Thomas Ellenbecker, St. Joseph
RE: Science Deniers from Jan. 23 Newsleader
I do not know who or where Dennis Dalman talks to people, but his editorial on “science deniers” sounds a lot like how he talks about conservatives. I know a lot of conservatives and they are nothing like he describes. As usual, no use of quotes or footnotes in his editorial, so I must assume he’s talking about his family or acquaintances. Other than Michelle Bachman’s supposed quote on carbon dioxide, where does he come up with this tripe? I have a lot of friends who are skeptical on the cause of climate change and they do not believe what he says they do. None of us want to pollute the earth for our children and grandchildren, for example, but we also do not want to ruin the economy for them either. Here are some of the reasons:
- The lack of accurate science. ‘Good scientists’ are drawing conclusions from a small set of facts that have yet to prove the warming that is occurring is man-made – not whether or not it’s happening. By definition, the climate is always changing – it has never remained static.
- “2014 was the warmest year ever” – the only problem with this ‘fact’ is even NASA’s “good scientists” who reported this say they are only “38 percent sure” this is true. That means, if my ‘denier’ math is correct, there is a 62 percent chance that it’s not!
- There has been no rise in average world temperature during the last 17 years even though the amount of carbon dioxide has risen. Remember the “hockey stick” temperature rise and the false data from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia? Are these Dalman’s “facts” for good science?
- Where has the climate computer modeling, done during the last 40 years, ever been correct? More good science?
- What is the “good scientists” perfect average world temperature and how has this been determined? There have been jungles in the Antarctic and glaciers covering North America – do either of these scenarios represent the “perfect global temperature?”
- And how about the last 40 years of idiotic predictions by “good scientists” like Al Gore. Everything from global warming “killing off all the polar bears” and an “increase in the number and severity of hurricanes” to the “Arctic Ocean remaining open all year” and “less ice in the Antarctic?” Maybe they should stop with the doom and gloom and stick to the facts.
- The lack of a willingness, by the “good scientists,” to debate the facts of climate change and dismissing the scientists who disagree as “deniers.”
- The lack of a realization we are looking at a very small “micro” slice of world climate history. To use phrases like “the warmest ever” and “past the tipping point” by “good scientists” is ridiculous.
- And finally, denying the fact the earth’s climate does go through 10,000- to 15,000-year cycles and we are reaching the warmest point of the latest one. The earth will start cooling again – it may take 6,000 to 8,000 years but the glaciers will return and man will be wishing for the good old days of global warming.
In conclusion, the “good scientists” say that: if it’s warmer than average – global warming. If it’s cooler than average – global warming. More rain – global warming, drought – global warming. More snow – global warming, no snow – global warming. More hurricanes – global warming, no hurricanes – global warming. More tornadoes – global warming, no tornadoes – global warming. And on and on and on… How can you argue with these “facts?” According to them, no matter what happens, it’s caused by global warming.
