Gore, the Energy Hog, Leaves Hypocritical Carbon Footprint

Gore, the Energy Hog, Leaves Hypocritical Carbon Footprint
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

Former Vice President Al Gore wants to be known as America’s chief guardian of the environment. He’s the “Numero Uno” propagandist concerned about climate change and everyone’s costly energy use. Everyone that is, except his own.

Image from Wikimedia Commons by SSEE, CC BY-SA 4.0.

Senior Fellow Drew Johnson of the National Center for Public Policy Research did some digging and found out that Gore is one of our nation’s heaviest users of energy. His home, a palatial 20-room mansion in the upscale Belle Meade section of Nashville, Tennessee, gobbles up energy as if it were free of the consequences he regularly cites for others.

How overboard is the use of energy at the Gore residence? Johnson reports that during the past year, the monthly energy usage at Gore’s home averaged 19,241 kilowatt hours (kWh). According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the energy per month consumed by America’s average household is a meager 901 kWh. Gore, therefore, uses more than 20 times the nation’s norm! His energy bill per year turns out to be what a normal America residence consumes in a period lasting 21 years.

Does Mr. Gore run up such a large figure because he fills his 20 rooms with the tired, hungry, and poor yearning to be out of the elements and into cozy surroundings? Not on your life. Gore’s routine has him living alone (except for possible servants) without even the former Mrs. Gore from whom he separated in 2010. Their four offspring all reside elsewhere.

During the single month of September 2016, Gore’s home ate up 30,993 kWh. That’s as much energy as is burned up by the average American family in 34 months! Over the past year, the energy used to heat Gore’s swimming pool could have been employed to power half a dozen average U.S. households for a full year. To conclude that this man’s energy use is a bit heavy is no exaggeration.

Having previously been targeted by watchers of energy use as far back as 2007, Gore has taken some face-saving steps including installation of 33 solar panels. They produce a meager 1,092 kWh per month, an amount less than six percent of his energy use. In addition to the solar panels, he purchased energy efficient windows, new insulation, a geothermal heating system, and a new driveway where rainwater gets collected and is used to sprinkle the lawns. But his use of energy is still far above normal.

In addition to his Belle Meade home, Gore owns a farmhouse in rural Carthage, Tennessee, and a fancy residence at San Francisco’s Regis Residence Club. Each uses energy, though not nearly as much as the main Gore residence. Although the total energy usage at these properties hasn’t been made available, we can guess that it still uses ample energy.

Much of the energy for America’s home and industrial use comes from burning coal and natural gas (so-called fossil fuels) resulting in the release of Gore’s favorite target, carbon dioxide (CO2). His newest film, An Inconvenient Sequel, would have viewers believe that CO2 is polluting the entire atmosphere and setting the stage for rising sea levels, destructive weather extremes, and numerous other environmental cataclysms.

If only people would use less energy, then there would be less CO2 to continue wreaking havoc, say Gore and his allies. But the truth is that CO2 is not a poison; it’s a beneficial substance that is necessary for healthy plant life – which is food. More CO2 would result in more food, more trees, healthy animals, and even healthier humans.

All of this suggests a hidden motive for the well-publicized Gore campaign about climate change. Less hidden today than when Gore’s ill-advised crusade began are outspoken claims of fright peddlers at the UN and elsewhere who openly admit that their real goal is world government controlled by them. Gore is their front man who should be shunned, not lionized. Happily, a large and growing number of scientists are challenging Gore and his fright-peddling friends.

Help expose climate change for what it really is, a hoax aiming for world government. Share information on Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 in order to prevent it.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Gored Again By Dishonest Al

Gored Again By Dishonest Al
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

The moniker “Bulldog” fits Marc Morano perfectly. He’s the founder and executive director of ClimateDepot.com, a website sponsored by the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT). In that role, he has traveled the nation attending advance screenings of Al Gore’s new film An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power. Morano specializes in debunking the Gore claims made 11 years ago in the global warming champion’s earlier film, An Inconvenient Truth. Morano points out numerous fallacies in the first production while suggesting that the current film is loaded with the same type of misinformation. He has already dubbed the new film pure “bunk.”

A climate realist not a climate sensationalist, Morano claims that Gore’s Sequel film is a self-centered ego trip, a diatribe riddled with more inaccuracies. For an example of Gore’s previous quackery, he asks Gore about the claim made in the 2006 film that the planet would reach a “point of no return” in a decade. That decade has passed and the planet is still functioning quite well.

