A Global Warming Skeptic Speaks His Mind
by John Corby (BSc, Applied Physics)
As a global warming skeptic, I am of the "scientifically skeptical" category. Here is why.
The Earth is several billion years old and has been subject to numerous severe climate changes throughout its history. It is rather presumptuous of mankind to conclude that our 250 years of industrial activity is the main cause of any current change in climate. If that were true whatever happened to the factors that caused even more severe climate changes over the last several billion years - have they miraculously ceased to exist?
Proponents of anthropogenic climate change claim the science is settled in their favour. Scientists rarely take the view that anything is beyond question. The history of science suggests that scientific theories are refined and improved upon as new studies are published.
If we blindly accept that mankind is responsible for climate change without continuing to question the science we may completely miss other factors that could turn out to have an important influence.
I am deeply suspicious of the rancour surrounding any dissent from the politically correct explanation of climate change. Dissenters are labeled as "deniers" and lambasted in the media (especially the CBC in Canada). There is no balance of scientific argument allowed in the media even though there are published works offering plausible alternative explanations for climate change.
I am no climatologist, but I did earn a scientific degree in another discipline so I cannot offer a qualified opinion on climate matters. However, my scientific training did teach me to examine the evidence and form an independent opinion rather than blindly follow the opinions of the masses.
On that basis I am inclined to remain scientifically skeptical of the accuracy of current climate change forecasts, their claimed anthropogenic cause and of the motives of those who support such theories.