Letter to the Editor - Friday, December 6: It’s up and down
LIKE most sceptics (not non- believers) I am as doubtful about the disbelievers as I am about your distorted research.
Whilst there is some obvious similarity in the rough (very rough) movement of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and overall temperatures, there is clear evidence from the hopelessly inaccurate forecasts that the science is not settled.
Complete research is the key to accurate conclusions. I have little doubt that you have sought out only those headlines that suit your side of the argument. But I also found today a headline that said - "More than 1000 cold snowy records set in US, one small media outlet covers it" (Is this outrageous bias?). When we combine the two views of the headlines, the only conclusion we can reasonably draw is that this type of extremes probably occurs every time the CO2 cycle reaches a high level.
As a genuine sceptic I am tired of watching imported "experts" talk about reducing CO2 levels to those existing before the Industrial Revolution. If you have studied the data that is freely available on the internet you would be horrified at the thought. Every time the CO2 concentration has dropped to this "perfect" level in the past 400,000 years it has continued to fall and culminated in an ice age.
What will the shoddy science do then? Can we expect a call to burn more coal in a futile attempt to act as a human thermostat? These are the people that you are backing in your determined support of the current global warming industry.
Isn't it about time we demanded that our scientists from both sides of the argument accept there are differing points of view and work together towards getting the science right. The matter is too important. We should demand that the scientists, media, public, et al, stop acting like football supporters barracking for their favourite team.