A Call for Balanced Scientific Debate on the Climate Change Narratives by Randall Carlson

This essay and review of research argue that the severity and frequency of extreme weather events are not increasing because of climate change, and the warming observed since the 19th century may be within the range of the earth’s natural capacity. Carlson critiques the reliance on positive feedback models to amplify the effects of CO2 and questions the evidence supporting catastrophic climate predictions. He emphasizes that the benefits of CO2, like enhanced plant growth and potential food security, should be considered, especially when the global population is nearing 10 billion. The paper warns against the totalitarian control of society in the name of climate action and suggests that the real threat may come from cosmic events, not human-induced climate change.

Editor’s Note: This piece by Randall Carlson is a great comprehensive introduction to the other side of the discourse surrounding climate science. His call for reevaluating predictive models to climate science is noteworthy, especially in a time where sensationalism and fearmongering are the crying call to make changes. While the majority of scientific consensus supports the notion that human activities are significantly contributing to climate change, it is essential to ensure that dissenting views are not dismissed outright. Debate fosters a more robust scientific dialogue and prevents the discourse from becoming too monolithic.

Read Original Article