Nick Ward, Comox Valley Echo, November 02, 2010

The science is clear. Carbon dioxide and methane are causing real climate change and the source of excess greenhouse gases is human activity. Among scientists, there is little debate. The theory is accepted.

That's not to say there is no debate. Outside the cloistered world of science, debate rages but this is a scientific question, non-scientists don't get a say. If ten doctors tell you that you have lung cancer, you understand the consequences and they frighten you. You don't ask the cigarette retailer for his opinion. You take action.

Few of us fully understand the causes and consequences of climate change, and the actions we are being asked to take are uncomfortable. We would much rather get a second opinion that tells us it's all OK, and those second opinions are available at the click of a mouse. Business as usual, with all it's comforts and conveniences, is easy to justify if you ignore the science and listen to the rhetoric.

Have you ever typed 'smoking doesn't cause cancer' into Google? They are still out there, the deniers. Unfortunately, Mother Nature cares little for those websites and tends to kill off smokers earlier than non-smokers. Nature will pass a similar judgement on our carbon dioxide habits; sadly she will begin by punishing low-carbon populations for our behaviour in the Western World.

Climate change is not a scam to garner scientific funding. The scientists I know - having lived in a small English college town called Cambridge - would much rather work on other, less scary, problems. Their work forces them to think through the consequences of climate change and it is unpleasant to have to deeply consider natural disasters, famine, water shortages, death and mass migration. Much of it will happen in places like Pakistan and Bangladesh so it doesn't matter, right?

People like Ms Powell ask us to believe that the cunning, self-interested scientists have cooked this all up to enrich themselves and can only be kept in check by the self-less intellectual rigor of the oil companies, car manufacturers and Republican politicians who, thankfully, devote their free time to debunking all this so-called science and it's love of theories, data and computer models.

The definition of a climate change skeptic appears to be "someone who hasn't read the data." I will happily debate the science of climate change with anyone who will accept the basic principles of the scientific method. As soon as you tell me that it's all a conspiracy, we are out of the realms of science and into a world of faith.

Obviously most of us would like this all to go away and let us drive our cars and fly to Mexico free of guilt and concern. My kids would take candy over vegetables any day but someone, somewhere, has to take the tough decisions. With climate change, the professionals tell me that the consequences will be a bit worse than a big dental bill down the road.

A few months ago, Ms Powell asked us all to put our dollars into local infrastructure so that she could keep her lawn nice and green. Now she is asking my grandchildren to deal with a world of hurt so that she can drive to Walmart. That's not OK.

Nick Ward
Cumberland

© Comox Valley Echo 2010

Source