The recent climate science denial letters in the Moscow-Pullman Daily News share a common feature; they all rely on discredited arguments.
This is not unusual. In fact, these arguments reappear so frequently that skepticalscience.com
(SkS) has already categorized, ranked, and comprehensively debunked all of them.
For instance, Bob Hassoldt’s June 3 letter, “Global warming alarmists need science to back them,” claims climate change is natural. SkS lists this as Myth No. 1 and its refutation emphasizes the very quick pace of the current climate change.
Charley McKetta’s June 4 letter, “Some insight into Cook’s 97 percent,” claims there is no scientific consensus.
SkS has this as Myth No. 4 and provides links to Cook’s actual paper as well as discussing the six other studies that broadly corroborate Cook’s findings.
Larry Kirkland’s June 4 letter, “Show us the data on climate change,” draws on Myths No. 4, 6, 32, 34, and 43, which are all refuted on the SkS website.
However, Mr. Kirkland’s letter is particularly interesting because while it appears to dispute the facts of anthropogenic climate disruption (ACD) it also acknowledges that climate change is happening, carbon dioxide is a contributing factor, and that “at least a small portion of the climate change over the past 50 years can be attributed to increased production of carbon dioxide”; statements which constitute the fundamental definition of ACD.
Bob Hassoldt’s letter disparaged climate activists as the “doom-and-gloom” crowd, but nothing could be further from the truth.
Activism gives hope and purpose in contrast to the despair of passive victimhood promoted by denialism.
Informed, effective, and amplified; that doesn’t sound like “doom-and-gloom” to me.