The discussion around human-induced climate change would be far more edifying if Dr Ray Black and others referred to their opponents as deniers, not sceptics.
It’s scientists who should be sceptical.
Ancient philosopher Socrates said: “The only thing we know for sure is that we know nothing for sure”.
Science is based on measurement and probability. There is no absolute system of measurement, so there’s no way of knowing for sure whether any phenomenon will occur even in a controlled environment.
Scientists can really only say something is more or less probable.
The other problem is the use of the term ‘climate change’. Deniers say the climate is always changing and, of course, they’re right – Earth’s climate is always changing, it’s a natural phenomenon.
What’s not natural is the recently discovered step-change in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
Antarctic ice cores show CO2 levels between 280 parts per million and 350ppm dating back 800,000 years. Somehow it has now jumped to 400ppm.
It may be chance that this event coincides with the start of the fossil fuel age but climate scientists agree the probability of human actions not causing the CO2 spike is very low.
If there is doubt increased CO2 might disrupt our climate, shouldn’t we be more prudent, more conservative, about how we proceed with the human project?
In his recent biography, Greens leader Bob Brown said: “Stupid people are cocksure of everything. Intelligent people are full of doubt”.
Phil Baulch
Belmont
