“There is very little substance to evaluate [in Robert Bradley’s piece]. Yes, one can find examples of when individual scientists or politicians have exaggerated the impacts of climate change. But to present those examples as if they are mainstream views, when they are not, is very misleading.”

 – Kyle Armour, Assistant Professor, University of Washington

“I also must ask my critics who profess to dislike scientific exaggeration. Where are you when the big names exaggerate to spew climate alarmism? Where is the real-time rebuttal to Al Gore, John Holdren, Paul Ehrlich, Joe Romm, Rajendra Pachauri, and many others?” (below)

I recently ran across a detailed rebuttal of an essay I wrote back in 2016 at Forbes.com, “Climate Exaggeration is Backfiring,” which received approximately 35,000 views. “Analysis of ‘Climate Exaggeration is Backfiring‘” at the website Climate Feedback was published right after my Forbes piece.…

“It’s flat-earthers like Obama who refuse to acknowledge the problematic nature of contradictory data. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who cite a recent Alaskan heat wave — a freak event in one place at one time — as presumptive evidence of planetary climate change. It’s flat-earthers like Obama who cite perennial phenomena such as droughts as cosmic retribution for environmental sinfulness.”

– Charles Krauthammer, “Obama’s Global-Warming Folly.” Washington Post, July 4, 2013.

The late Charles Krauthammer was a wise voice in a public policy hothouse. His views on Obama-era climate-change policy ring true today–and demonstrate prescience.

After providing key quotations from Krauthammer, I revisit James Taylor’s rebuttal to the critical backlash generated by the Washington Post piece.

————-

“The economy stagnates. Syria burns. Scandals lap at his feet.…

“Dense mineral energies can be considered more environmentally benign than dilute, intermittent renewables. Peter Huber has written that ‘the greenest fuels are the ones that contain the most energy per pound of material that must be mined, trucked, pumped, piped, and burnt.’ He notes that ‘extracting comparable amounts of energy from the surface would entail truly monstrous environmental disruption’.”

Letters-to-the-editor are an effective way to communicate ideas. They are brief and to the point, appealing to the shortened attention spans that most readers have experienced.

Letter writing can be the best return on a policy writer’s investment. The King of the practice is Donald Boudreaux, Professor of Economics at George Mason University (see his many titles and affiliations here).

Through the years, I have published several letters in the Wall Street Journal.…

“If we can’t even use seismic to ‘see’ the vast majority of our underground prospects and resources, we cannot possibly estimate what is actually there. The one thing we can say is: Our current estimates of U.S. oil and gas resources are wrong, and are almost certainly much too low.”

“Producing ANWR’s oil riches represents hundreds of billions in state and federal royalties and corporate income taxes, over the life of the fields, plus billions more in lease sale revenues, plus thousands of direct and indirect jobs, in addition to numerous jobs created when all this money is reinvested in the USA.”

Paul Driessen is a indefatigable intellectual warrior for energy and climate realism. Propelled by a distain for crony  environmentalism that promotes global poverty, he has produced weekly opinion-page editorials and written a full-scale book challenging climate alarmism and unmasking energy fantasies.…