DATA BACKS HUMAN INFLUENCE
In an act of retro-science, Des Goonan has invited "climate changers" to prove to him personally that climate change is real.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
But when even the head of Exxon-Mobil stated in the 1970s that CO2 emissions were causing global temperatures to rise, that the threat of climate change did indeed pose an existential threat, Des still needs proof.
When the mountain of science and data spanning decades has pointed to human influence over climate change, Des won't have a bar of it. When Australia recorded its first extinction event due to climate change last year, Des was looking the other way.
There is no point trying to "prove" anything to the likes of Des, who knows full well that science is never settled.
But trying to deny climate change, by ignoring its very real threat to our economy, our agriculture (just ask a farmer about how climate change is affecting agriculture here), our very way of life, is like trying to ask the oncologist to "prove" that the shadow on a lung is cancer, even when all the facts point to it. It's time ideologists grow up and start seeking change to reduce the impact of increasing temperatures, sporadic weather patterns, and an ecology which is dying.
Simon Goss, Albury
READ MORE LETTERS:
COME CLEAN ON CRASH CAUSES
The loss of life from road crashes is a tragedy. Education is a major part of preventing it. Superintendent Bob Noble is correct to mention the role of distraction, fatigue, speed and reactionary gap in road safety ("Heartache", June 16).
I disagree, however, with his last statement that most fatal collisions are avoidable. All collisions are avoidable, the result of an error by one or more people, and don't need to involve breaking any rules.
It's unfortunate that we never find out from the RMS what the causes of actual crashes were. With more precise conclusions about the cause of major crashes it might be possible to improve the education message incorporated in future safety initiatives. By the way, at 100 km/h the "reactionary gap" needs to be about five seconds.
Bruce Harper, Wagga
CHOICES HAVE CONSEQUENCES
Thank you Kacie for your well-written letter ("We need to listen to our loved ones, not institutions", June 9). I feel real sympathy for you. At the end you said "God gave us the greatest gift, the gift of choice". That is very true. We are not made as robots or puppets but people with the freedom of choice. But with this freedom of choice come the consequences, good or bad.
This all began way back with Adam and Eve. They could choose to say yes or no to the tempter, obey or not to obey God.
They chose not to obey and the consequence has been suffered by mankind forever after. You say "we need to listen to our loved ones, not to institutions". Institutions are fallible but God is not fallible, nor is his word.
In his word he says in both the Old and New Testament "You shall not kill". If voluntary assisted dying becomes legal in NSW, we can choose yes or no, kill or not kill.
But each choice has its consequence.
I do not know when or where your mother died but I know from a reliable source that at this time adequate pain control can be administered. I hope that this will be a comfort for anyone who is suffering now from a terminal illness.
Paul Bosman, Estella
HAVE YOUR SAY: Do you have something to get off your chest? Simply click here to send a letter to the editor.