The May 16th Seattle
Times filings article exemplifies the paper’s decade-long decision to either ignore or belittle my
candidacies. It continues the
paper’s years long decision to refuse urging legislators require auditing Sound Transit. Choosing
instead to abet spending billions on light rail extensions to Central Link that
either Northgate operation next year or East Link in 2023 will demonstrate Prop
1 was the biggest transportation boondoggle in history. The paper still refuses to recognize
Sound Transit’s decade-long failure to increase bus transit capacity is the reason for
area’s congestion.
This year they ignore my candidacy’s
attempt to debunk the claim fossil emissions are an “existential threat”. My rationale is relatively simple. Ice core data clearly show CO2 level was the result of increased out
gassing from ocean when temperatures were warming and increased dissolution
when temperatures were cooling. Both warming and cooling were driven by
the Sun.
The fossil emissions have added to the Sun's
impact on CO2 over the last 60 years raising level to the current 410 ppm. The basis for climatologists concern is
the failure of computer models to match measured temperatures unless increasing
fossil emissions had 10 times the impact of Sun on global warming.
However, fossil emissions currently add ~5
gigaton carbon (GtC) to the ~90 GtC out gassed from ocean. Even more important, the fossil emissions are largely offset by increased dissolution since atmospheric CO2 only increased by ~2 ppm. If emissions averaged
10 GtC over the next 50 years the additional 500 GtC would add 200 ppm raising
the current level from 410 to 610 ppm, or from 0.041 to 0.061%, still a tiny
fraction of the 96.5% CO2 that warms Venus. Sooner or later the entire "scientific" world will recognize the futility
of continuing to spend trillions each year to limit global warming by reducing
those emissions.
One would think the Seattle Times, whose pages are replete with the need to support a "free press," would welcome the chance to tell the world about a candidate's claim debunking global warming. Instead they refuse to even mention my candidacy despite having finished
third in 2016. Choosing instead to
include those who are “far better known” or have received significant financial
support. Including my candidacy as
one of “Republicans haven’t reported raising significant amounts of money”
despite having finishing 3rd without spending a dime campaigning.
It’s not clear what prompted Inslee to waive
the $1822 filing fee. As one of
those who paid, I’m now one of 35 candidates instead of one of 11 in 2016. (They may not be aware of the need for
Public Disclosure filings) As one
of 11 the Times chose to interview me, though belittled my candidacy. This year they’ll likely ignore me as
one of 35. (They refused to interview me when I ran for King County Executive, King County Council, and 48th District Senator.)
Thus voters will now have to wait until they
receive Voters’ Pamphlet to learn of my candidacy. However, I’m optimistic of being on
general ballot this fall. While I believe Inslee is totally incompetent (more on that later), as with my previous 8 candidacies, I have no desire or expectation of winning. Instead I welcome the chance to use it to "spread the word" and debate Inslee about his $3 million campaign on the futility of his carbon tax to influence global temperature.
If not, as with Sound Transit, I’m confident
it’s only a question of when not whether I’ll be vindicated.
No comments:
Post a Comment