By Edward T. Lentz

Recent editorials and commentaries in the media, including in this newspaper, have asserted that there is disagreement among scientific experts about the fact and/or cause of global climate change. Such comments are, at best, misinformed and, at worst, dishonest.

The clear weight of expert scientific opinion is that the Earth is warming due at least in part to man-made carbon emissions. Yes, there remains a minority of scientists who are skeptical about the role of human activity in global warming. No matter what the issue, there is always a minority viewpoint.

An Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group recently concluded that (1) "warming of the climate system is unequivocal" and (2) there is "very high confidence" that human activity is causing global warming. "Very high confidence" is defined as meaning there is at least a 90 percent chance that the conclusion is correct. A second Working Group expressed only "high confidence" (at least an 80 percent chance of being correct) concerning the effect of human activity.

Who are the likes of Rush Limbaugh and other pundits to dispute these findings? And, why accept their opinions when an overwhelming majority of experts is telling us otherwise? Would it make sense to rely on Rush Limbaugh’s opinion of a medical condition over that of a majority of doctors?

The experts’ diagnosis of global warming is well-supported by scientific evidence and is borne out by our own observations. There are several good sources for information concerning the scientific evidence. These include, among others, the IPCC, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Woods Hole websites as well as the Al Gore documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," which, politics aside, is widely acknowledged as being factually and scientifically accurate. (Contrary to what some would have us believe, climate change is a global issue, not a political one.)

Supporting evidence includes:

average global temperatures have been rising steadily, with many of the hottest years on record occurring in the last 10 years;

the polar ice caps are melting before our eyes;

glaciers and high mountain snow cover are disappearing around the world;[an error occurred while processing this directive]

the severity and frequency of violent weather events are increasing;

carbon dioxide levels have increased dramatically since the industrial revolution began and are now at their highest in more than 400,000 years;

ice core samples dating back over 400,000 years prove a tight correlation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and temperature;

the levels of other greenhouse gases, such as methane, are also increasing significantly;

tropical diseases are spreading to regions where they’d never been encountered before;

coral reefs are dying;

seasonal weather patterns are shifting; and on and on and on.

And, is it really so hard to believe that our spewing of carbon dioxide and other gases into the atmosphere for the past 150 years or so would have negative consequences? We know that dumping waste into the ground contaminates soil and water with devastating consequences for the environment. We know that dumping untreated waste water into our rivers and streams poisons the waters and living creatures, including humans, who depend on them. Doesn’t it make sense that dumping waste into the air in the form of industrial, automobile and other emissions would also have grave consequences?

And for those who say, "Who cares?," think again. Global warming does not merely mean shorter winters and hotter summers.

It means, among other things, rising sea levels with deadly consequences for coastal cities and communities in this country and elsewhere, an increase in heat-related deaths, an increase in the geographical range of vector-borne diseases such as malaria and yellow fever, mass extinctions of animal species that cannot adapt quickly enough, and greater human misery in regions that will suffer unprecedented drought.

So, it’s time, no, it’s past time, we wake up. It is incumbent on all of us, for the sake of our own and future generations, to take action. What can we do?

We can each take individual measures to reduce our carbon footprint such as by driving more fuel-efficient vehicles and driving them less. We can work within our communities to promote conservation and localization of production of food and other essentials.

Finally, we can demand that our political leaders stand up to industry and take legislative action to force reductions in carbon emissions. Remember, political leaders don’t lead _ they follow the will of those people who make themselves heard. It’s time we made ourselves heard on this vital, global issue.

__

Edward T. Lentz, of New Lisbon, is a patent attorney who works in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology fields. He has a master’s degree in biology and writes on behalf of the Coalition for Democracy of Central New York.