In his guest opinion “Explaining the doubt about climate change,” Michael Tomlin declares: “The ‘consensus’ would be far easier to believe if it were pure science and not tainted with politics, and if science were occasionally right in its predictions.” He cites President Obama’s alleged lies (Benghazi again), and asks “why should we believe him on climate change?” Talk about letting politics inform your scientific opinion. In reality, President Obama is late to the party. There has been an overwhelming scientific consensus from “pure” scientists on this for years notwithstanding the efforts of Big Carbon to sow doubt. Ideologically blinded Republicans are the deniers’ last bastion in the developed world. Tomlin also cherry-picks past predictions (and distorts them in the telling) which have since been modified. But the idea that science should be ignored because some predictions have been incorrect ignores the fact that our incredible progress in technology over the past 200 years reflects the accuracy of tens of thousands of scientific findings. If science is telling us that carbon emissions are heating the world at an unprecedentedly rapid pace which will cause extreme harm by century’s end, I suggest it is prudent to listen regardless of one’s politics.
Robert Gilbert, Sun Valley
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Idaho Statesman