oysters or mussels can create 100 tons of calcite in a single season.
99.84% of all carbon on earth is already sequestered as sediments in earth’s crust. The lithosphere is a massive hungry carbon sink that converts ambient CO2 to carbonate almost as soon as it is emitted.
The Paris Treaty is now estimated to cost up to to $100 trillion — $13,333 per human being. Nearly two-thirds of humanity’s cumulative savings over history. And will not affect climate at all.
A modern coal power plant emits few air effluents except water vapor and carbon dioxide. Coal remains the lowest cost and most reliable source of electric energy, along with natural gas. Coal has always competed effectively with natural gas.
Coal & gas dominate electric energy generation because they are cheap. And coal remains the cheapest energy source. Illinois and Powder River Basin coal now costs less than 1/3 the equivalent cost of natural gas at their respective sources. Less than $1.00/MMBTU. Coal is more competitive with gas today than it was twenty years ago.
Nuclear & big hydro are in death spirals–both driven by excessive regulation. Wind & solar won’t make it, even supported by subsidies, mandates, and penalties on fossil fuels. When subsidies & mandates end, renewables will die. Investment in all these businesses will be lost, and lead to power shortages.
Renewables happy talk foretells a bubble. Without the CO2-driven global-warming boogeyman, wind and solar power will be relegated to the niches they deserve. So-called renewable energy will cause system failure, the waste of more than $100 trillion in capital, and a financial crisis.
Watch South Australia, Germany and California closely. They are the guinea pigs for the “Energy Policy as Fashion Goods” or “Virtue Signaling” experiment. If everything works out great for them, then we should also decarbonize. If not, we should resume full utilization of fossil fuels, the form of energy that brought us prosperity.
Date Submitted: 01/29/2018 – 5:37
Last Modified: 01/29/2018 – 5:57
Well done. I also posted a comment. I can’t believe they’re still focused on climate change due to man’s contribution to CO2. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Elementary school science taught climate was determined by location. It’s never been CO2.
https://review.globalchange.gov/140681/comment/141894
It seems the key message chapter on the many benefits of a warming world is missing ?
Pretty straight forward really . Suggesting tax payers piss away $trillions on the basis of failed climate models and fear mongering from gold diggers is not happening . Quit wasting our time and find a new con-game .
All this man made Global Warming?Climate Change Malarkey and Poppycock so what ever became of Global Cooling and the New Ice Age we were suppost to been having back in the 1970’s at least according to liberal rags like TIME and NEWSWEEK