A 2006 prediction that hasn’t materialized saw Gore insist that Africa’s Mount Kilimanjaro’s snow cap would disappear within a decade. Now that the decade has passed and snow is still there, the obvious conclusion is that warming has never happened or has been minimally insignificant.

Gore won a Nobel Prize for his earlier film, a choice that should have left the prize committee red-faced. Now a wealthy man as a result of his misguided campaign, the former Tennessee senator assured viewers in his decade-old Inconvenient Truth that the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey and New York could be traced to global warming. Not true, according to many scientists. Same for the destructiveness resulting from Hurricane Katrina on the Gulf Coast. Saner commentators have concluded that global warming didn’t cause these storms, and won’t lead to more storms in the future. In fact, according to a 2013 report issued by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the decade since 2006 has seen fewer destructive hurricanes, not more.

In his new film, Gore never mentions pocketing millions through contacts he has gained as a result of his propaganda. A firm he co-founded, Generation Investment Management, invested in Elon Musk’s SolarCity. By 2013, the former U.S. Vice President held an $80 million stake in SolarCity while it consumed billions in taxpayer-funded subsidies. But it still went belly up. Did that hurt the famous champion of global warming and foe of carbon dioxide? Of course not. His Solar City stock got converted into shares in Elon Musk’s Tesla.

If, during all of his crusading for cleaner air and stable temperatures, Gore achieved multi-millionaire status honorably (no subsidies and nothing but honesty), no one should complain. But he amassed wealth at taxpayer expense along with dishonest claims crafted to bring in the moolah. And he has done so with no mention of the fact that top UN environmental officials have openly admitted that their goal in promoting the global warming scam is to lead mankind into UN-led socialism and redistribution of the world’s wealth.

Congratulations to Marc Morano for his increasingly successful efforts in combatting Gore and his allies. They are misleading the American people while promoting unadulterated “bunk.”

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Al Gore’s Sequel

Al Gore’s Sequel
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

Soon to be in theaters across the nation, Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Sequel” will repeat, even add to, the apocalyptic claims shown in his 2006 film “An Inconvenient Truth.” In the decade since Gore’s earlier film, however, the numbers of scientific realists who counter the stance put forth by Gore and others has grown enormously. There will, therefore, be plenty of outright denials of the former vice president’s fright-peddling insistence about warming and mankind’s role in it.

Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Sequel” will soon be in theaters across the nation. (Image from Wikimedia Commons by Kasey Baker CC BY 3.0)

Don’t expect any apology for misinformation in this film. And don’t look for details from an important report examining how data from weather stations have been doctored to buttress Gore’s scares. A conservative news purveyor known as PJ Media has recently shown that temperature figures making up the Global Average Surface Temperature (GAST) have been manipulated to favor the position favored by Gore. The culprits include the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA), and the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction and Research.

Figures used to create GAST’s summary conclusion do not coincide with actual temperature readings and have been dubbed “not a valid representation of reality.” In fact, the year 2016 was not “the hottest year on record” as claimed by NOAA. That year produced “a below average’” number of hot days that ranked it 80th from the hottest since 1895 when recording temperatures began.

NOAA’s charts and graphs portray U.S. temperature higher by 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the 19th century. But its own figures disproving that very claim have been altered to conform to the increased amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. CO2 is “supposed” to be a dangerous substance driving temperatures upward; however, mounting numbers of climate realists and allies in other fields point to the needed and beneficial effects of CO2. And they don’t adjust temperature data to conform to their expectations regarding temperature fluctuations.

According to many climate alarmists, deniers of “inconvenient truths” are bought-and-paid-for agents of energy companies. No mention is made of the millions Al Gore and his climate allies have accumulated from government grants and green-energy subsidies. Gore alone has become a multi-millionaire.

Nor should anyone be conned into believing that any denier is a self-indicted and dangerous kook just because of the claim that “97 percent of scientists” believe the CO2 con and mankind’s pernicious role in causing its increase. There’s “consensus” among scientists say Gore and his allies. There isn’t. But, as the late physician, researcher and author Michael Crichton stated in his 2003 Caltech lecture, “In science consensus is irrelevant…. There’s no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

There happens to be a political agenda behind all of the hoopla about climate change. The Paris Agreement President Trump refused to sign turns out to be a key step toward wealth redistribution. Former head of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Rajendra Pachauri openly pointed to that goal. Christiana Figueres, who led the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) until 2016, said the Paris Agreement provided tools to “replace capitalism.” Former UNFCCC official Ottmar Edenhofer summarized, “we de facto redistribute the world’s wealth by climate policy.”

