Three Letters Re: Pondering Some Personal Consequences of Global Climate Change

Both M.W.A. and Michael Williamson bring some sanity and reason to the subject of climate change. Thanks for publishing their letters. Weather/climate is probably the most complex system on earth. For anyone to say they can tell with any kind of certainty what the climate on earth was like millions of years ago is ridiculous and what is the point. On a very basic level, the one universal truth about the weather/climate is change, unending change. You could even make the case that change is a universal physical law. The writers are correct to question the motives of the climate change promoters. I believe most are socialists, trying to get more control over our lives thru the politics of climate change. As in the past, humans will have to adapt to any changes in the weather/climate. Think about it, has the weather/climate ever been unchanging, with or without man on the planet? Regards, – Keith

I would suggest the site for a balanced view of global warming. However, I do believe we are heading for climatic upheaval due to a cyclic pattern- go to and order their DVD for additional info. Many things seem to be converging. [You can read] my two-cents worth at
Thank you, – Martin P.

There is an awful lot of money being spent by Big Oil to contradict the global warming research, and in particular their efforts to refute the recent UN ICPP report. As I read the 21 page Summary for Policy Makers, the report really seemed to want to avoid speculative consideration of methane feedback loops or nonlinear warming effects, i.e.:glaciers sliding into the ocean. My sense is that it was very conservatively written. Any rise in ocean level has profound implications for our way of life and Peak Oil issues since refining in the US is mostly at sea level. [Some ranting, snipped.] – Bruce F.

JWR Replies: The media hoopla over the UN report has ignored mention that what has been released thusfar is just a 21 page summary. The full 600+ page report won’t be released for several months. There is definitely a divergence of opinion within the scientific community on this issue. I think that the jury will be out for quite some time. Draw your own conclusions. In my opinion, what we should take away from all this debate is that as well-prepared individuals, it is prudent to make preparations for both short term weather changes, and if we can afford to do so, for the possibility of longer term climate change. (But again, the degree, the direction, and even the cause of that potential change is still a matter of conjecture and heated debate.) To illustrate my point, let me digress: I had a friend named Richard, who sadly died of leukemia at age 45, a couple of years ago. He was a first class eccentric, but he had a sharp wit and was a lot of fun to be around. Richard was a single man that traveled the world. He made his living as a computer programmer in the States, but he owned both a home on a small island in the Philippines and a condominium in Thailand. (He only worked in the U.S. in alternating six month contract stints to support his “travel habit”.) As an adherent of the Art Bell/George Noory school of paranormal conjecture, Richard was convinced that severe climate changes could happen “any time, and maybe even overnight” because of “pole shift.” He was so concerned that he had all three of his homes stocked with arctic clothing. (N3B extreme cold weather parkas, insulated boots, Wiggy’s Ultima Thule sleeping bags, the whole works.) Objectively, I think that Richard was over-prepared, but in the back of my mind is a small but lingering doubt. What if that ever really happened? What if Richard was right? I suppose that if I ever have a really big budget (read: somebody in Hollywood ever sends me a big fat check for my Pulling Through screenplay), then I might buy a second retreat in Central America, just in case. And I might even stock it with some cold weather gear, in memory of Richard.