Scientific facts are not opinions

When is an expert witness not an expert? When he is being paid to mislead, such as the author of the con portion of your pro/con feature on the Paris Agreement.

Despite his credentials, his views are in direct disagreement with major scientific organizations such as the American Physical Society, American Chemical Society and the Geological Society of America, as well as 97 percent of climate scientists.

Unfortunately, hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent to convince us that the science of climate change is uncertain, but that has not changed the reality that we are observing. You have certainly noticed the changes around you, such as more severe storms and more frequent flooding. These changes have a real cost on individuals and the economy.

There’s an important fact that paid lobbyists like the author don’t want you to know — we can act on climate change, reduce air pollution, create jobs and improve the economy all at the same time. How? By sending each American household a monthly carbon dividend check that is funded by a fee on fossil fuels. This will stimulate the economy and reduce dangerous emissions, and is supported by conservatives and liberals alike.

We can certainly have different opinions on the value of the Paris Agreement, but scientific facts are not opinions. Human-caused climate change is real, and we are already seeing the costly effects. Let’s focus on the pro of positive solutions to climate change, and avoid the “con” artists out there.

This story was originally published June 24, 2017 at 9:03 PM with the headline "Scientific facts are not opinions."