Letter to the Editor graphic

This is a response to anarticle by Richard Penaskovic: “Global Climate Change, part two: Hope for the future,” The Auburn Villager, Nov. 7, 2019.

In the referenced article, Richard Penaskovic incorrectly states that I “feel that global climate change will inexorably take over and devastate the Earth, despite our best efforts to minimize its damage.” This quote was from a summary by The Guardian, UK-based online news, of the UN IPPCC August report; not my belief.

Like many untrained people, I have little technical knowledge of the truth of the Climate Change (formerly Global Warming) warning; I don’t deny that it is true, but have yet to see unbiased data that supports this claim. Often, those like me are referred to as “deniers,” when we should be labeled “unbelievers.”

My questioning this claim comes from a host of problems that have been part of the advocates’ assertions; I will only relate three since I have limited editorial space but will provide many others if editorial space is allowed in the future:

(1) In the 1970-1980 period we were warned of the coming “Ice Age;” advocates produced various data that pointed to this coming catastrophic demise of life on earth. Now some few years later, we are warned of Global Warming and that man was responsible for this problem.

When data showed that the Earth had not warmed in two decades, advocates changed the name to: Climate Change,” and with it, claims that changes in weather were caused by man-made pollutants, CO2 in particular.

(2) Advocates stated that there was a 97 percent consensus among scientists that human activity caused global warning. Science have never been based on consensus; those who thought otherwise were silenced and defamed. Many lost their credibility, study grants and positions because they disagreed with this conclusion.

This 97-percent claim comes from the results of a survey taken by the University of Illinois, who sent out 10,000 requests to various earth scientists. Some 3146 responded, and of those only 77 identified themselves as “climate scientist,” and only 75 of that 77 agreed that humans caused global warning. Divide 75 by 77 and you get: 97 percent! That 75 represents only 2.38 percent of all responses. 

(3) Many advocates are those seeking control over all peoples and democratic governments, with the power to collapse industrialize civilization, limit population growth, ration and redistribute wealth, change human eating habits and “models of consumption and production,” destroy capitalism, and private ownership of property. Many unbelievers see this movement as a fanatical “religion” that allows no other opinions on this subject.

Carl S. Gagliano

Auburn, Alabama

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.