A balanced viewpoint

Amid daily concerns about overpopulation, species extinction and global warming, it may seem soothing to be once again reassured by Michael Ivey that CO2 pollution is no big deal [“Carbon Dioxide Does Not Cause Global Warming,” Dec. 25 Xpress]. Not that he supports his position with any shred of evidence, but that he so firmly believes in it is the point. Passionate conviction seems good enough for him, so it should be good enough for you.

My own physics training about radiation balance between the incoming solar, high frequency radiation and outgoing infrared emissions made it seem perfectly logical (to me) that excesses of atmospheric gases (CO2, methane, water vapor) which selectively absorb outgoing radiation frequencies would trap more heat, leading to a higher atmospheric temperature that resets the incoming/outgoing radiation balance. Not that this is the only mechanism which controls global temperatures, but it is certainly one of them. Perhaps this viewpoint is too dressed up in sciency-sounding statements to be accessible to the Michael Iveys, who are instantly suspicious of math, chemistry and logic as the province of liberal elites who are out to hornswoggle them. Why anyone such as myself, a retired physicist, would want to hornswoggle Mr. Ivey remains to be explained.

— Glen Reese, Ph.D


Thanks for reading through to the end…

We share your inclination to get the whole story. For the past 25 years, Xpress has been committed to in-depth, balanced reporting about the greater Asheville area. We want everyone to have access to our stories. That’s a big part of why we've never charged for the paper or put up a paywall.

We’re pretty sure that you know journalism faces big challenges these days. Advertising no longer pays the whole cost. Media outlets around the country are asking their readers to chip in. Xpress needs help, too. We hope you’ll consider signing up to be a member of Xpress. For as little as $5 a month — the cost of a craft beer or kombucha — you can help keep local journalism strong. It only takes a moment.

About Letters
We want to hear from you! Send your letters and commentary to letters@mountainx.com

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

One thought on “A balanced viewpoint

  1. bkepley

    And this is a “balanced viewpoint”? How about the following: 1) Will the warming be a net plus or minus for Earth? 2) Has there been such a warming in the past and what were the results then? 3) Are the methods proposed to halt the warming actually going to do that? 4) Remove man’s additions to the climate change entirely and what is the result? Does the warming stop? 5) We are currently past the end of the last inter-glacial period. What does that mean for the future with and without man’s addition of carbon-dioxide?

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.