An­other sub­terfuge

The Northland Age - - Opinion -

Bruce Bell’s lat­est re­sponse (Here you go then, letters April 11), by fo­cus­ing on past hurricanes and floods, is an­other sub­terfuge to de­fend his de­nial of global warm­ing. Again he re­fuses to ac­knowl­edge the science and the over­whelm­ing ev­i­dence in sup­port.

While agree­ing that these past weather events took place, it is puz­zling to see how this has any rel­e­vance to today’s cli­mate change. What is sig­nif­i­cant is that sea tem­per­a­tures con­tinue to rise there is clear ev­i­dence that the fre­quency and in­ten­sity of trop­i­cal cy­clones and floods are on the in­crease.

As I have stated be­fore, with­out green­house gases the Earth’s sur­face would be com­pletely frozen over, some 33 de­grees Cel­sius colder than at present. Water vapour ac­counts for most of our green­house gases.

Our knowl­edge of CO2 as a green­house gas goes back more than 150 years, and adding more into the at­mos­phere — we are al­ready ap­proach­ing a 50 per cent in­crease above the pre-in­dus­trial level — will trap more heat from es­cap­ing from the Earth’s sur­face. More than half of the one de­gree Cel­sius rise in global tem­per­a­tures since pre-in­dus­trial times has oc­curred in the past 40 years, at a time when we should have seen a small de­crease ow­ing to a mea­sured slight drop in the sun’s to­tal out­put.

Bruce Bell’s per­sis­tent de­nial of the science and sup­port­ing ev­i­dence sug­gests ei­ther he has a stake in the fos­sil fuel in­dus­try, or he is en­trenched in some form of fun­da­men­tal re­li­gious dogma to re­buff in­for­ma­tion that would be up­set­ting or anxiety-pro­vok­ing to al­low into one’s be­lief sys­tem.

RAY PATER­SON

Kaimau­mau

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.