« Continue Browsing

e-mail article Print     e-mail article E-mail

Jack Williams, Fargo, Published March 15 2014

Letter: The hype distorts the facts

In the March 8 issue, The Forum spreads the climate change storyline. At least it’s on the editorial page.

I attended my first “global warming” seminar in Colorado 15 years ago presented by researchers from the University of Colorado. The first speaker that day emphasized that it was important to understand that the temperature changes to be discussed would occur over a 100-year period and worldwide. She suggested that nobody present should be presenting localized short-range weather opinions since the subject had to be viewed over a longer period of time. This was an excellent presentation on the subject until the Q & A started with opinions about that current year’s snowfall being higher than average, the temperatures that year were above normal, etc. etc., all ignoring the first speaker. The ignorance continues.

Sometime in the past 15 years “global warming” became “climate change.” Now they didn’t have to confine themselves to temperature, they could talk about the weather.

So what happened to the 100-year time period? Climate change is occurring faster, they told us. In the same Forum issue, another writer suggests that catastrophes will occur within the next 10 to 20 years, flooding ports, obliterating islands.

Are these the same people who said we’d run out of oil by now? Since the entire theoretical concept of warming was based on computer models, what changed in the computer models? Who wrote those models, and why is what they produce called fact? You’re a newspaper. Your job is to present information to us. Where is the information?

One of the more despicable tactics when attempting to destroy another’s opinion is demonization. So those of us who are skeptical are called “deniers.” Did that come from Holocaust “deniers”? Do they equate the two?

One of the more informative books on the subject is “Cool It” by Bjorn Lomborg. He is not a “denier” but he suggests that the hysterical hype being promoted is not rational. I recommend it to your readers who still have open minds.