Dear Editor:
RE: Disappointed, Aug. 31.
Jeremy Squires asserts that he is amused by the back-and-forth on climate change by older readers. At just more than twice his age, I think I may be one of those older readers he refers to. I do share the view that the climate is changing, and that there is no doubt in my mind that human activity has an impact on the climate. I have trouble with Jeremy’s question: “Why would you ask if science is true?” There may be some science that is considered settled, but certainly not all of it is, otherwise we would no longer need scientists.
It must be then, that ideally it would be the scientific process that we would trust, not necessarily blindly trusting or forever believing the most recent conclusions or predictions, which further science may change?
Science does get proven wrong or needs to change from time to time. I will make the claim that politics often displaces science, or selectively chooses the science upon which decisions are made.
Duane Koster,
Guelph