After the pandemic hectic that was handled rather dubiously with emergency law and the CS catastrophe that is by no means over, we return to democracy on 18 June with an absurd federal referendum proposal. The climate protection proposal is in fact absurd in several respects, especially since no one – this also includes climate researchers – knows exactly how the climate actually works. Incomplete models and theories as well as a far from unanimous consensus among scientists are nevertheless often passed off as assured knowledge. In particular, the fact that there is no scientific evidence on the climate issue is ignored. This is too little and questionable.
It is obviously not taken into account in the discussion that in pre-industrial, car-free times, namely from 800 to 1300 AD, there was a medieval warm period with temperatures similar to today. This was followed by the so-called Little Ice Age from 1300 to 1870, with probably the greatest cold for 10,000 years. And now we are back to the level of the aforementioned medieval warm period. Actually, there is no reason to panic, given the following facts: In the last 150 years, the global temperature has increased by only 1.2 degrees, and the supposedly significant CO2 content of the air today is 0.04 %, with humans contributing 3 % to this low percentage (i.e., 3 % of 0.04 %!). Above all, however, it should be noted – while acknowledging the efforts of climate researchers – that the still little researched but certainly significant natural climate factors of the sun, oceans and clouds are likely to be particularly significant. However, for understandable reasons, they are hardly included in the climate models.
It can only be in the interest of those who want to obtain the planned enormous subsidies that, with this modest level of knowledge, we should, according to the proposal, disfigure our nature with thousands of mostly inefficient wind turbines and alpine photovoltaic plants without hesitation, while not further promoting the nuclear power plants that have been functioning safely in Switzerland for decades and would soon put an end to them together with the fossil energy sources. Further serious climate research and the indispensable security of supply would fall by the wayside due to the proposal to be rejected.
Hanspeter Bornhauser, Bedano
(Translation Current Concerns)
Our website uses cookies so that we can continually improve the page and provide you with an optimized visitor experience. If you continue reading this website, you agree to the use of cookies. Further information regarding cookies can be found in the data protection note.
If you want to prevent the setting of cookies (for example, Google Analytics), you can set this up by using this browser add-on.