I have read with concern, recent letters to the editor in this paper discussing climate change and explaining why it is not happening, not human-caused, only a solar cycle, only a cycle of unknown origin, nothing to do with CO2 and the cause of elevated CO2 concentrations and not the consequence.
Even our recently-elected MP, Mel Arnold, has expressed several of the above contradictory opinions in a fall interview on CBC Radio.
On the other hand, the science behind climate change grows stronger every day. Global average temperatures continue to climb as do atmospheric CO2 levels, and 97 per cent of climate scientists are convinced that it is real and human-caused.
It has been 25 years since the US military recognized climate change as a serious future threat to global security, and the Insurance industry has also recognized it as a serious threat to their continued profitability.
The primary reason, other than wishful thinking, that there is so much public confusion is that certain major players in the oil, gas, and coal industry are funding organizations and individuals to create doubt in the minds of the public, thereby delaying urgently needed action in government policy.
In light of the serious and growing consequences of climate change throughout the world, my question is this. Is it not high time that this paper stop publishing confusing and contradictory letters and information on climate change?
After all, we are in a similar situation to that of smoking 20 years ago. We can no longer afford to confuse an issue where the science is settled, and the consequences of inaction are so serious.
Eli Pivnick