Dear Editor:
Re: Groundhog hogwash, Feb. 7.
I can assure Ron Moore that I do not depend on a rodent for weather or climate predictions, nor does NASA scientist Roy Spencer, whose views I quoted in my previous letter. In fact, we both believe in global warming. However, we are skeptical that recent human activity is the sole or major reason for warming. We also don’t agree with the alarmist claims that the Earth will soon become uninhabitable if temperatures continue to increase at the modest rates that have been observed. Nor do we agree with media headlines that the latest extreme weather event (heat, cold, flooding, drought, hurricanes, you name it) was caused by climate change. Some things are beyond our control and can’t be fixed by carbon taxes.
Why should we take at face value every scary prediction of government-paid UN scientists, many of who would likely lose their jobs if they challenged the alarmist view? They have been known to fudge or exaggerate figures to fit their theories. They ignore previous warming periods that didn’t result in catastrophic changes to the planet, when it was likely much warmer than today. They have been wrong in predicting higher temperatures and greater increases in ocean levels than we have experienced, the demise of polar bears, etc.
Moore claims Dr. Spencer’s theories have been debunked in peer-reviewed publications, but he neglected to mention Spencer is author or co-author of over 30 peer-reviewed articles on climate change.
Henry Brunsveld,
Puslinch