Nathan Alford, the Daily News editor and publisher, stated in an editorial that a goal of the DN is to present the truth.
Editorials, news articles and several recent letters to the editors on climate change have consistently claimed coming disaster if CO2 is not immediately and dramatically reduced without presenting any sound science to back up their predictions. The cost of their proposals will cost trillions of dollars and be especially hard on the poor, who need cheap energy to bring them out of poverty.
This is too important an issue to base decisions on cherry-picked facts, consensus or even a judge's decision. Devin Rokyta, in a recent editorial ("Our View: Trump's view on climate change a danger to the world," Dec. 2), lambasted President Trump for his stance on climate change based on the Fourth National Climate Assessment.
Several expert reviewers of the FNCA call it a joke based on junk science and emotional greenmail. France and Germany have raised gas prices to above $7 a gallon in an attempt to reduce CO2 production. The resulting reduction of greenhouse gases by these countries has been minimal, and citizens are becoming frustrated by the extreme prices.
Prophecies of coming disaster from the infamous Al Gore to the United Nations have not come true.
All actual data on temperature increases, rising sea levels, loss of polar bears, sea ice melting, etc., to date are substantially below the forecasts of the numerous published models. The best data do not support the drum beat that CO2 is the primary cause of climate change.
Honest reporting on climate change by the DN and most main stream media has not happened. The DN could do us all a favor by publishing some serious reviews on climate change. Let's follow editor Alford's goal statement and see more honesty and balance in reporting on this critical issue.