Well said Celia. Spot on. Excellent letter.

If others haven't come across 'Transition Towns' then try wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Transition_
Towns

Dave

I think Mr Weeden's letter was aimed more at showing a consensus does not correlate to being correct, as opposed to evidence of the AGW theory being wrong.

In reply to Anthony Weeden’s points about the irrational fear of Climate Change. We should not be mislead by the simplistic numbers on CO2’s relative ineffectiveness as a GHG. Our own Royal Society says carbon dioxide “even in tiny concentrations has a large influence on our climate”. The “3.62% from fossil fuels” ignores the Human impact of other ‘land management practices’, ie, deforestation. Humans have put the Carbon cycle out of balance - it is enough if have been doing it for hundreds of years. But who cares what our best scientists & climatologists have to say?? Likewise, concerning solar activity the Royal Society go on to say “…measurements from satellites show that there has been very little change in underlying solar activity in the last 30 years …. so this cannot account for the recent rises we have seen in global temperatures.”

As for the old “warming ceased in 1998” chestnut – I am surprised that Weeden chooses to raise this without embarrassment. 1998 was an exceptionally hot year to due to the strongest El Nino of the century. If you actually draw a line through the average global air temperature chart from 1978 to 2008 it is a very steep line - up. Feel free to choose any starting year, 1988, 1908, 1508, you name it, the result is the same. Choose 1978 and you get what you deserve.

As for irrational fear I quite agree, everything from microwaves to terrorism we are all easily manipulated for political purposes – unfortunately to label all our concerns as irrational is itself irrational. It may sell a lot of books and can be very comforting to those who wish for easy answers – but this fails to withstand serious scrutiny. A stopped clock is right twice a day. Whether or not I am right or Anthony is right, we cannot rule out the rational science exposing our “over-shoot” of finite limits. Mankind is busting the seams of our little home. Be it top soil, oil or even monetary credit. I would like to see which piece of astrophysics we could come up with to prove that our populations and economies can continue to grow exponentially on a base of finite resource – be it atmosphere, fossil fuels or available agricultural land. At some point we’ll come to a screeching halt. It almost no longer matters if it is climate change or some other wolf at the door. We can continue to ignore this reckoning even after the damage is self-evident but many of your fellow citizens DON’T find this comforting at all. I would prefer to be prepared. We all should, don’t you think?

Mark Brown
Chairman – Transition Town High Wycombe
Totteridge