More and more people are warming to the undeniable facts of climate change
On reading Myles Allen’s Perspective article of 23 April (“We don’t have 12 years to act on climate change – we have to do something now”) my thoughts turned to the anthropogenic climate change contrarians who frequently write tothe Scotsman.
It has been almost two years since Professors Brian Cox and Jim Al-khalili maintained, in reaction to the archdenialist Nigel Lawson’s total misrepresentation of the facts, that the “dwindling band of the usual suspects”, as Prof Allen calls them, were being “irresponsible and highly misleading”.
What the contrarians may wish to reflect upon is a very recent article in the Engineering and Technology Magazine (published by a wholly owned subsidiary of the globally renowned Institution of Engineering and Technology) which reported that “evidence that human activities are responsible for climate change has reached a gold standard, making it virtually irrefutable from a scientific perspective... there being only a one-in-a-million chance that the current evidence will be proved to be incorrect”.
Those of your readers who are seriously worried by climate change – and there are surely many – must not continue, by their silence, to let the tiny, and thankfully dwindling, band get away with their irresponsible determination to mislead, whatever their motivation may be.
JOHN MILNE Ardgowan Drive, Uddingston
Hawaii’s much-celebrated Waikiki Beach is predicted to be under water in a matter or years, as a result of rising sea levels due to climate warming. It’s a matter of grave concern to Hawaiian politicians, who are pushing for immediate measures to be taken to try and protect the threatened shoreline. Urban areas are also under threat: Honolulu is expected to see regular flooding within 15 years.
If a typical climate warming denier residing far from the coast stepped outside one day and found sea water lapping at their feet, would they a) think they were dreaming b) think God was playing a practical joke just to annoy them or c) change their views about a warming planet on the spot?
The third option is unlikely, no matter how compelling the evidence.
The second option could be a fleeting thought, quickly dismissed, because God’s on their side – of course He is.
That leaves option one. They would quickly retreat indoors, close the door, and refuse to look outside again.
This, in essence, is how deniers deal with any new, or even well-established, evidence of climate warming. The implications of a warming planet are too grave to contemplate, so they choose denial in order to maintain a sense of security, and to avoid making any changes to their way of life.
Like the grasshopper in Aesop’s fable, they refuse to prepare for the future, refuse to believe that their comfortable way of life might end some day, and continue to sing the same song of denial over and over again.
CAROLYN TAYLOR
Wellbank Broughty Ferry, Dundee