December 27, 2010
Climate Change: Science and Skeptics
To the Editor:
Re “A Scientist, His Work and a Climate Reckoning” (“Temperature Rising” series, front page, Dec. 22):
It is a tragic commentary on a 40-year decline in scientific literacy in America that the work of Charles David Keeling on rising carbon dioxide levels is so egregiously misinterpreted by conservative legislators and a significant fraction of the general public.
At a time when we need greater understanding of science and scientific method, we are instead offered scriptural rationalizations to deny the existence of global warming.
At a time when we need unity of purpose in combating one of the most significant threats humanity has ever faced, we are instead offered the blustery hyperpartisanship of incoming committee chairmen who eagerly anticipate hindering the researchers who are our first line of defense.
At a time when we need wisdom and farsightedness to recognize the implications of Dr. Keeling’s 50 meticulous years of work, we are instead offered folly, measured out in quarterly profit margins and two-year electoral cycles.
Warren Senders
Medford, Mass., Dec. 23, 2010
•
To the Editor:
Your otherwise excellent article did not mention the most frightening aspect of climate change: the “feedback loops” that can cause runaway temperature increases.
Examples include the increased heat absorption when seawater replaces sea ice; the release of methane from thawing tundra; and the change in ocean carbon dioxide absorption with increased ocean temperature.
The possibility that these positive feedback effects (“positive” in the sense that changes produce more changes in the same direction) may lead to uncontrollable temperature increases, even without further human contribution, is the most compelling reason to do whatever we can now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Allen E. Armstrong
Portland, Me., Dec. 22, 2010
•
To the Editor:
Your article shows that China has overtaken the United States as the largest emitter of carbon dioxide that is dangerously accumulating in the atmosphere. But China has already taken more forceful actions to limit emissions than we have: stricter vehicle fuel-efficiency standards; a minimum percentage of electricity from renewable energy nationwide and a guaranteed price for it; requirements to close down many gigawatts of inefficient coal-fired power plants; and greater investments in wind and solar energy, which are enabling it to capture those expanding markets in China and abroad.
Now, the main obstacle to greater international cooperation on climate stabilization is not China but the failure in this country to enact national climate legislation.
Robert Repetto
Boulder, Colo., Dec. 22, 2010
The writer is an economist with the United Nations Foundation and author of the coming book “America’s Climate Problem: The Way Forward.”
•
To the Editor:
Your superbly written article about the life and work of the climate scientist Charles David Keeling makes the scientific issues regarding climate change crystal-clear.
Debate on the science of climate change is to be welcomed. However, some (but not all) climate-change contrarians lace their arguments with sarcasm, innuendo and snide remarks, and question the honesty and integrity of any climate scientist who argues that global warming is detrimental to human welfare.
Light on this controversy will be shed not by radio talk-show remarks but rather by reasoned and civil debate.
Michael Klein
Brooklyn, Dec. 22, 2010