Climate realists, adamant deniers of the message put forth by Gore and others, are today’s heroes not the enemies of mankind. That their number continues to grow is welcome news.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American


A Return to the Republic: A Game Plan for Donald Trump

A Return to the Republic: A Game Plan for Donald Trump
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

The following statement was solicited and then aired, along with the thoughts of others, via the nationwide “Connecting the Dots” radio program on November 22, 2016. We were asked what advice would we give to incoming President of the United States Donald Trump.

Donald Trump speaking to supporters at an immigration policy speech at the Phoenix Convention Center in Phoenix, Arizona (photo by Gage Skidmore via Flickr, some rights reserved).

Mr. Trump, I suggest that you add to your goal of making America great again the following statement: “America became great, not because of what government did, but because of what government was prevented from doing by the U.S. Constitution.”

You should consider that, were the Constitution fully adhered to, the federal government would shrink to 20 percent its size and 20 percent its cost.

To questions asking what you intend to do after your inauguration, you should say, “I am not going to do as much as people might expect. Instead I shall use all the proper powers of the presidency to undo much of what government now does. And what I intend to undo, to abolish, are all agencies, departments, and bureaucratic monstrosities that are not authorized by the Constitution.”

Among the federal agencies that should be abolished are the Departments of Education, Energy, Interior, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and many of those issuing handouts of various kinds. You should arrange to have the U.S. military and the U.S. Border Patrol take on whatever responsibilities have been assumed by the Department of Homeland Security.

One by one, all agencies of the federal government that have been created and empowered by presidential Executive Orders should be abolished. The most egregious of these is the federal Environmental Protection Agency, a monster created via an Executive Order written by President Nixon in 1970. The EPA was never voted into existence by Congress.

America has not won a war since 1945 when victory was achieved in World War II. No victory in Korea, in Vietnam, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Why? Because our nation submits to rules and regulations mandated by the United Nations and its controlled stepchild NATO. For this reason and many more, the United States should withdraw from the United Nations at the earliest possible time. A measure to accomplish this goal, H.R. 1205, has been introduced in the House of Representatives and it should receive presidential support.

Proper attention should be given to the very first sentence in the Constitution that states, “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States….” That means no law making is proper if made by presidential Executive Order or by a Supreme Court decision. Any law enacted outside of the legislative branch must be declared null. One good example needing termination is the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade that has legalized the taking of 60 million lives since 1973.

Presidential power must be employed to have a thorough audit of the Federal Reserve, something that hasn’t been done in the Fed’s more than 100 years of existence. Congress would welcome the help of the President to get this done. Once audited honestly and thoroughly, moves should be undertaken toward abolishing this unconstitutional engine of inflation. The path toward creating precious metal backed currency should be laid out and followed.

Various job-destroying entanglements in which our government has placed the nation should be terminated. This means exiting NAFTA, CAFTA, the World Trade Organization, and others.

Let me say again: “America became great not because of what government did, but because of what government was prevented from doing by the Constitution.”

Mr. Trump, I will continue to pray that you accomplish all your legitimate goals, only some of which I have listed in this brief statement.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Sign up today! Be sure to also get our free Top Daily Headlines from The New American.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


What Altered Reality is President Obama In?

What Altered Reality is President Obama In?
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

In his final State of the Union address, President Obama managed repeatedly to avoid reality. Simply stated, his performance as chief executive has harmed America. He ended his speech with the claim that “the State of our Union is strong.” Many Americans disagree. One clear measure of that disagreement is the powerful showing of a candidate seeking to succeed him who employs the slogan, “Make America Great Again.” Americans who support this candidate, and others as well, believe that our nation’s greatness isn’t strong.

In his speech, the President pointed to the nation’s “broken immigration system.” He has had seven years to fix it but, as he himself admitted, it’s still broken.

He called again for a raising the minimum wage, as if such a task fits within his job description. Sound thinking economists insist that arbitrarily forcing employers to pay higher wages discourages hiring, especially among the youth.

He took credit creating “14 million new jobs.” But whatever wealth-creating jobs have opened up aren’t the product of any government magic. Real jobs get created despite the taxes, regulations and bureaucratic control government creates.

