Dear A.M. Costa Rica:
Mike Michael (in Monday’s edition) made it clear he has no background in science and is an environmentalist in training. That being the case, his summaries need to be considered as opinion without scientific explanations regarding the environment.
He mentioned, “A lot of folks do not let the facts or common sense enter into their thought processes, so many times the hidden agenda pops up.” That is true but if you get facts from programs with some of the most reliable information like NASA, NOAA or Scientific American and many other reliable scientific sources and papers, you will get the facts that global warming is happening and the human race is having a substantial impact in regards to it.
Mike also tries to simplify the equation by using statistics that have nothing to do with the human impact on the planet.
He narrowly uses the argument regarding the current world population of 7.2 billion people could fit into the state of Texas and Montana. The real equation on this topic is how much land is being used to sustain the population, and how much habitat destruction and pollution are having an affect on the entire planet. That is what needs to be considered, and you will see we have overstepped our boundaries.
I have studied this topic for many years and have a background in the sciences and tropical ecology. Mike claims this is a political issue, left vs. right. It should not be a political issue. It should be an issue of raw scientific evidence by reputable research. As most know, the vast majority of scientists are on the side of global warming being an enormous issue of great consequences. Chistiana Figueres may have an agenda but what she is basically saying can be backed up by the majority consensus of climatologists and others in the climate field.