Climate science and politics

Few individuals hold that medical conclusions on causes of heart disease or cancer are political, since they are derived from research in medical science. If the medical evidence suggests that a cause for both is smoking, the decision as to what society should do becomes a political issue. Similarly, the evidence and conclusions regarding climate change and its causes are not political, although decisions about what to do once we acknowledge that our activities are probably causing it are political. So long as some individuals continue to deny the scientific consensus and argue the science is politically motivated, making rational political decisions to address this issue will be delayed.

Randy Dunn's May 24 letter contains numerous erroneous claims, most notably the suggestion that the globe has been cooling over the past decade, which is simply false. However, Dunn's claim that carbon dioxide is not the only cause for climate change is partly correct, as methane and nitrous oxides also contribute to climate change. Since the common argument advanced by the skeptics is that controlling greenhouse gases is too expensive, it is ironic that Mr. Dunn should argue the only reason anyone recommends controlling carbon dioxide is because they can make money. Mr. Dunn's letter suggests that he is not reading science. Rather, he prefers nonscientific, agenda-driven skeptic garbage. If one seeks information from those pushing a political agenda demanding climate change cannot be happening or if happening is not caused by human activities, then one will find it and remain ignorant.

ADAM GOHN, Cape Girardeau