He patted himself on the back for cutting the rate of unemployment when the figures regularly given by government don’t count the many would-be workers who have given up looking for a job.

He claimed the “No Child Left Behind” educational program had improved education. Reality shows it to be another failed scheme forced on the schools by the federal government.

The president’s cheers for solar and wind power failed to mention the tax breaks and subsidies the government provides for such industries. Even more, he skirted the fact that the combined product of both of these energy sources adds up to a mere one percent of what is needed to power our nation.

He took credit for cutting imports of foreign oil when those cuts really resulted from discovery by private enterprise of new domestic sources and new methods of obtaining previously unavailable oil and natural gas.

He insisted that our nation’s “standing around the world” has improved in the years he’s been in office, and he termed any disagreement with such a boast “political hot air.” The reality is that respect for America has declined substantially with him at the helm.

He claimed it is a “lie” to believe that radical Islamists spring from a reading of Islam’s holy books. While it surely is true that most Muslims don’t seek to implement some of the directives appearing in their basic creed, a minority does take what they find literally. And they act accordingly.

He urged acceptance of the dangerous Trans-Pacific Partnership, a new form of entanglement that will surely lead to surrendering hard-won independence just as European nations have surrendered theirs to the European Union.

He congratulated himself for steering the nation into climate change agreements. Yet the number of competent scientists who strongly disagree with the need for such action continues to grow.

Near the beginning of his speech, Mr. Obama praised America’s “commitment to the rule of law.” But, like numerous predecessors, he employs executive orders to make law, a horrendous flouting of the rule of law. He also sanctions sending our military into war without a constitutionally required congressional declaration of war. And he does nothing to abolish unconstitutional departments of energy, education, medicine, housing, and more. The rule of law has virtually disappeared.

Missing completely from his address, however, was any mention of the enormous national debt that will almost double during his presidency ($10.9 billion in 2009 to $20 billion when he leaves in 2017). Indebtedness that grows daily can alone destroy this nation.

The state of the union isn’t “strong.” It is weak and getting weaker. And much of the blame for this growing weakness can be laid on Barack Hussein Obama.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news by signing up at our Facebook page.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


Scientific Hokum and its Destructive Political Agenda

Scientific Hokum and its Destructive Political Agenda
by JBS President Emeritus John F. McManus

The war on the use of available energy (coal, oil, and natural gas) not only continues, it received a huge boost at the recent United Nations Climate Summit in Paris.

The doomsayers who gathered in the “City of Light” decided that the world must be saved from certain calamity by markedly reducing the amount of carbon dioxide put into the air by burning fossil fuels. But the carbon dioxide resulting from such fuel burning happens to be well known among competent scientists as the “gas of life.” Simply stated, plants eat carbon dioxide. The more that’s available, the healthier and larger will be the trees and plants that humanity uses for food, building, and more.

Orange trees as part of an experiment to see the effects of elevated levels of carbon dioxide. The result? Plants grew three times larger and produced 10 times more fruit! Photo and charts from U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.

Several years ago, scientists at the U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory in Arizona conducted a remarkable experiment. They planted small orange trees side by side with each tree enveloped in a clear plastic container whose top was left open. Half of the trees were supplied with ambient air and the other half received air enriched with 300 parts per million of carbon dioxide. After four and a half years, the trees enriched with carbon dioxide grew three times larger – both above and below ground – than those exposed only to ambient air. Also, the trees receiving the carbon dioxide produced ten times more fruit than the nearby trees that didn’t receive the added carbon dioxide.

An experiment like that has undoubtedly been duplicated elsewhere. It demonstrates carbon dioxide’s value, not its supposed harm. But what the Arizona scientists showed was politically incorrect. Some even feared that publicizing the results of their work could lead to cancellation of their funding by the government. No one is supposed to conduct experiments that contradict politically correct conclusions.

Increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is blamed for melting polar ice, rising sea levels, droughts, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and more. But fluctuations in the Earth’s temperature have been occurring regularly for as long as records have been kept. As for the claimed weather anomalies, they too have occurred before coal, oil, and natural gas heated our homes and ran our industries.

The war on carbon dioxide amounts to a war on productivity, even a war on life itself. And there are plenty of scientists who have taken a stand against the scientific fright-peddlers and the hordes of agenda-promoting politicians. As recently as 2014, Dr. Art Robinson, the co-founder of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, obtained 31,000 signatures from American scientists on his Global Warming Petition Project. It stated in part, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.” If you have never heard of this petition, its political incorrectness is the reason.

