Column was misleading

It is unfortunate that the Sun Journal publishes the garbage in J Dwight's column.

On April 18, Dwight ranted on about the lack of true science supporting global warming. He ridiculed the multiple papers and studies on the topic by respected groups such as NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Where does Dwight get his science from? The “Center for Sound Science and Public Policy,” a think tank funded by ExxonMobil. No bias there.

The fact is that global warming is the most serious threat facing humanity today. More than one-third of the world's population receives its drinking water from Himalayan glaciers that are disappearing. Those populations will need to migrate.

India, Pakistan and China are all nuclear powers that will soon struggle with that shortage.

Populations in low-lying countries are also threatened by rising seas and more violent storms.

Tropical diseases are spreading beyond the tropics.

Important plant and animal species are dying out because they cannot migrate rapidly enough to keep pace with climate change.

All of these things are documented by real scientists who aren't paid by one of the world's biggest polluters.

It's a shame that Dwight tries to mislead people into thinking global warming isn't real.

I wish the Sun Journal would feature editorial columnists who use reason and persuasion based on factual information to change our opinions, instead of supporting garbage like his.

Denis Bergeron, Auburn

Editor's note: The writer is an energy professional and professional engineer who has worked with the Public Utilities Commission for over 20 years. The views reflected in the letter are his and not the views of the commission.

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



PAUL ST JEAN's picture

So, Denis. Now that you've

So, Denis.

Now that you've revealed the entire plot of the movie, "2012", I guess the parrot and I won't bother watching it. Thanks for spoiling it for us. What're you going to do next?; tell us that "Avatar" is really going to happen?

David A. Gagnon's picture

So these people in the

So these people in the following quotes are full of it Mr. Bergeron? Maybe your full of it like the phonies at the UN. I can see that you haven't accepted the fact that the IPCC has lied and cooked the numbers so as to keep their grants coming in. There are those who are researchers for their love of science and then there are those who are researchers for the money.

"The second glacier, the Siachin glacier in Kashmir, is even more stable. Claims reported in the popular press that Siachin has shrunk as much as 50% are simply wrong, says Raina, whose report notes that the glacier has “not shown any remarkable retreat in the last 50 years.” These conclusions were based in part on field measurements by ecologist Kireet Kumar of the G. B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment and Development in Almora. Much like the hysteria about Greenland's ice cap, it seems reports of the glaciers' demise are a bit premature.

According to a report in the journal Science, “several Western experts who have conducted studies in the region agree with Raina's nuanced analysis—even if it clashes with IPCC's take on the Himalayas.” The “extremely provocative” findings “are consistent with what I have learned independently,” says Jeffrey S. Kargel, a glaciologist at the University of Arizona, Tucson. Many glaciers in the Karakoram Mountains, on the border of India and Pakistan, have “stabilized or undergone an aggressive advance,” he says, citing new evidence gathered by a team led by Michael Bishop, a mountain geomorphologist at the University of Nebraska.

Having recently returned from an expedition to K2, one of the highest peaks in the world, Canadian glaciologist Kenneth Hewitt says he observed five advancing glaciers and only a single one in retreat. Such evidence “challenges the view that the upper Indus glaciers are ‘disappearing’ quickly and will be gone in 30 years,” said Hewitt. “There is no evidence to support this view and, indeed, rates of retreat have been less in the past 30 years than the previous 60 years.”

Other researchers and noted experts have raised their voices in support of Raina's conclusions. According to Himalayan glacier specialist John “Jack” Shroder, the only possible conclusion is that IPCC's Himalaya assessment got it “horribly wrong.” The University of Nebraska researcher adds, “They were too quick to jump to conclusions on too little data.”

"The IPCC also erred in its forecast of the impact of glacier melting on water supply, claims Donald Alford, a Montana-based hydrologist who recently completed a water study for the World Bank. One of the dire predictions that the IPCC report made was for water shortages in the region. “Our data indicate the Ganges results primarily from monsoon rainfall, and until the monsoon fails completely, there will be a Ganges river, very similar to the present river.” Glacier melt contributes only 3% to 4% of the Ganges's annual flow, says Kireet Kumar. Another piece of climate catastrophist propaganda debunked.

Even when faced with data showing the errors in their work, the IPCC seems incapable of admitting they were wrong. Typically, Murari Lal, chair of the Climate, Energy and Sustainable Development Analysis Centre in New Delhi and coordinating lead author of the 2007 IPCC report's Asia chapter, rejects the notion that IPCC was off the mark on Himalayan glaciers. Even more petulantly, IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri accused the Indian environment ministry of “arrogance” for its report claiming there is no evidence that climate change has shrunk the Himalayan glaciers. Unfortunately for the climate change alarmists the truth is out, the glaciers of the Himalayas remain safely frozen and won't be disappearing anytime soon."




Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...