Rebuttal to climate change believers

After two letters (“Spoken like a dinosaur,” and “Truth behind climate catastrophe,” Oct. 3) with wild critiques of my recent commentary against the climate-change hysteria (“Questioning the Truth behind Climate Catastrophe,” Sept. 26) and the editor’s comment appended to Chuck Park’s letter (“Cobb is spot on,” Oct. 10) I feel a rebuttal is in order. 

First of all, the critics did not address the central issue that we simply cannot produce enough power without fossil fuels, and a lot of people could die if we attempt the radical curtailment of carbon- dioxide output. Park’s promotion of fusion energy is on the mark. Why haven’t the climate-change people pushed this big-time? 

Second, the common line that scientists who criticize the man-caused climate-change thesis are on the take from the oil companies is an easy pot-shot. I know of very reputable scientists who have come to their conclusions, not for money, but from honest scientific investigation. 

Take Judith Curry, atmospheric scientist and climatologist, who was hounded out of her position at Georgia Tech for questioning the prevailing dogma. Or others, including John Cristy, climatologist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, and Henrik Svensmark, physicist at the Danish National Space Institute. This is just a sampling. I could cite many more.

Finally, doing the research, doesn’t mean just looking up what a website like Climate Feedback has to say. Despite the image I feel they try to purvey, they are highly biased and are staffed by true-believers in the climate-catastrophe religion. 


Hunter Cobb