Skip to content

Letter: Following the money

In his letter denying there is a climate emergency, Gerry Kirkham mentioned volcanoes, implying that they contribute to global warming [ “‘Emergency’ is paranoia,” March 15].
Powell River letter

In his letter denying there is a climate emergency, Gerry Kirkham mentioned volcanoes, implying that they contribute to global warming [“‘Emergency’ is paranoia,” March 15].

Research shows they actually slow down global warming, and a couple of really big eruptions could send us into an ice age.

Kirkham quotes a former environmentalist who also claims Monsanto's Roundup is safe to drink, so I don't think his opinion is worth very much.

The one relevant argument was to follow the money. However, the opinions of celebrities, regardless of their wealth or hypocrisy, are irrelevant.

So we have the climate scientists around the world, whose research points to catastrophic climate change. Most of those scientists are in academia or government. If they were motivated by money they would go to work for industry instead.

Incidentally, the scientists who work for the oil industry have come to the same conclusions. Academics do not make huge amounts of money. They do need funds to do their work, though, so where does that money come from?

Much of it comes from the universities that have been, at least until very recently, well funded by the oil industry, so they don't have a strong financial motivation to support the work of “climate alarmists.” Some of that money comes from governments that have been extremely reluctant to hear the message. For the most part, they have forced the scientists to water down their warnings before making them public.

On the other hand, we have to look at the money supporting the argument against global warming. None of that money seems to be going into scientific research, rather it seems to be going into public relations. Every time I have followed the money from arguments against global warming, I have found lobbying organizations for the oil industry or companies that directly profit from the negative impacts of global warming.

We can actually argue the science, but consider this: Given that the worst-case scenario means humans may become extinct due to our own climate disrupting activities, are you so sure of your side that you are willing to risk the future of our race?

Edward Sanderson
Manson Avenue