From: David Alcock, Guiseley, Leeds.
IT is dispiriting to read, in one recent edition, three contributors (two letter writers and Bernard Ingham) variously describe global warming as ‘‘cyclical’’, ‘‘probably cyclical’’ and ‘‘a scam’’.
While there is room for discussion about the scale of impact of climate change and of the ways to combat it, as evidence by your articles this week on flood prevention, there is an overwhelming scientific consensus (more than 97 per cent of climate scientists).
Although there are natural variations in the global climate, almost all of the current spike in temperatures is attributable to human activity.
It is difficult to admit to ourselves that we are partly to blame, but doing so allows us to confront this challenge sensibly.
I am no hair-shirted advocate of economic degrowth.
Rather, I am optimistic that we can, and should, mitigate and adapt to climate change through human ingenuity and scientific advances, coupled with public and political will.
But to ignore the science because it suits one’s own lifestyle or outlook is not going to help society in this important task.