Your Opinion: Response to Christy on climate change

Dear Editor:

The reprinted article by Dr. Christy in your March 18 edition caught my attention. Dr. Christy is one of the few climate scientists critical of the line of thinking by a majority of climatologists that I will read. He has published in peer reviewed journals and is reportedly one of the few skeptics not on corporation payrolls.

The general public must realize that a scientist must have some degree of skepticism to stay honest about their own work and that of others. Many, if not all, of the scientists dealing with the natural world must know that their results are never absolute; the more variables involved, the more difficult the research becomes.

As Dr. Christy rightly points out, this is one reason why many scientists are prone to not answer questions from the public or press; those who seek only up or down answers. It is nevertheless a professional responsibility to alert at least decision makers when their findings suggest dire potential outcomes.

I have been a researcher and a policy analyst in the field of natural resources so I know from experience that the latter is more difficult when tradeoffs must be weighed. Since retirement, I have been undertaking a crash course in climatology to better understand the science and make more sense of publications in the professional journals. As an ecologist, I am always looking for clues for potential impacts to the global environments.

Every living organism, including mankind, is the product of the temporal environment that climate produces. As climate has slowly changed over the eons, species have either evolved and adapted or become extinct. But what, as a major body of science seems to believe, if the global environment is changing at an unprecedented rate? What are the implications?

As a policy analyst, the apparent risks warrant serious consideration. This is where I disagree with Dr. Christy's remarks about his view on the downside of a carbon tax. For one it smacks of the same rhetoric from the 1950s and '60s about a sulfur tax; the cause of acid rain. In addition, there is a good indication where this remedy has been applied elsewhere, the impact to the economy is not draconian. To date, it is at least the easiest of all the potential remedies to implement. My fear is that our decision makers will kick that can down the road at our peril.