Colin Turton, Muckleford
I have resisted thus far in the knowledge that I will be shouted down and berated endlessly by the majority of your correspondents; I have, however, fairly broad shoulders and a reasonably thick hide.
Firstly, I believe the fiasco that has been raging (read climate, so-called ‘debate’) with ever-increasing angst, is largely political in nature; whereby everyone has an opinion, without having undertaken any real research.
Humans naturally seek to associate with like-minded ‘others’. They do this in order to obtain/strengthen inbuilt/preconceived ideas/belief systems.
If two people take a quick peek at a 20 cent coin and if they each only observe opposite sides of the same coin; they will end up at each other’s throat arguing who was describing the coin in question.
Thence to the climate disputation.
Firstly, planet Earth – necessarily – constitutes a plethora of ‘climates’, with temperature ranges well in excess of 120 degrees Celsius and, moreover; all in a state of perpetual flux. As I have mentioned earlier in these pages it is fairly easy to find an excellent paper on the web penned several years ago, delivered to a USA senate standing committee on climate, by Patrick Moore. For those who may be unfamiliar with the name, he was one of the founding fathers of Greenpeace.
Moreover, the ‘climate debate’ is a deliberate distraction from the very real problem we do face – we must answer the question “what is the ‘carrying capacity’ of the planet? (in terms of human population)”
The microcosmic parallel that explains graphically what is inevitable on plant Earth is: – the life cycle curve of a bacterium in a petri dish.
To quote a highly educated lady geneticist after a presentation at LaTrobe University recently – “I fear that we are destined to become food for microbes”.