Who promotes the fears about climate change? From 2008 to 2015, Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer chaired a prestigious United Nations panel dealing with the topic. He stated his goal in promoting fears about carbon dioxide: “We redistribute the world’s wealth by climate policy.” Separately, UN official Christiana Figueres said that the real goal of the claims about climate change was “a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world.” These individuals are not alone.

The truth is that carbon dioxide is a blessing and the claims of global warming and climate change alarmists amount to dangerous politically motivated hokum.

The New American, a JBS affiliate, sent a team over to the UN Paris Climate Conference. The January 4, 2016, issue offers their findings. Either download or order physical copies today of “UN Climate Summit: Shackling the Planet to ‘Save’ It.” Learn more about the climate agreement that will affect every American, and what you can do about it.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news by signing up at our Facebook page.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and President. Mr. McManus has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs and is also author of a number of educational DVDs and books. Now President Emeritus, he continues his involvement with the Society through public speaking and writing for this blog, the JBS Bulletin, and The New American.


A Welcome Endorsement for Nuclear Power

A Welcome Endorsement for Nuclear Power
by JBS President John F. McManus

Joshua S. Goldstein is emeritus professor of international relations at American University and a research scholar at the University of Massachusetts. Steven Pinker is professor of psychology at Harvard University. These two recently teamed up to pen a lengthy column in the Boston Globe entitled “Inconvenient Truths for the Environmental Movement.”

Steven Pinker is professor of psychology at Harvard University (Photo by Steven Pinker (Rebecca Goldstein) [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons Wikimedia Commons).

The two men do believe climate change is caused by human action. They contend that burning of fossil fuels to produce electricity by humans – resulting in carbon dioxide being sent into the atmosphere – causes a rise in the earth’s temperature. There are growing numbers of scientists who disagree. But, unlike most of the would-be banners of fossil fuel, Goldstein and Pinker’s solution doesn’t target its use in generating electricity. They thereby separate themselves from environmental extremists who insist that the carbon dioxide byproduct of burning coal and oil to produce electricity is a hazard serious enough to ban the practice. Then they present a strong case for nuclear power.

Here’s how these two educators addressed this topic: “Nuclear power is the world’s most abundant and scalable [reachable] carbon-free energy source. In today’s world, every nuclear power plant that is not built is a fossil-fuel plant that does get built…. Yet the use of nuclear power has been stagnant or even contracting.” Their point, of course, is that by not relying on nuclear power, the need for burning coal and oil cannot be avoided if electricity is needed – which it surely is. They then make the point that solar and wind power amounts to a mere one percent of the need and cannot be counted on to meet the needs for electric power.

Aware of the fears surrounding nuclear power, Goldstein and Pinker point out that 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan killed no one. But, they note in sadness, it unnecessarily led Germany to shut down some of its nuclear plants. In France where nuclear power produces three-quarters of the nation’s electricity, environmentalists are forcing a shutdown. And the anti-nukes in America also wrongly claim that Japan’s nuclear accident is reason to abandon nuclear power here.

Many Americans can recall the 1979 mishap at Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island plant. No one died and no one was even hurt. A camper who might have set up his tent right outside the injured plant would never have received any unwanted radiation during the fright-producing coverage of the incident. Pro-nuclear scientist Dr. Edward Teller worked himself into a state of exhaustion attempting to refute the nonsense about this accident being spread by Ralph Nader, Jane Fonda, and others. He actually suffered a heart attack and claimed his countering of the misinformation aimed at the American people led to him to being “the only victim of Three Mile Island.”

Late Colorado University Professor Petr Beckmann, the author of “The Health Hazards of Not Going Nuclear,” consistently sought to counter fears about the use of nuclear power. He pointed to the numerous deaths resulting from mining and transporting coal for power generation and the corresponding safety in the use of nuclear power. Pittsburgh University’s Dr. Bernard Cohen, the author of “Nuclear Science and Society,” noted the safety associated with nuclear power production. Before he passed away, he stated: “The radiation that a person is exposed to by living within 25 miles of a nuclear plant is less than he would get from one coast-to-coast airplane flight every ten years.”

America should turn to nuclear power for its electricity. We are grateful to Messrs. Goldstein and Pinker for saying so.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news and sign up at JBS.org or on our Facebook page.


McManus_2Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.