LETTER: Consider source of climate claimsAn Associated Press article in the Sept. 25 Duluth News Tribune reported “scientists are 95 percent sure global warming is real.” However, more information is in order.
An Associated Press article in the Sept. 25 Duluth News Tribune reported “scientists are 95 percent sure global warming is real.” However, more information is in order.
Most valid studies set the figure at 97 percent confirmation that manmade global warming exists. The 3-5 percent remaining must work for or represent the interests of big oil and coal companies and have vested interests — foxes guarding the hen house.
Deniers have circulated all kinds of conspiracy theories claiming scientists are scheming to control the energy markets of the future, but scientists are only interested in gaining knowledge, not financial ill-gotten gains.
The rest of those disagreeing often include scientists not directly involved with climate change, such as those with bachelor’s degrees in mathematics, chemistry or agricultural engineering.
When compared to the many doctorates in climate science, several being Nobel Laureates, scientists with only a general background are not nearly as credible.
Many deniers are actually not professional scientists and have little knowledge that can credibly defend their claims. So, they rely on our similar lack of knowledge to provide undue weight supporting their statements. Yet what they are asking us to do, is similar to asking one’s plumber to perform brain surgery or one’s janitor to design the new World Trade Center — general knowledge which does not come directly from climate scientists cannot be blindly trusted to provide valid knowledge.
Some deniers scoff at the 95 percent figure, claiming no one would board a plane that had only a 95 percent chance of reaching its destination. By using this argument, they have tried to turn a positive into a negative — why not ask instead which of two planes you would board if one had a 95 percent chance of arriving safely and another had only a 5 percent chance of arriving safely? Who can better decide a climate scientist with a doctorate, or your local weatherman?
Deniers prefer to spread incredible conspiracy theories claiming climate scientists are using some sinister plan to control future energy markets. Not only is this a projection of the actual intentions of big carbon dioxide using and producing companies, but scientists are only interested in gaining useful knowledge — not dominating the energy market by using seemingly unlimited profits.
Peter W. Johnson,