by Stephen A. Poschmann
I would appreciate the opportunity to respond to K.D. Cordes’ critique (Jan. 29) of my global warming piece that ran a week earlier (Jan. 22). My earlier piece was short on supporting details in an effort to concentrate on my overall point: that pro-global warming government policies are based on unproven science and therefore is wrongheaded and reckless. I hope the newspaper indulges me to answer Cordes’ questions.
Where can I see or read The Great Global Warming Swindle? Like most of Cordes’ questions, this supports one of the points of my first letter: that all global warming dissent is marginalized and suppressed by the media powers that be. It is still not available on Netflix. But, it is now found in Amazon.com. There is also an entry about it in Wikipedia. Check the internet.
Paraphrased: What scientific experience do former Czech president Vaclav Havel, Michael Crichton, etc. have? Former Czech president Vaclav Havel is a smart and savvy politician. In other words, he possesses the same qualifications to speak on global warming as Al Gore. Havel, as well as the other politicians I previously named, were mentioned because they have influence in changing public policy and because they are courageous to speak their minds on this subject. Michael Crichton, aside from being a successful novelist, received a degree in anthropology, a medical doctorate from Harvard, and a fellowship in biological studies. He has given public policy talks on environmental theory. The relevant credentials or job titles for the rest of the names were noted in my previous letter.
Where can I find a list of the hundreds of scientists who have publicly signed on as global warming dissenters? The “U. S. Senate Minority Report: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims” can be found on line at epw.senate.gov. Also, the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine has enlisted over 31,000 scientists and engineers publicly rejecting global warming theory (found at www.oism.org/pproject). Additionally, scores of scientists will speak in the 2009 International conference on Climate Change in March. This conference is a gathering that opposes global warming theory.
Paraphrased: Identify studies that counterbalance certain global warming claims. Generally speaking, if one looks hard enough, one can find scarcely publicized stories about studies that show glaciers growing and polar bear populations that are increasing, etc. Since Cordes highlights specific topics, I will address those. Glacier National Park: According to the National Climatic Data Center there has been glacial melt in Montana, and the rate has been consistent for over 100 years. Also, Patrick Michaels, professor of environmental sciences at University of Virginia has found that the Montana glaciers began melting in the mid-1800’s after the “little ice age”. Greenland Icecap: The Greenland ice trends are inconclusive at best. Research by glaciologist William Krabill has shown inconsistent trends and according to a study in the Journal of Geophysical Research in 2001, ice coverage in Greenland was shown to be steady and likely increasing. Northwest Passage: This does not require a study. The fact is that around 100 years ago there was less ice in the Northwest Passage than there is now and ships sailed the route. The ice will grow and recede due to normal changes in the planet’s temperature. Mount Kilimanjaro: A study published in the March 2004 issue of International Journal of Climatology showed no warming trend in that region and attributed the loss of ice to deforestation which resulted in a reduction in moisture in the region.
Thankfully, there are sites on the internet that keep track of global warming skepticism and dissent.
Finally, Cordes invites me to keep my opinions to myself, as is common among global warming cultists. I decline that request, as that is what letters to the editor and opinion pages are for.