Please help keep this Site Going

Menopausal Mother Nature

News about Climate Change and our Planet

Uncategorized

Letters: Response to climate change opinion – Loveland Reporter-Herald

Climate change denier provides a limited perspective on complex issue

Monday, a guest opinion titled “Climate crisis is nothing compared to proposed cure,” by Dr. Carl Langner was published. As with an earlier guest opinion (Nov. 15, 2021) by Dr. Langner, I, as a trained atmospheric scientist (MS and PhD from Colorado State’s Atmospheric Sciences Department) want to further enlighten readers about this complex global issue.

Dr. Langner’s perspective comes from someone who has worked in the fossil fuel industry. One of the sources he refers to is a book edited by a geologist, Dr. Don Easterbrook, titled “Evidence-Based Climate Science: Data Opposing CO2 Emissions as a primary source of Global Warming.” It appears that Dr. Langner has hand-picked selected climate-related “evidence” to support the further development and use of fossil fuels within the U.S. and across the world. This is not the process by which one examines scientific issues. Data indicates that greenhouse gases such as CO2 and methane are increasing in the atmosphere and are creating climate-related extreme temperature and precipitation events at a greater frequency, duration, and intensity than those experienced earlier in the observed climate record.

I would strongly encourage Dr. Langner and others who are interested in the topic of global climate change to spend time evaluating recent climate science published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. These documents provide the most up-to-date, extensive, and sound atmospheric evidence of how climate is changing across the planet. If Dr. Langner is really interested in learning about the most current information on climate change, I would suggest that he attend the Annual American Meteorological Society meeting scheduled for January 2023 in Denver.

Remember, when approaching a complex issue, one must evaluate information from all perspectives, not just those that provide the answers one wants to hear.

David Changnon, Ph.D., Berthoud

Climate change denier’s predictions have been wrong

Carl Langner in his recent guest opinion promotes a book by Don Easterbrook, “Evidence Based Climate Science.” Before wasting your money on this expensive book, I suggest that readers research the author. Don Easterbrook is a global warming denier and frequent speaker at the Heartland Institute sponsored meetings.

Here are some past quotes from him. In 2006, he said, “The current warm cycle should end soon and global temperatures should cool.” In 2008, he said “predicted cooling seems to have begun.” In 2008 he also said, “In a nutshell, in 2001, I put my reputation on the line and published my predictions for entering a global cooling cycle about 2007.” In 2014, he said, “I am continuing to predict global cooling for the next couple of decades at least”. He bases his predictions on historical temperature cycles and claims that increasing levels of carbon dioxide could not cause global warming.  He must have failed Physics 101. We all know from personal experience what the heat waves of the last decade have been like.

Carl Langner makes reference to satellite data that do not confirm as large a temperature rise as is recorded by ground temperature readings. We do have accurate atmospheric temperature readings from many satellites, not just three. What is important is that these represent “atmospheric” temperatures and are not calibrated in any way with the global surface-based thermometer readings. It is important to analyze any source of information before concluding that it is accurate. We are all victims of confirmation bias and look for information that confirms our opinions. We should all look at the forest and not just a single dead tree.

Jerry Chase MD FACP, Loveland

LEAVE A RESPONSE

Please help keep this Site Going