Global warming just guff
On May 14 the Taipei Times reported on the Energy Efficiency and Green Environment Forum, where Michael Nobel, great grandnephew of Nobel prize founder Alfred Nobel, was the featured speaker. In effect, he and other forum attendants echoed the global warming mantra that our planet is in imminent danger of catastrophic disaster despite much scientific evidence to the contrary.
Nobel cited last year’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report. The IPCC has issued several reports on global climate change (in 1990, 1995, 2001 and 2007). However, each of these reports contains false claims and exaggerations while conveniently disregarding sound environmental research. Unfortunately, many of the IPCC’s unproven hypotheses have been passed off as facts.
In response, over the past few years, more than 19,000 US scientists have signed a petition coauthored by Dr Frederick Seitz, former president of the US National Academy of Sciences, urging political leaders to reject the Kyoto Protocol. Also, from March 2 to March 4 of this year, renowned scientists from around the world met in New York for a conference on climate change and issued a report on their extensive research. In the report’s forward, Dr Seitz wrote that the IPCC “is pre-programmed to produce reports to support the hypotheses of anthropogenic warming.”
He further pointed out that the 1990 IPCC report “completely ignored satellite data, since they showed no warming. The 1995 report was notorious for the significant alterations made to the text ... in order to convey the impression of a human influence. The latest IPCC report [2007] completely devaluates the climate contributions from changes in solar activities, which are likely to dominate any human influence.”
A vast majority of scientists have acknowledged that our solar system is so complex that they’ve barely begun to understand its effects on our climate. The data show that cooling and warming cycles lasting five to 35 years or longer are the norm. Not coincidentally, some of the same doomsayers who 30 years ago warned of a global ice age are now warning of catastrophic global warming.
But shouldn’t we believe such environmental “authorities” as Nobel prize winning former US vice president Al Gore? After all, last year Gore won an Oscar for his documentary An Inconvenient Truth. A look at his living style, however, reveals just how “green” he is. In February last year, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research reported that Gore’s 20-room mansion consumes more electricity per month than the average US household uses per year. Yet in his documentary, Gore has the audacity to lecture his fellow Americans and global citizens on reducing their energy consumption at home and drastically slashing carbon dioxide emissions. Apparently, doing so himself would cramp his style.
Many scientists concur that adopting the Kyoto Protocol would have a miniscule impact on the environment. Yet, implementing it would cost a fortune and do tremendous damage to our weakened global economy.
No wonder Michael Nobel encouraged us to embrace Gore’s vision. After all, Gore also received a Nobel Prize for his documentary.
Wayne T. Schams
Pingtung
A funeral for Taiwan?
We are at a crossroads again in Taiwan. We are either witnessing a smooth transition of power from one leader to another, as has happened in the US 43 times since 1789, or we are witnessing the death of Taiwan. Perhaps we will not know for some time.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has promised to safeguard national sovereignty, but he has already said things that might scare an ordinary Taiwanese citizen. For instance, he used Singapore, a city-state that is known more for its repressive dictatorial authoritarian rule, as a model for Taiwan to emulate. This is a warning sign.
Also, within days of Ma’s inauguration, Wu, the chairman of the KMT is due to meet Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party head Hu Jin-tao (胡錦濤) for “party to party” talks. Why on Earth should there be “party to party” talks between one of the world’s most repressive parties and the KMT? If the KMT is in power, what is the reason for party-level talks?
This raises questions about what the KMT is planning, plotting or agreeing to and on whose behalf. If talks are “party to party” rather than “country to country,” then we can expect the KMT to revert immediately to its old dictatorial ways. No surprise there.
Ma has also promised to open up the nation to investment in real estate by Chinese businesspeople and has promised to lift limitations on Taiwanese investment in China.
Without these restrictions, Taiwan may end up ravaged and emptied, a thought that should scare the public.
That many members of the public believe the nation’s future is best pursued hand in hand with China is also reason for concern.
That Taiwan must deal with China goes without saying and it has spent years just surviving China’s daily onslaught. But to dream that Taiwan could be spared the kind of abuse inflicted on Tibet these past 50 years is utterly naive. Taiwan has voted for an uncertain future, with a president known more for equivocation than determination or decisiveness. To entrust Ma with preserving national sovereignty in the face of Beijing is a terrifying thought, yet here we are. All we can do now is hold our breath and hope for the next four years that the nation is not dying a little bit each day.
Those of us who love freedom and appreciate the freedoms Taiwanese enjoy — freedoms that the Chinese public is denied — must remain vigilant against the rebirth of tyranny and raise our voices when necessary if the KMT goes back to its old tricks.
As for me, I wore black on inauguration day. I hope these four years will pass without killing Taiwan and that Tuesday was not actually the nation’s funeral.
Lee Long-hwa
New York
WHO’s ignoring Taiwan?
W. Andy Knight makes a convincing case for granting Taiwan membership in the WHO (“Taiwan should gain WHO status,” May 19, page 8). Taiwan’s highly developed health care system is a model worthy of emulation, as is its generosity in assisting other countries.
The next deadly virus will be as ignorant about the “one China” policy as it will be about national identities in general. The WHO should welcome Taiwan to the table before that virus arrives.
William E. Cooper
Richmond, Virginia
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
Heavy rains over the past week have overwhelmed southern and central Taiwan, with flooding, landslides, road closures, damage to property and the evacuations of thousands of people. Schools and offices were closed in some areas due to the deluge throughout the week. The heavy downpours brought by the southwest monsoon are a second blow to a region still recovering from last month’s Typhoon Danas. Strong winds and significant rain from the storm inflicted more than NT$2.6 billion (US$86.6 million) in agricultural losses, and damaged more than 23,000 roofs and a record high of nearly 2,500 utility poles, causing power outages. As
The greatest pressure Taiwan has faced in negotiations stems from its continuously growing trade surplus with the US. Taiwan’s trade surplus with the US reached an unprecedented high last year, surging by 54.6 percent from the previous year and placing it among the top six countries with which the US has a trade deficit. The figures became Washington’s primary reason for adopting its firm stance and demanding substantial concessions from Taipei, which put Taiwan at somewhat of a disadvantage at the negotiating table. Taiwan’s most crucial bargaining chip is undoubtedly its key position in the global semiconductor supply chain, which led
RSS