Letter on ‘Climate’ to the Islands Independent
The Editor, The Islands Independent
Thanks for publishing the response from Tim Ball, who, like many of us whose inquiry does not support man-made global warming (nor CO2-forcing of climate change), is subjected to ‘shoot-the-messenger’ tactics such as being generally tainted with the ‘denier’ label and being accused of being dupes of Oil Company propaganda or worse, being ‘bought’ by corporate funding or corporate loyalties.
Having studied ‘nonlinear dynamics’ in natural systems for over forty years, as a geophysicist/seismologist (paleo-climates are key to geological understanding) and in other natural systems contexts, and having managed simulation-science research initiatives, I have a first-hand awareness of the pitfalls of over-simplification in earth-modeling (linearizing highly nonlinear phenomena).
Elizabeth May and perhaps Nadia Nowak, Peter Carter and others, may have no need to discuss dynamic phenomena in more than superficial detail because ‘they have it on good authority’ that anthropogenic global warming and CO2-forcing of climate change ‘are fact’.
Early on, it was said that no-one of scientific repute challenged these ‘facts’ but that was never true and many respected climate scientists who do not ‘buy it’ have since spoken out. My continuing inquiries have led to exchanges with such scientists in Canada, Russia and the U.S. So, without depending on my own (continuing) work on ‘complex systems’, I too can say that ‘I have it on good authority’ that anthropogenic global warming and CO2- forcing of climate change are artifacts of over-simplifying nature’s complexity.
This letter is not intended to ‘push’ my views on climate change (those can be found by googling the “Aboriginal Physics Newsletter”), but to support/reinforce openness in continuing reportage on this important topic and to be sure that the community knows that the relative silence from so-called ‘deniers’ derives more from the thanklessness of the task of speaking up and sharing openly and honestly (to speak up is to draw fire) than to accepting the alleged ‘truth’ about ‘climate’ that has become tantamount to ‘religious dogma’.
I accept that my understanding ‘may be wrong’ as everyone of whatever view must, until models/predictions have been subsumed by actuality, but would like to give voice to those of us who have been diligent in our inquiry on this topic, whose opinions have not been ‘bought’ and who are raising a red flag to try to help avoid a costly ‘wildgoose chase’ that will inevitably reduce effort on a plethora of non-controversial, sorely-needed ‘tread-lightly’ initiatives..