Dear A.M. Costa Rica:
Your editorial was right on. Even the president of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, who just had to resign, said global warming was his religion and his faith, meaning, that like faith in all religions is believing without evidence, or despite evidence.
There has never been such a concerted effort to suppress dissent, while using bad science to support doubtful opinion.
Just recently, all the newspapers in the world had a headline: “2014 hottest year on record – IPPC”
Only at the end of the article did it give the facts. 2014 was hotter by 0.02 degrees, with a margin of error of 0.20 degrees. No self-respecting scientist would make such a meaningless statement.
And no scientist would ever say “The debate is over.” It is never over. The whole basis of science is to depend on evidence, and any new evidence has to be accounted for.
To get back to the margin of error, there has been no increase in global temperature for the last 18 years. This is a huge embarrassment to the IPPC, and they are desperate to come up with a reason. So far this century the deniers have been right, and the IPPC wrong.
As you rightly observe, we cannot preach in favor of pollution, but we must not be panicked into expensive measures which are neither needed nor necessary.
They cannot continue to scare us by failing to mention things that do not support their dodgy computer predictions:
That Antarctic ice is increasing and now at a maximum. That sea levels have not increased. I was in the Maldives, and there is no measurable change. That bad weather is not caused by warming.
That the 97 percent of scientists, they love to quote, only agreed that there is climate change (surprise, surprise), and that man-made emissions had “some effect.” Hardly a ringing endorsement to make us change our way of life.
Unfortunately, if climate change is your religion, it is goodbye to rational discourse, and goodbye truth and logic.
The press might help by giving both sides of the story, but they thrive on scare tactics. Need I say I am not supported by oil companies. On the contrary, I am supporting them.