To the editor:
It is apparent Alan Journet has not read the entire National Academy of Science's report. The NAS reviewed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. There was no discussion as to the validity of the report. The one climatologist on the panel wasn't permitted to discuss his concerns. The scientific community is laughing at this report.
The so-called Kyoto Protocol is an agreement between nations to punish prosperous countries and to find a way to distribute wealth to undeveloped nations. The United States is not the only nation to not sign the Kyoto Protocol. Japan, Australia and Canada have said no. Many smaller European nations were relieved when the United States turned down the so-called treaty.
Environmentalists were not an original party to the IPCC. They only joined when they realized the money-making possibilities of the 40-some doomsday scenarios.
I realize I meet Journet's criteria of those who disagree with him, but he left out the word "skeptic." I am a skeptic. I do not agree with his data or opinions. Here's why: In 1999, an assessment of global warming from the University of Alaska said warming will affect Alaska's wildlife, "especially the penguins." There are no penguins in the Arctic. Another report said penguins near the South Pole are dying due to warming in Antarctica. Less than 2 percent of the Antarctic continent has experienced warming since the 1970s. The rest experienced a cooling trend.