Hi Wendy,

I appreciate the comment and you taking the time out of your day to read my article. Now let’s get into it.

My argument is that the recent fires (devastating as they were) weren’t without precedent, and globally there isn’t a worsening trend in bushfires, or any natural disasters for that matter. See prior comment for rainforests being burnt.

I’m not skeptical of science, I’m skeptical of the politicization of science, which seems to have infected climate-related fields and popular culture at large. The consensus among scientists shouldn’t be used as a bludgeon to beat dissenters over the head with. Instead, open dialogue should be encouraged in order to either find the truth or, dissuade “climate deniers” as you’d call them, through reason.

Instead, it looks like any deviance from the climate orthodoxy is silenced or deleted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFpnE-kpSfU

Would you care to elaborate on why I’m scraping the bottom of the barrel with ClimateGate emails? ClimateGate involves scientists most deeply embedded in the development of the hockey stick graph, with many key scientists having major disagreements about the graph itself and its implications. Furthermore, the emails mention how scientists were upset they couldn’t find warming, with environmental organizations such as the WWF requesting they “beef up” the results to suit their agenda. Phrases such as “hide the decline” (in temperature) were thrown around with regards to the hockey stick graph, which was then used as the bedrock for climate change arguments for many years subsequently.

I’m not sure about the 270 scientists, though I’ll rebut with 31,400 U.S. scientists, of which over 9,000 have PhDs: http://www.petitionproject.org/index.php?fbclid=IwAR3Tl0JZq_uu2AjDJlx07umifQ_aX7znlZ9QLR_g5LMbPMEEg3Zr2Br3K9E

Now, do you see why appealing to authority isn’t a good method of debate?

We may be in the hottest year in recent history, though some have also argued that the medieval warm period roughly 1000 years ago was equally as hot as today. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/02/12/more-evidence-that-the-medieval-warming-period-was-global-not-regional/

Moreover, even if we remove the medieval warm period from the equation, what would the temperature be today if humans had never existed? Is there a consensus on this?

I’d also repeat a point I made previously; critics love to make out as though I’m tweeting my opinion out to millions of my unquestioning followers; this isn’t the case. I’m simply putting forth evidence which seems to contradict the popular narrative, in articles which are rarely seen by beyond a few thousand people, many of whom outright disagree. I’m not dictating any kind of policy, so this slippery slope argument that somehow my thoughts are leading to the degradation of humanity is laughable.

Rather than address my ideas individually, I’m told I’m a shill for the fossil fuel industry, or that the earth is being destroyed by ideas such as mine. This is often used instead of reasoned debate. I appreciate you’ve not necessarily done this to a great extent, but terms like “climate denier,” as I’ve mentioned in previous articles, are used to demonize people rather than deal with their ideas.