greenhouse gases

In this article, I question whether what is called “climate change” is consistent with science and social science.

Climate change activists are unwittingly supporting one of the greatest moral travesties of our time: the valuing of people yet to be born more than those suffering today. Rather than focus on helping vulnerable people adapt to real climate change in the present, activists concentrate on mitigation, trying to avert hypothetical events that may, or may not, someday happen.

Amid the dire warnings about global warming’s impacts, what’s often overlooked is that actions to reduce or prevent them will lead to livable communities, improved air quality, protection of natural spaces, and greater economic efficiency, to name just a few benefits. So it’s not surprising that tangible positive action on climate change is happening in Canada’s cities.

Ian Mauro, an environmental and social scientist at Mount Allison University in New Brunswick, recently toured Atlantic Canada, interviewing fishers, hunters, farmers, businessmen, First Nations, and local politicians about climate change. The result is a powerful film, Climate Change in Atlantic Canada, with people from different walks of life sharing observations about what’s happening all around them.

Canada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) levels peaked in 2007, and have been flat or declining since.

One of Canada’s largest unions is calling for a national moratorium on hydraulic fracturing for shale gas.