A new book by attorney and author C. Paul Smith makes a case that may seem shocking – “The Climate Change Hoax Argument” takes an unblinking look at the research behind the increasingly accepted belief that the world is getting too hot, largely as the result of human-caused CO2 emissions that are causing seas to rise and causing more extreme weather events to occur, including tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, floods, and wildfires.
Smith’s deep dive into the research behind climate change, however, provides a much different perspective. His book does not oppose solar or wind energy. Neither does it argue against improving gas mileage in cars, decreased reliance on fossil fuels, or the search and advancement of alternative energy sources that could entirely replace fossil fuels at some point in the future.
But the dire state of emergency being presented by many experts and governing bodies maintaining that humans are causing climate change is not supported by science, Smith says. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) established by the U.N. in 1988 to address climate change, is a government-funded body. Smith says the IPCC was formed “to build the case for humans as the cause of global warning;” however, much research from non-government funded research, such as Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming—The NIPCC Report on Scientific Consensus (2016), by Craig D. Idso, Robert B. Carter, and S. Fred Singer shows the opposite.
Smith notes that the 75-page EPA report Climate Change Indicators in the United States (April 2010) says that CO2 increases account for 80% of global warming increases (EPA, 4), and that almost all CO2 increases are due to “human activities,” that the rate of sea level rise has “accelerated,” and the “ocean has become more acidic.” It also says the intensity of hurricanes has “risen noticeably” and expresses concern that droughts may also be increasing. Yet, Smith points out, other scientists not funded by the government dispute these conclusions.
Is there excessive global warming and CO2?
According to Smith, the answer is “no.” Some global warming has and is occurring, but the increases are very small, he says. The IPCC endorses the view that average global temperatures have increased by 0.85°C (1.5°F) over the last 167 years. Similarly, CO2 emissions in the atmosphere now exceed 400 ppm (parts per million). But scientists have found this increases crop yield and does not have a major or detrimental effect on global warming.
Some attempt to make more of the human contribution than is reasonable. If the overall warming is imperceptible, then the human contribution to it must also be even less perceptible. It would be very difficult to make a case that the small warming and the small increase in CO2 emissions that are occurring are excessive or dangerous to the planet, especially when there are some benefits from higher temperatures and increased CO2, and since the current temperatures and CO2 levels are well within the normal and natural variability, according to Dr. Roy Spencer, Dr. Judith Curry and other scientific reports. Craig Idso also concluded that the effect of CO2 on our climate is much less than some had assumed and that only 5% comes from fossil fuel emissions.
Are human-caused CO2 emissions causing global warming or climate change?
Virtually all scientists agree that humans make some contribution to global warming, CO2 and climate change. But the percentage of human contributions are very small, and those contributions do not appear to be a driver of either global warming or climate change. Smith says that many prominent scientists deny that science shows that humans have a significant impact on global warming or on climate change.
Why is this important? Because, according to Smith, our understanding – or misunderstanding – of the genuine climate issues is behind decisions such as the Administration’s cancelling of the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline in January, 2021, on the premise that the fossil fuel could make climate change worse and harder to reverse. The decision resulted in the elimination of 11,000 oil industry jobs (and thousands of other jobs indirectly affected) at a time when much of the nation was already struggling economically, due to the Coronavirus.
Our full understanding of climate issues is also important to spending programs such as the currently proposed Green New Deal that is projected to cost taxpayers a total of $90 trillion. In our current economy and world, would this level of expenditure be well spent? Many supporters of the Green New Deal take the position that science is settled in proving that humans are causing catastrophic climate change, but Smith says this is not true. Many of the world’s top scientists dispute it. It is time for a thorough and open discussion about this science. Regardless of where readers currently stand on the issues of climate change, Smith proposes that it is vitally important we take the steps to learn more.
Paul Smith is an attorney and author who has operated a general law practice in Maryland for more than forty years. He was an elected official in Frederick, Maryland from 2006 -2014. He has authored the following books: The State of the Constitution— 2017; The Fetal Right to Life Argument (1977, 2020); and The Capitalism Argument (2019).
