Re Hamilton Davis letter, "Ignorance abounds in man's rant on science," March 22:
Davis' reaction to my recent letter in The Sun News was quite interesting. He spent a lot of time "refuting" statements that I never made, putting words in my mouth that were never spoken, and launching personal attacks instead of addressing the facts that he cannot deny.
Let's look at his argument in depth:
1. Not once did I state or imply that CO2 is insignificant. I have consistently said that all living things depend on CO2, that, contrary to what the Environmental Protection Agency says, CO2 is not a pollutant, and that life on Earth would benefit from more CO2 and higher temperatures. This has been proven by Earth history.
2. I have said CO2 produced by humans is not causing climate change. Atmospheric CO2 levels have been much higher in the past, long before humans were around, and life did not perish.
3. History has shown us that rises in CO2 levels do not cause global warming. The temperature records clearly show that temperatures rise before CO2 levels do, proving that there is no cause and effect relationship between the two events. History also shows that temperatures have been lower when CO2 levels were much higher than they are now.
Next, Davis refers to scientists who disagree with him as the "scientific fringe." I suppose he includes in that category the 31,000-plus scientists who signed the petition to the U.S. government stating that, "There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or any other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate." Maybe he should go online and actually read about the studies, examine the charts and graphs, and evaluate the conclusions they have reached (www.petitionproject.org). I realize that this may be slightly beyond his comprehension due to the fact that these people actually have degrees in science, and he does not. I read that he has a B.S. in sociology with a minor in religion and philosophy. No atmospheric science? What a shame.
Finally, it was quite amusing to see him accuse those who disagree with him of being dishonest because some of their funding comes from the fossil fuel industry. Of course, he neglected to mention that his Coastal Conservation League has received money from the Merck Family Fund, the Surdna Foundation and other ultra-left-wing groups. Does this mean his group is equally dishonest? As you know, scientists seek funding from many sources. Those sources with an agenda will refuse to fund studies that may disagree with their preconceived determinations. Scientists on peer review panels will deny peer reviews for other scientists who disagree with them. Is he implying that 31,000-plus scientists on the Petition Project are all being paid by fossil fuel providers? I guess he would stick that label on me as well, since I once had a job pumping gas at a Hess station in New Jersey when I was in college more than 30 years ago.
He was correct when he said "scientists are not perfect." This includes his scientists as well, if in fact he has any working in his organization. I can see that the Coastal Conservation League is involved in some noble causes. It is also involved in causes that would do serious harm to our nation and its economy. Only wealthy, prosperous nations can afford to be environmentally conscious.
The writer lives in Myrtle Beach.