I read a letter in February’s paper from Beth Hodsdon. She expressed concern about climate change and its devastating effects on our planet.
I am a retired aerospace engineer and spent many years studying our atmosphere as part of both the Apollo Moon Mission and the Viking Mars Lander Project. So even though I’m not a climate scientist, I am not ignorant of atmospheric conditions. Personally, I do not believe in man-made climate change, but rather than get into a diatribe as to why not, I will go directly to an indisputable fact. Most climate-change adherents focus solely on what the U.S. should do. Even if climate-change adherents were correct (which they aren’t), bankrupting the U.S. economy and rendering us a third-world nation by eliminating nearly all fossil fuels would be of little consequence if other big green house gas emitters (e.g., China and India) didn’t do the same. They would have to do more than just give the cause lip service; there would need to be tangible results. The Paris Climate Accord, for example, relied solely on the U.S. sacrificing, but not developing countries. Since pollution is global and so eminently threatening, why is it okay for developing countries to “skate?” Climate-change scientists make their living “proving” climate change and not ascertaining whether it’s true, so they are inherently biased.
Richard A. Lau
Send your letters to the editor to [email protected] Letters will not be printed anonymously. Letters do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Crozet Gazette.