Environmental Confusion

Mike and I occasionally have interesting discussions about the political and economic implications of environmental policy. I subscribe to the point of view that we should do our best to protect the environment with sensible policies that don't simultaneously destroy the economy. Mike has expressed similar sentiments.

I am certainly no expert, so I typically defer to Mike on environmental issues because he is much more knowledgeable. As I understand it, he generally subscribes to the belief that human activity is largely responsible for global warming. But, lately I've read a number of articles by academics and scientists disputing the commonly held notion that global warming is occurring and that we're all doomed.

Today I found this article in the Brussels Journal, entitled "Kyoto: An Open Letter to the European Governments and the European Commission." It actually focuses on a letter written by "60 accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines" to the Canadian Prime Minister. The experts made some pretty shocking statements, including:

“If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.”

“Climate change is real” is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural “noise.” The new Canadian government's commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to “stopping climate change” would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.

We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.

As someone who cares about the environment, but admittedly is no expert, I find these new studies confusing. Environmentalists, many of whom have a political agenda, have told us repeatedly over the past decade that human causation of global warming is indisputable. Anyone who thinks otherwise is condemned either as a polluter, a nut job, or in the pocket of big industry.

I don't think dogmatic environmentalists have helped the debate about global warming by trying to stamp out competing viewpoints. I'd like to know the truth. Then we can formulate sensible policies to make the earth healthier, while protecting the economy.