Letter: Climate Change. Care to bet on it?
To the Editor:
Suppose you had only $1.00 and you had to bet it on “A” with a 97% chance of winning or “B” with a 3% chance of winning. Which would you choose? Most would bet on the 97%.
But wait. Suppose there are powerful voices arguing for the 3%. Select TV and radio shows, along with some top-of-the-heap government guys who say they are not sure of the 97%. Things get muddy.
Welcome to today. The question of climate change is being looked at by all sorts of scientists. They question whether it is real by tests in physics, geology, biology, chemistry as well as meteorology. They test it with ice cores, tree rings, satellite sensors and more. The answer keeps coming back. Alert! Alert! Alert! (See climate.nasa.gov)
Matter of fact, many of the science papers that make up the 3% denying human caused climate change are disputed for errors in their findings.
Suppose we went with the 97%. We cut coal and oil use. We spend lots of money shifting to sustainable energy and later it turns out that we did not need to do it. Was it wasted?
The coal is still in the ground and can be used, so is the oil. It is not lost.
If we stopped contributing to global warming today, science indicates it will continue getting worse before it tops out. Then it may take a thousand years to get back to today’s climate.
I can’t understand how so many folks want to ignore this problem in the face of an overwhelming probability of terrible tomorrows for our grandkids. But they do.