LETTERS: Climate change an overblown issue

After the Paris conference to address climate change, world leaders will return to their respective countries with a renewed sense of purpose to combat climate change, which they claim is a crisis. Despite all the terrorist activity in the U.S. and around the world, President Barack Obama has declared climate change the most important issue to be dealt with, and he is planning more taxes and regulations on Americans and the U.S. industrial base to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

But is CO2 really resulting in man-caused climate change that will negatively affect our planet? Currently, those crisis projections are all based on computer models. Although the president claims 99.5 percent of scientists agree with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that man-caused climate change is a problem, many scientists disagree. A petition disputing significant man-caused influence is circulating, with signatures from more than 31,000 scientists and engineers, including more than 9,500 with Ph.D.s.

A careful look at measurements show global temperatures increased at most a few tenths of a degree in the last 50 years. NASA found Antarctic ice and snow is increasing. The frequency of very large tornados and hurricanes has been decreasing, contrary to IPCC climate model predictions. No correlation has been found between drought and CO2 levels, while crop production worldwide has been increasing significantly.

Carbon dioxide is not a poison, but rather a gas necessary for life. Higher taxes and regulations proposed to combat climate change will significantly increase our energy costs, hurting America's poor and middle class most. If the U.S. were to reduce CO2 emissions by 17 percent between now and 2030, at the cost of many billions of dollars, we would see at most a reduction in global temperature of 0.027 degrees Fahrenheit, based on the IPCC climate models. That is tiny — nearly unmeasurable.

I encourage everyone to consider carefully the impact of new taxes and regulations, and contact your congressional representatives to suggest a thorough review of the science behind the climate models. That science that is definitely not settled.

Steven Saterlie

Las Vegas

Teaching politics

I was appalled to read that a government teacher at Arbor View High School reportedly suggested any student who got ejected at a Donald Trump rally would get extra credit ("Debate Deluge," Dec. 15 Review-Journal). Is this what you want your child to learn? How to disrupt a rally? How to spread hate among a crowd?

Obviously, the teacher doesn't like Mr. Trump, so he encourages his underage students to do his dirty work. Would he give extra credit for the same disruptive attitude toward any other candidate, Republican or Democratic? Thank goodness he rescinded his offer. This isn't how I think students should be getting acquainted with the political system. I wouldn't want that being taught to my children.

Jan Madigan

Las Vegas

Stopping terrorists

Regarding Phil Hausknecht's letter ("America's gun disease," Dec. 12 Review-Journal), the Second Amendment protects our right to own guns and to protect our families. I am tired of hearing about how much better the gun laws are in other countries. Radical Islamic terrorists are waging war on us, whether we acknowledge it or not.

In most of Europe, private gun ownership is not constitutionally guaranteed. Look at the radical attacks around the world, and see if you think this is the time to clamp down on law-abiding Americans who want to keep a gun for protection. None of these proposed new laws will affect the bad guys; they can always get guns, make bombs or cut off heads. This is an active global war that just might require an adjustment in attitude if we expect to survive it.

Linda Caterine

Henderson