Doug Hornig's article "Climate Change Revisited" brought a
flood of reader emails.
Here are two representative letters:
I've often considered myself intelligent when it comes to
sensationalism and herd mentality. Once again you have proved me wrong with
your insightful and, I might add, factual analysis of an otherwise sensational
topic. Global warming. Absolutely brilliant article and I must say I couldn't
stop laughing through the whole thing at the bitter irony of how little I
actually knew on the subject. All I can say is thank you, thank you, thank
you, for facilitating proper knowledge. You have once again brought
another mystical beast into the light of day. After all, it wasn't that long
ago (a mere 400 years in a six-billion-year-old planetary cycle) that the
earth was considered... well... flat? It is flat, isn't it?
Do continue your wonderful research and continue to shed
light of all the dinosaurs, both living and non-living. I for one greatly
appreciate your newsletter. Be blessed.
(Marc A.)
***
I thought this was a very good article, although I think
the author is still missing the point. The point of any scientific analysis of
human behavior is whether we are influencing the environment in which we live
by our own actions. It is clear that we have increased the level of CO2
significantly. We know how to reduce this, for example, by using more nuclear
power.
Should we not seek to reduce our potential impact on the
Earth's climate? Since we do not really know what effect the increased CO2 will
have, shouldn't we seek to minimize it? Or should we just hope for the best?
This is the real debate, and if believing that we should
minimize the unknown effects of a human-based climactic variable on the Earth
makes me an "alarmist," then so be it. Perhaps it would have been
more objective of you, since you used pejorative language to describe those who
favor action on global warming as alarmists, then "skeptics" should
instead have been labeled as "ostriches."
Fortunately for us, so far the Earth has shown us what a
marvelous self-correcting system it is. Should we just assume that will
continue, or should we take action so that Nature decides what happens next,
not us?
(Tom L.)
See more reader comments here.