How nice of The Citizen (April 11) to print my delusional musings on climate change every now and then.
But I must admit I'm puzzled by your claim that there's only one side to that story.
The only way you could know that would be if you investigated the claims of both sides. Having done that myself I came to a completely different conclusion than you have. Did nobody there do any investigation?
Is your opinion based on blind faith? Such certainty on your part, yet your words contradict all the science that I've seen over the years.
You must have read my words when they were printed so you know that I claim to be supported by the facts. I've even supplied scientific citations.
What have I missed?
I've been called names, I've been misrepresented, I've had people try and get my words banned, but what nobody has done is show me where I'm wrong.
For years I've had a standing offer for anyone to debate me on this issue.
No takers.
I've made direct offers to debate some of my detractors, thinking that if they're so certain that they're right and I'm wrong, they'd be eager to take me on.
But no, when the offer is made they're suddenly not to be found or they make excuses. The impression that I'm left with is that they haven't seen the science and suspect they'll lose, or they do know the science and know they'll lose. I'm not an immovable object, I've changed my mind on DDT, ozone depletion, global cooling and economics.
All you have to do is show me where I'm wrong and I'll switch sides in a heartbeat.
Yes, there are two sides.
Art Betke
Prince George
