June 5th, 2020

Why do some people refuse to read?

By Letter to the Editor on November 9, 2019.

Re: “Watch your climate language,” Nov. 6

The science of climate change caused by humans is settled just as the science of vaccines and autism is settled. Yet we continue to suffer the repetition of Facebook fictions in public forums and letters. Barb Taylor has produced a letter that is totally devoid of factual content; read it, there’s not a single fact. She states “Scientists with expertise…” yet fails to provide anything more, just her assertion that these scientists exist and are on her side. She fails to mention the open letter signed by 11,000 scientists just recently, fails to mention that not a single scientific body on the planet disagrees with the IPCC, fails to provide a single link or reference to a peer reviewed paper, just offers a whole lot of nothing.

Perhaps the worst part of dealing with deniers is their belief that they are educated about climate science. Taylor prattles on about isotopes and emissions offering her personal opinions as facts, again, no links to peer reviewed papers , no authority or evidence is offered. Contrast that with a rational approach, go to this link climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus and read a little, as you can see Taylor is simply wrong. Taylor suffers from the Dunning-Kreuger effect. Reading her letter some might think she is actually a working climate scientist. It is clear that she is just repeating tripe picked up on Facebook or from her social circle, like others who have been hoodwinked by the disinformation campaign run by oil companies.

The Heartland Institute is a prime example of a group that disseminates false information under corporate directives. From 1984 to 2000 the Heartland Institute worked with the tobacco industry to debunk the claim that tobacco causes cancer. Since 2000 they have fought to undermine the scientific consensus on climate change under corporate directives from the oil industry. If you dismiss the NOAA, NASA, the American Meteorological Society, and every other group of experts you are left with witless prattling which is what was offered in the letter. Here is direct link to the IPCC paper, go and read it for yourself http://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ar4-wg1-chapter1.pdf. The link is to a paper by climate scientists and contains actual facts.

What is it about the climate change denier camp refusing to read? The consensus on consensus is another fact. Here is another link to a paper that deals specifically with the consensus, http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Consensus_Handbook-1.pdf. If you take the time to read the section on the “consensus on the consensus” you will find the fact that the consensus on the consensus is about 97% on average, when all peer reviewed scientific papers are taken into account. That is simple to understand, about 97 out of 100 scientists publishing relevant peer reviewed work and having the relevant scientific expertise agree with the IPCC. So why do we still suffer letter writers telling us tobacco does not cause cancer?

Brian Latmier

Medicine Hat

Share this story:

3 Responses to “Why do some people refuse to read?”

  1. Homer the Conservative says:

    Nice try Mr Latmier, but that paper does not support your claims. You try to discredit Barb Taylor by stating her writing is devoid of fact. After all, she only talks about “isotopes and emissions”, you know science stuff. Not like you, where you prattle on about how she is not a scientist but then you diagnose Barb with Dunning–Kruger effect (and your spelling is wrong). Are you a psychologist? Then you throw out your “97 out of 100 scientists” stat that is a falsehood in and of itself. How about you list the names of these scientists instead of throwing out baseless statistics, you know like you complained Barb failed to do? I am fascinated by people like you that like to insult anyone that do not agree with you. Typical liberal tactic to demean rather than debate. Listen to Steven F. Hayward, Pepperdine University on his research. Rather than posting a link, just Google it. You have to be so self-important to think that in the 3-4 million year history of the planet that you have the power to have this type of effect in a 100 year period. Try practicing what you preach!

  2. asthecrowflies says:

    Homer the Conservative, thank you for writing an excellent response to Mr. Latmiers’ anal ramblings!
    Your letter, as well as Barb Taylor’s’, highlight dramatically the difference between the children (schoolyard bullies like Mr. Latmier) and the adults (rational people like yourself and Barb Taylor).
    I, for one, applaud you and Barb!

  3. max2459 says:

    After the excellent letter written by Barb Taylor, it was almost amusing to read the pathetic comeback from Brian
    Latmeir. He appears to be one of those misinformed people living within their little echo chamber, only believing what they have been fed by the climate alarmist regime. The long list of gaffes, coverups and misrepresentations by the global alarmists over the last couple of decades should be enough for any rational person to at least be skeptical of the outrageous falsehoods being told about our climate. It is incumbent upon all of us to take the time to do the research to understand and push back against this hideous movement intended to destroy our lifestyles and economy.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.