Climate change deniers need to show the evidence

Sir, – To many people there are many unanswered questions about the role of CO2, methane, the sun, and so on in relation to the proven warming we have been steadily experiencing since the 1700s.

Given the significant weight of statistical and scientific evidence, it would appear that climate deniers are suffering from confirmation bias. In effect, taking some facts out of context and aligning them to support their profound beliefs, which includes ignoring inconvenient facts or interpretations that do not fit those beliefs.

Those people who have not looked at and weighed up all the available information also then fit the Dunning-kruger effect, otherwise classed as a little bit of information or knowledge leading to assumptions of expertise.

There are many acknowledged experts who have come to the conclusion that our use of hydrocarbonbased energy is indeed almost certainly the major contributor to the warming we are experiencing.

In any scientific debate it is right that there is an element of doubt, but just because there is some doubt, it does not and cannot invalidate the scientific consensus, or still less prove that the hypothesis is wrong.

As with all human endeavours, we need to weigh up harms and consequences, which in most cases means looking at the costs of both courses of action.

Reducing our use of fossil fuels has consequences, as does carrying on as we have been doing.

Instead of arguing that our production of CO2 has nothing to do with the climate, or in effect that we are doomed anyway, it would be more useful if those arguing against doing anything in mitigation actually did an equal amount of research into the phenomenon and produced real evidence to support their denials.

Nick Cole. Balmacron Farmhouse, Meigle.