“Climate-change prevention schemes threaten human welfare and promote environmental injustice. Thus it is imperative that the case of manmade greenhouse-gas prevention be based on science and not pseudo-science.”

Climate change has been “real” throughout Earth and human history. Thankfully, modern housing, energy and other technologies help us cope with climate and weather events much better than ever before.

With biotechnology we could even handle another Little Ice Age, despite the shorter growing seasons and reduced arable land that would result – unless anti-technology activists erect more obstacles to this, too. About the only thing that would really give us trouble is another Pleistocene ice age that buries lands and cities under mile-thick glaciers, and sends global temperatures and plant growth plummeting.

For 18 years though, contrary to computer models and White House proclamations, average planetary temperatures have barely budged, even as carbon dioxide levels “soared” from 0.03 percent of Earth’s atmosphere to 0.04 percent.…

“Canada withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, and the U.S. never ratified it, largely because it lacked legally binding GHG targets for developing countries. So why are developed country governments, those of Canada and the U.S. included, supporting a process that will result in our nations being stuck in another Kyoto?”

John F. Kennedy once said, “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.”

In announcing the Canadian government’s new greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets on May 15, Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq perpetuated one of the many myths of the climate change debate when she said that Canada will “work with our international partners to establish an international agreement in Paris that includes meaningful and transparent commitments from all major emitters.”…

“If there’s any chance at a rational policy on climate, two things must happen. First, intelligent laymen must take back the debate, by pushing currently out-of-bounds science back onto centre stage. They must stop letting ‘experts’ do their thinking for them. Second, political attacks on scientists must be stopped. Those must be pushed out of bounds.”

– Christopher Essex (Ph.D), Financial Post, February 26, 2015.

On June 11-12, 2015, in Washington, D.C., The Heartland Institute of Chicago, Illinois will host its Tenth International Conference on Climate Change, titled The New Science & Economics of Climate Change. “The debate over climate change is changing,” our conference brochure states. “Can you feel it?”

Yes, a growing number of scientists say the climate is less sensitive to carbon dioxide than previously thought. Most Americans do not believe global warming is a major threat.…

“It is encouraging that eco-modernists ‘reject the planning fallacy of the 1950s.’ However, they still ’embrace a strong public role in addressing environmental problems and accelerating technological innovation.’  So their rejection of top-down development and innovation is only partial.”

The New York Times has published a remarkable article. Remarkable for the Times, that is. It has taken to task the United States and other developed countries for engaging in heavy-handed eco-imperialism.

The impetus for the article is a new infrastructure development bank being created by China that will begin operations at the end of the year.  Such a bank could, as noted by the Times, rival the World Bank and other development banks controlled by the United States.  Indeed, the Obama administration initially encouraged countries not to join the bank, arguing that it could undermine the World Bank. …