An alternative look at climate

n response to the editorial in the Dec. 9 issue of the Independent, blasting Prime Minister Harper for not acting quicker on climate change, I feel compelled to point out what more and more people are thinking: that climate change is quite possibly a dangerous and costly hoax.

Dear editor,

In response to the editorial in the Dec. 9 issue of the Independent, blasting Prime Minister Harper for not acting quicker on climate change, I feel compelled to point out what more and more people are thinking: that climate change is quite possibly a dangerous and costly hoax. I suppose hoax might be too strong a word since many people who believe and/or study climate change have good intentions and desire to protect our planet – however, it seems that in many circles, science has become more about “trends” and economics than truth and experimentation. Perhaps a cursory look at some of the facts will help to sort through the rubble of extremists on both sides of the issue. Fact: The average temperature of the earth is changing. Fiction: This is a new phenomenon.

The average global temperature has always been changing. The Romans wrote about growing grapes in Britain in the first century, but in the dark ages, it was too cold to grow grapes. Then, another warm up in the later middle ages allowed for growing grapes again.

The fact is, global temperature patterns are shown to be like a sine wave, fluctuating up and down across a “median point”. Despite the fact that average global temperatures had been rising in the latter part of the 20th century, recent studies have shown a decline in global temperature over the last decade – a trend that many climatologists are failing to recognize, or adequately explain – with some even trying to skew the data that clearly shows this to be true.

There are two critical questions to ask: First, is the effect of greenhouse gases the only explanation for a changing global climate, or is climate change a regularly (albeit slowly) and naturally occurring process? Second, can our scientific method of “question-research-hypothesis-testing-analysis-conclusion” adequately explain global climate change?

The answer to both questions is that science, no matter how meticulous the research and testing is, cannot adequately explain changing global temperatures.

The existence of these factors alone should call into question anyone and any theory that says greenhouse gases are THE culprit of climate change, and also call into question anyone who says that the average global temperature will continue to rise without seeing any cooling trends. The fact is, global temperatures are decreasing, despite a dramatic rise in C02 emissions (mainly due to China’s booming economy). Many scientists even predict a long term cooling trend. This flies in the face of the “global warming” hypothesis. The reality is twofold: we simply cannot gather enough raw data to be able to adequately research, hypothesize and test and hence, we cannot arrive at any certain conclusion, and the limited data we do possess does not support the fundamental claims by those in the scientific community who predict doom and gloom for our earth because of greenhouse gases.

See Alternative on page A5