Climate change is an unproven future hypothesis
Editor of the Reformer:
I would like to respond to a recent article in the Reformer ("Report warns of severe weather damage from climate change," Aug. 26).
Bernie Sanders is certainly right that we have a "financial and moral obligation" to properly address climate change. Across the world people suffer due to climate change. Yet aid agencies are unable to secure sufficient funds to help them because, of the $1 billion spent globally every day on climate finance, only 6 percent of it is goes to helping vulnerable people adapt to climate change today. The remaining 94 percent is poured into mitigation, trying to stop phenomena that might someday happen.
This is happening because of the confidence of Sanders and others like him that we know the future of climate and that we can control it merely by reducing our carbon dioxide emissions. Yet, reports such as those of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change illustrate that there is no known consensus among scientists about what caused the past century's modest warming or even whether warming or cooling lie ahead.
Sanders should be asked if he thinks it is moral that, based on an unproven hypothesis of future climate change, the world should value the lives of people yet to be born more than those in need today.
Tom Harris, Executive Director, International Climate Science Coalition, Aug. 30