The anti-science climate crowd

Jack Hellner:

Why won't journalists ask scientists, educators, entertainers, and other Democrats serious queries based on their policy proposals connected to climate change, since those people describe themselves as smart and want to get rid of oil as an energy source based on so-called scientific data?

I would love to see Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Al Gore, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Joe Biden, and Dick Durbin attempt to answer this one question: can you provide any scientific data that show a direct correlation between oil use and temperatures, sea levels, and storm activity for the last 150 years?  Hint: There is none. 

Oil use has risen exponentially from almost zero to around 100 million barrels per day since the late 1800s.

Meanwhile, temperatures may have risen one to two degrees and that would be normal after a little ice age ended around 1850.  Temperatures have also declined for lengthy periods during the 150 years, so much so that the "smart" people of science predicted a coming ice age in the 1970s.

Sea levels have risen a minuscule estimate of less than one foot, out of an average depth of around 30,000 feet, as if you could measure it that close.  Sea levels have also risen and fallen throughout billions of years of history.

Storm activity is also cyclical and natural, as it always has been.  We have had massive droughts and severe floods throughout billions of years, long before oil and humans.  That is why we have deserts and oceans covering so much of the Earth not because of oil or humans.

The reason supposed journalists declare that the science is settled and refuse to ask questions is because the "smart" people would get their clock cleaned in a debate.  They call those of us who tell the truth that the climate has always changed cyclically and naturally names.  We are called stupid, deniers, anti-science, and even racists for telling the truth by the people who say they have a big tent and want to unite us.

...

The climate has always changed and the Chicken-Little approach to that change is the opposite of scientific.