While Jeff Judson and Willie Soon believe they are qualified to comment on the deadly trend of Earth's climate, I haven't found Gilbert Garcia. The link with the article took me to an obituary page of many Gilbert Garcias. (click here) So, it is difficult to defend or critique Gilbert if I can't read his work.
But, I can still comment on the article/opinion paper.
June 11, 2017
By Jeff Judson and Willie Soon
As a policy analyst and atmospheric scientist, (click here) we felt the need to respond to Gilbert Garcia’s recent column attacking U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith’s “anti-science” support for President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord, or PCA.
Smith is right to oppose PCA, which has the dubious honor of simultaneously being environmentally worthless for the planet and economically punitive for the United States. In fact, PCA is really more about global wealth redistribution than it is about the climate. The 2016 analysis of PCA by Bjorn Lomborg of the Copenhagen Consensus Center found that even if every single signatory met its nonbinding commitments, global temperatures would be reduced by at most 0.2 degrees Celsius in 2100 relative to the baseline case of no PCA.
Simply put — any impact on the climate produced by this treaty over the next 80 years would be negligible....
Lamar Smith is not qualified to comment on climate. My sincere guess is that if there is a Gilbert Carcia (hispanic - mixed race really, Gilbert is not an ethnic name - half breed) there would be some solid facts to his work.
Texas District 21 demographics
- 57.1% White
- 4.1% Black
- 3.8% Asian
- 28.5% Hispanic
- 0.10% Native American
- 6.1% other
On the other hand Lamar Smith simply speaks to impress his ignorant constituency who have little literacy benefit to understand the climate crisis. (Although, the literacy rate is fairly good. 92 percent have graduated from high school and about 45 percent have a bachelor's degree from college.)
After all, the flooding in San Antonio only kills folks once in a while. And, of course, it is never attributed to the climate crisis. It just rained a lot. There have been at least six major floods in this congressional district, but, it just rained a lot. The flooding continues today.
March 10, 2017
By Andy Jechow
Cibolo, Texas (KXAN) — The body of a woman (click here) swept away in floodwaters outside of San Antonio on Friday has been recovered, according to News 4 San Antonio.
Police in the suburb of Cibolo, just northeast of San Antonio, say a family member called for help overnight after the victim, identified by News 4 as
Shireal Boulanger, 58, said she was in a car surrounded by water.
Transportation officials later heard a man — the woman’s husband — screaming for help near an Interstate 10 frontage road at Santa Clara Road that was flooded with more than three feet of water. The man, who was found clinging to a tree, was rescued and treated for hypothermia along with cuts and bruises.
The man told rescuers that he and his wife were swept away as they drove down the frontage road.
Hm. These things happen. Very sad. God will forgive them for their sins.
There is a woman taking note of the disastrous administration.
May 20, 2017
By Sharon Lerner
...But Smith, (click here) who has boldly argued against funding for an institute that studies the toxicity of substances such as lead and asbestos, and has rushed to the defense of Monsanto’s RoundUp, is no longer just throwing bombs from the margins. With Trump in the White House and Scott Pruitt at the helm of the EPA, Smith now has the power to turn his visions of regulatory rollback into realities.
Already this session Smith revived two bills that, before the election, had been dismissed as nuisances. The Honest Act, which grew out of a strategy developed by the tobacco industry, is designed to prohibit the EPA from using public health research; the other bill, known as the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act, was crafted to allow industry representatives to serve on scientific boards. Both bills were passed by the House in March....
I don't doubt Ms. Lerner is correct and has done her homework when discussing Smith and all his cohorts, but, she is discussing the wrong methodology. We know science doesn't matter to these buffoons. So, why discuss science?
The Paris Agreement on Climate is not about a disputed scientific basis for ACTING on climate to protect life on Earth. The Paris Agreement on Climate has the word AGREEMENT in it's title. The conclusions have been made and the focus is what do we do about it. That is where the discussion lies. Got it?
Now Mr. Lamar Smith states that the Paris Agreement on Climate is fraudulent. He states it is a SCHEME for wealth distribution to other countries. Imagine that?
This is from a symposium in 2011.