In 2007, 2010 and 2013, Congressional hearings on climate change were cancelled or postponed due to snow. While short term weather patterns do not prove or disprove long-term trends, one cannot help but chuckle at the juxtaposition of the two events. In the same vein, DivestNU is pushing for Northeastern’s endowment to cease investing in the fossil fuel industry in the throes of a winter that seemingly will not end.
All irony and kidding aside, divestment is inspired by a movement based not on science, but alarmism. It is focused on promoting an ideology, not ensuring that Northeastern’s endowment will be a robust source of funding for the incredible academic work that takes place at our university.
The fallacies of climate alarmism are too numerous to list here, so I will address the ones germane to the conversation started by DivestNU. In a 2013 UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, the panel admits that previous reports “may not have taken enough notice of natural variability in the climate, therefore exaggerating the effect of increased carbon emissions on world temperatures.” Additionally, the report states that “most models simulate a small decreasing trend in Antarctic sea ice extent, in contrast to the small increasing trend in observations … There is low confidence in the scientific understanding of the small observed increase.”
Nature, “the world’s most highly cited interdisciplinary science journal,” published a study in 2013 which found that out of 117 climate predictions made in the 1990s, 114 overestimated the amount of warming, on average predicting twice as much warming as what actually occurred. Similarly, John Christy, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville states, “I looked at 73 climate models going back to 1979 and every single one predicted more warming than happened in the real world.” What DivestNU is asking the university to do is trust models and studies that have been wrong for decades to be correct far into the future, then use that faulty data as a rationale for divesting from companies they happen to dislike.
To directly address the issue at hand, Northeastern University does not need to divest from fossil fuels in order to comply with its “principles,” as argued in a pro-divestment letter to The News last week. As an institution of higher learning, Northeastern’s foremost principle should be to provide students with an education that prepares them for successful careers in their chosen fields. An endowment helps a university accomplish this goal, but does not do so by kowtowing to the ideological demands of a vocal minority. In recent years, Student Government Association (SGA) election deadlines have required extensions to reach the 20 percent turnout threshold necessary for the vote to become official. Any majority on the referendum will reflect the viewpoint of 10 to 20 percent of the student body – hardly a large enough number to signal a mandate for change to Northeastern’s administration.
-Patrick O’Neil is a junior finance major.
