Simple research contradicted column
By Letter to the Editor on October 7, 2019.
Re: “Child abuse in the name of climate change,” Sept. 28 Anyone can say anything in print or online, so long as it does not infringe on the rights of another; this is the basis for freedom of speech in Canada. A person can assert that Sasquatch is responsible for the Alberta recession. It is up to the reader to filter that information and decide whether or not it is true. This proves difficult if the contributor does not support positions with references and sources. In a recent guest column the author suggested that, “The current popular movement predicts that failure to act on climate change within the next ten years will be irreversibly detrimental to human life” and that “most weather and climate scientists do not accept the current narrative being expounded by our left-wing politicians and our media.” I decided to do some research and contacted Environment Canada, the University of Alberta Department of Environmental Science, and the Environmental Science Program at the University of Calgary. None agreed with the author’s statement regarding climate scientists. A University of Alberta scientist recommended “A website run by leading climate scientists and heavily reviewed by the community”: realclimate.org. The University of Calgary scientist suggested, “An excellent resource is https://skepticalscience.com/ which provides (referenced) counter arguments.” Interestingly, on that website I found the exact CO2 argument outlined in the editorial. Another assertion in the editorial reads, “Every country in the world that has moved toward socialism has failed ultimately.” Difficult to know what type of socialism is at question here. Marxist-Leninist states such as China have human rights questions but are certainly not considered failures. Countries which lean toward socialism such as Denmark consistently score higher on quality of life indices than most countries on earth including Canada (Numbeo.com). My research continued to contradict the columnist’s positions, suffice it to say the important thing is that readers take time to accept “facts” only through evidence. If an author wants credibility, s/he must offer such evidence. With a federal election looming, we must all recognize our own biases, and filter assertions through references. It is not enough to believe what we read and hear and have been told, we must take the time to research the facts so as to make truly educated choices. John Whidden Medicine Hat 10-9
