AS one who is old enough to remember being relentlessly told that we were heading into an ice age, I have to admit to being somewhat cynical about the announcements of impending global catastrophe due to global warming.
Dr Hamish Maclaren states “the science is on Ms Thunberg’s side, and the scientific community overwhelmingly supports what she is saying”(Herald letters, October 2).
A discussion with a university researcher shed some light on why there is this unanimity within the scientific community.
It would appear that anyone seeking research funding has a vastly better chance of obtaining it if the object of the research is to prove some element of global warming. He estimated that there was ten times more funding for such research than for anyone questioning the draconian predictions of industrialisation causing global warming.
A second factor affecting university researchers’ seemingly total acceptance of the climate crisis is that to become known as a “denier” is the kiss of death for anyone’s chance of promoted posts.
Such is the atmosphere within universities that it appears there is a policy of attempting to shut down any debate completely and effectively blacklist anyone who dares to voice a contrary opinion.
In the light of these circumstances, it is difficult to place total faith in the current scientific conformity.
Does this mean that I reject totally global warming? The answer to that is ‘no’ but it does mean that I treat research with a large pinch of cynical salt. After all, most of the predictions are based on computer programs and they are only as good as the information which has been input.
My concern for Ms Thunberg is that she will be cynically used by vested interests until she loses status and then she will be discarded.
David Stubley,
Prestwick
Rev Dr John Cameron (Letters, October 2) thinks people should take a close look at Greta Thunberg, whereas I think we should take a close look at what she’s saying.
If what she’s saying is wrong, Rev Cameron should be able to explain why. If he can’t offer an explanation, he won’t find an adequate substitute in telling readers that her voice is monotonous, or that some people treat her as a cult figure, or that we live in an age when “even the less well-off can travel the globe and sample international cuisines”. All of that might be true, but none of it undermines Thunberg’s claims.
Robert Canning,
Bridge of Earn,
Perth
I MUST congratulate the Rev. Dr John Cameron for his superbly succinct condemnation of the emerging movement of teenagers against adults on scientific matters they do not fully understand.
Informed adults are themselves hugely divided on the issue of climate change for example. The arguments on the role of human activity versus natural causes such as solar radiation and movements in the magma continue unabated.
The young people in question do not appear to wish to learn about the many factors which could be included in the debate, and are at a very easily influenced period in their lives.
They can be affected by the impact of their peers such as the rather peculiarly dogmatic Greta Thunberg who wishes to blame adults- or psychologically, I suggest, her parents- for her obvious unhappiness.
I believe the fact is that the whole debate on human causes of climate change is driven by anthropocentrism, which I thought would have largely died out in science with the emergence of Copernicus.
Bill Brown, Milngavie
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel