Al Gore’s film on global warming- is it all a lie?
Dear Editor,
With reference to your article about the science of global warming of June 12th
2006, “Scientist’s Respond to Gore’s warnings of climate catastrophe”, you are
happy to quote various scientists who speak out against global warming and what they think, but conveniently ignore other mounting evidence which tells a
completely different story to what is implied by your article, and your premise - that most of the science in Al Gore’s film is poorly researched lies and bunkum.
For instance, you conveniently ignore very substantial evidence provided by the
US military that the glaciers in Greenland are now melting at 5 times the rate
that they were 50 years ago, when the US started to overfly Greenland at high
altitude to measure and map this continent. You also conveniently forget to
mention that glaciers in Austria and Switzerland have shrunk by 40% in the last
40 years, as stated by their government environmental agencies. You also fail to mention the drop off by 25% in 25 years of the rate of flow of the Gulf Stream northwards to the bottom of Iceland, as measured by Edinburgh University. This phenomenon is caused by the increase in fresh water come off the Greenland ice mass as a result of increased glacial melting, and fresh water from rivers in Northern Russia which are also shedding ice at a greater rate. You also conveniently ignore fresh evidence by a respected scientist from University College, London (forgotten his name at the moment) and a second research scientist from Moscow University, who have published compelling evidence that the permafrost of Northern Siberia is starting to melt at an unprecedented rate during the Siberian summer, releasing massive extra amounts of methane gas into the atmosphere, or about an extra one third of total global emmissions per year.
If you want to write summaries of the evidence surrounding such a major subject as global warming you should provide a more objective view, and not quote from only a couple of sources. Your article would then appear a little more balanced and better researched. You also choose to ignore other major evidence that clearly demonstrates that the climate balance around the world is changing.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Crowhurst. (Isle of Man, UK)
