Show us data that climate change skeptics are wrong
Re: “Checking climate facts — really!” (Citizen, Aug. 27)
The letter writer’s allegations regarding “the climate skeptic community” are no different than if someone were to claim that “the climate alarmist community” shouldn’t be listened to because they are taking money from foreign-funded environmental lobby groups — whether they are or aren’t — and that they warn about CO2 warming only because otherwise the government won’t give them their research grants. Their data is either correct or incorrect, regardless of who funded them. Show us in data points exactly how they’re wrong, instead of saying “most scientists agree”. Science is not a consensus; when people suddenly stop questioning and investigating, there is no progress.
Speaking of data, does the letter writer support the “adjustment” of old temperature records after the fact in modern times, instead of leaving them as-is and just accepting them?
Patrick Moore, formerly of Greenpeace, has an interesting take on this issue. He believes that if humans hadn’t started adding lots of CO2 back into the air, eventually the level would drop below 150 PPM, which he said is very bad for plants. He also argues that more CO2 also means plant stomata don’t have to open as wide, thus they lose less water through them, and that even at current levels we are still at historically low levels of atmospheric CO2, and that proxy data which included measurements of fossil leaf stomata indicates CO2 was much higher in prehistoric times, such as 7000 PPM around 500 million years ago, and 1,000 -2,000 PPM during the Cretaceous era. It’s certainly something to consider.
April J. Gibson
Duncan
