Climate change

Dear Editor,

Christians differ in their response to the ‘climate emergency’. Some, like David Golding that the (February en), accept ‘evidence is irrefutable’ that emissions from fossil fuels are endangering billions of people as the Earth heats up. Over recent years, reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have become more specific in attributing global warming to the release of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.

However, not everyone is impressed by this claim. David Golding is aware that ‘some believers seek to distance themselves’ from the alarmism expressed by climate emergency advocates who declare that the evidence is unequivocal and undeniable. Maybe some of these believers cite Genesis 8:22, but the reason for responding to his article is that it suggests that ‘climate complacency’ explains the thinking of those who deny that we face a climate emergency.

When Christians disagree, we need to talk together. There are several issues raised by Golding’s article that show dialogue is needed.

1. The argument from consensus. He acknowledges that ‘alarm almost invariably characterises the assessments of most leading scientists and reputable commentators in relation to the climate and wildlife “crises”.’ It is easy to be impressed by numbers, but science is validated by evidence, not by consensus.

2. The description of carbon dioxide as a ‘pollutant’. Pollutant is an emotive word, conveying entirely negative messages. Yet plants love carbon dioxide! At atmospheric concentrations, carbon dioxide is not only harmless, but is indispensable for animal and human life.

3. The claim that sea levels are rising due to climate change. This is a subject where there are great difficulties in getting an accurate picture. Studies of Pacific Island areas show them to be stable or increasing, rather than being submerged. The claim of the Palau president that ‘we are drowning’ is not based on science nor on direct experience.

4. The claim that we have only 12 years to ‘limit climate catastrophe’. In the period around 1970 there were many forecasts of catastrophe linked to a fast-approaching ice age. An eminent and reputable scientist wrote: ‘Civilisation will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.’ By 1990, the perceived danger had become global warming, and regular predictions of crisis hit the headlines.

Undoubtedly, there is much more that can be said on these matters.

Yours sincerely,
(Professor) David J. Tyler Hyde, Cheshire