WASHINGTON, DC, July 14 — There he goes again. Gregory Wrightstone, the well-known activist, who dismisses the claims of climate change proponents, recently opined on a little-known effort by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to require publicly-held companies to reveal their carbon emissions.
Wrightstone is a geologist, the Executive Director of the CO2 Coalition and the author of a book that offers some Inconvenient Facts: The Science that Al Gore doesn’t want you to know. It’s a layman’s expose of the “apocalyptic predictions about our ever dynamic climate.”
As he put it in a recent article he wrote for the RealClear Energy website, “By proposing that companies take extraordinary measures to account for climate risks, the SEC embraces a false climate emergency based on a premise that emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) from human activity threaten earth with catastrophic warming. None of this is true. Yet, the SEC — mimicking a climate-industrial complex that demonizes carbon-emitting fossil fuels — presents an apocalyptic outlook with the certitude of pre-Reformation popes 500 years ago.”
Climate change — whether it is a real threat to the future of the world or an exceptionally controversial theory that has become a political issue, particularly among Democrats and the progressive left, doesn’t seem to be resonating with the public at large. Gallup polls that ask “what is the most important problem” facing this country today show that a mere 3% of respondents answered, climate change. Yet lawmakers and enforcers on the left have managed to use it to make our lives more and more uncomfortable and expensive.
A few weeks ago, on June 30, as the Supreme Court got ready to shut down its most recent session, it handed down a decision in the West Virginia v. EPA case, striking down the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. But the Court has at least two more climate change cases to decide when it returns in the fall. In Louisiana v. Biden the court will determine whether the Federal government is allowed to use the social cost of carbon for making decisions. Social cost refers to economic costs, or damages, of emitting one additional ton of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere without looking “at any of the benefits of carbon dioxide,” Wrightstone told Newsmax. The second focuses on the validity of the Securities and Exchange decision requiring public companies to keep track of their carbon footprints.
There’s no doubt that our government’s “apostles of climate change” will find other ways of regulating greenhouse gasses.
There are many of us who believe that climate change has been with us since the beginning of time, that the earth’s climate is not and never has been static and is ever changing. And among the “many” are tens of thousands of experts in the field. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine conducted a survey that resulted in at least “31,000 scientists [saying] there is ‘no convincing evidence’ that humans can or will cause ‘catastrophic’ heating of the atmosphere.”
In his interview with Newsmax, Wrightstone said that to put global warming in a proper context there are several facts that need to be taken into account. “We have some of the lowest levels of carbon dioxide currently in all of earth’s history. We’re at 420 today. The average for all of earth’s history is 2,600 parts per million…It’s gotten as high as seven or eight thousand.” He went on to say that global warming began some 300 years ago. But, he added, “We really began adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere in significant amounts in the mid-20th century. So, the first 250 years of that warming trend had to have been entirely naturally driven.”
Dr. William Happer, professor emeritus of physics at Princeton University, got the proverbial last word in the Newsmax coverage of the issue: “There isn’t a climate crisis. There will not be a climate crisis. It is utter nonsense.”
We hope you've enjoyed this article. While you're here, we have a small favor to ask...
Support AMAC Action. Our 501 (C)(4) advances initiatives on Capitol Hill, in the state legislatures, and at the local level to protect American values, free speech, the exercise of religion, equality of opportunity, sanctity of life, and the rule of law.
Donate Now
I’ve been saying for years climate change has to do with the earths rotation. It’s not new. Man might have helped by mining and other activites which change earths balance.
Did it go from “global warming” to “climate change” because of what happened the winter of 2010 2011? The coldest ever temperature recorded exceeded by 7 degrees (now -142 F). 4 moths of below freezing every night and not reaching 55 during the day in Southwest Florida!! Coldest I’ve ever seen in my 58 years here! If the Sun ever takes another break like that for over a year we will be in an ice age!!
It went from global warming to climate change after a focus group by Frank Lutz determined the people retired of hearing the term global warming would respond to climate change. And no matter what happened it could fall under the name of climate change. A Democrats latched on to climate change and are still beating us over the head with it. This is not my first rodeo
I am and always have been a CARNIVORE! It makes me stronger, faster and more Healthy than most. When dumb people realize that we do need FOSSIL FUELS to live work and play, then things will improve. This younger generation is so pre-occupied with the SELF, that they have forgotten about the US! My late father used to say: “ You know what’s wrong with your generation? You got to much sh.. in your heads
It’s all about John Kerry money by making the pot boil. Global warming an John Kerry are as fact as they can get. It’s all about money. Why would you buy property an live there then say the ocean is rising. About as two faced as you can get, besides there big private jets putting out the most carbon.
CO2 is what makes plants grow. If you’re concerned, plant trees all over the place, get rid of your lawn, and stop eating red meat. Otherwise, quit your yapping and leave me alone.
Correct on the CO2. If we were to actually eliminate all CO2 from the atmosphere, as virtually all the “green” groups are advocating for as they classify CO2 as a pollutant, all plant life on this planet would die off. With no plants left on the planet, to produce the necessary oxygen which all air breathing creatures require, including human beings, we would all quickly die off from asphyxiation. See the problem with what these scientifically illterate idiots are advocating? The entire “green movement” is built on a series of poorly thought out policies just like this.
As for “climate change”, this planet’s climate has been continuously changing for its entire 4 billion year existence. We’ve had multiple ice ages and periods on this planet when the CO2 levels were significantly higher than now and no humans existed on the planet at that time. This planet’s climate will continue to change naturally, long after the human species no longer inhabits this planet. Most of factors driving that continual climate change are related to the sun, our planet’s slightly shifting orbital characteristcs, shifting magnetic poles and a host of other factors.
By the way, every planet in this solar system has experienced what would be defined as “climate change” over the course of their existence based on samples of their soil and other data gathered by us over the last 50 years. It’s a natural condition bought about by a multitude of forces, both external and planetary related. Last I checked, humans have never inhabited Mars, Venus or any of the other places we have sent probes to that showed signs of significant climate change over long periods of time.
If you want to be happy on this pile of dung, either have a clear conscience or have none. I guess Gregory Wrightstone has opted for the latter.
Well, aren’t you just a little ray of sunshine cupcake.
The left in this country has been trying to weaponize the concept of potential climate catastrophe since the 1890s as a means to justify enacting a whole slew of authoritarian policies to subjugate the population. Yes, the 1890s. This nonsense has been peddled by many names over the years and has now spread around most of the world, thanks largely to corrupt politicians. The underlying message has remained constant throughout all that time: The world as we know it will come to an end in some relatively short time frame unless we adopt a series of draconian rules and accept massive changes to our lifestyles.
The “solution” just also happens to necessitate a huge transfer to our accumulated private wealth to some governmental entity or group via taxation, regulatory changes, new, expensive products to comply with the new governmental standards designed to combat “the threat” of climate change. Just since the early 2000s, this has amouted to several trillion dollars world-wide that has been sucked out of the private sector. That is money that could have been better spent to build stronger economies world-wide and improve the lives of billions of people on this planet through higher living standards. Instead, this transfer of wealth is how those promoting this fraudulent scheme have all become exceeding rich off of this hoax.