- BC Games
Victor Findberg filled your letter page of Aug. 23. 2013 with enough material for a study unrelated to the earth sciences. What he neglected to do is prove that man-made CO2 is responsible for the disastrous global warming he predicts.
Not being a scientist myself I am drawn to more commonsense studies and would like to share a couple of quick thoughts. Just in case Findberg found even more naïve comrades to man the barricades in an effort to stop all future development of our resources in this country.
CO2 may play a minor role in climate change but is not a driver.
Jay Lehr of the Heartland Institute, to name one, claimed already in 2004 that CO2 is no more than four per cent responsible for climate change. Of this humans contribute only about three per cent, which is 0.12 per cent of the total. Canada is responsible for about four per cent of that, which amounts to 0.0048 per cent!
Were we to shut down Fort Mac and the oil sands we would reduce global CO2 emissions by 0.000144 per cent. This is not to be laughed at when you are serious about the butterfly-flaps-its-wings-on-the-other-side-of-the-globe argument, but it takes on a different meaning when you consider the next point.
Prof. Plimer of the University of Melbourne calculated that the volcanic eruption by the Filipino Mt. Pinatubo in 1991 put more CO2 into the air on its first day than all of mankind ever did together. It took the Icelandic volcano with the unpronounceable name three days to wipe out every effort mankind has made to reduce CO2 consumption, like buying the odd electric car, discouraging people from visiting us as tourists because it uses oil, switching to the 10 times more expensive curly light bulbs and using only two squares of toilet paper per session.
On some days there are 200 volcanoes active!
As it so happened, Lawrence Solomon of the Financial Post shreds all previous arguments re computer models. His article of Aug. 23 is called ‘Model Mockery.’ Mr. Solomon is backed by America’s Freeman Dyson, and also by Italy’s best-known scientist, Antonino Zichichi. If this is not enough, there is Robert S. Pindijck. Here are four more reputable people who all agree that the climate changes, but disagree whatever conclusions Mr. Findberg draws and wants your readers to abide by.
One final note. Mr. Findberg knows how to dish out insults heavy-handedly, but is rather thin-skinned himself. He tells Dr. Khaskin: “it would help if he first masters basic language skills.” This, right after defending his comment that our offspring will “inherit a poisoned Earth!” There he twists himself into a pretzel to soften his idiotic pronouncement, but, on top of that, he uses the excuse: “The English language is not perfectly literal...” Huh?...
Don’t you love these rational people who demand perfection from all others but themselves?
Re: Climate change deniers aim to muddy the waters (Letters, NewsLeader, Aug. 23)
If Victor Finberg wants to persuade us that his interpretation of climate change science is the correct one, then he should keep his letters respectful and to the point. His unbridled attack on the integrity of an esteemed SFU Research Associate, and his denigration of that scientist’s academic credentials, may serve to vent Finberg’s aroused emotions, but those outbursts do nothing to advance any scientific argument.
Furthermore, Finberg’s innuendo, that his opponents “have nothing valid to say”, only confirms his own lack of tolerance for views that differ from his own. What is he going to do next? Attack this old lady for daring to write a letter to the NewsLeader?