YOUR VIEWS

I WAS interested to see Monitor commenting on the report that the forecast of rapid glacial melting had been based on nothing more than hearsay. Unfortunately many of the key factors which were highlighted in Al Gore's film and were subsequently incorporated into IPCC Assessments have been found to have fundamental faults, which have been compounded by the rapid adoption of the Assessments by most governments round the world who have not taken the simple step of having them thoroughly investigated by recognised scientific experts. What makes it difficult for the average observer to make up his/her own mind is the deliberate censorship imposed by parts of the media on any reports that run counter to the accepted ‘general consensus'. Many newspapers take this line and the BBC refuses to include such material in their programmes because it may be considered to be biased reporting!.

Those fortunate enough to read publications like the Wall Street Journal, the Daily Mail, the Telegraph or the Spectator will have read about the results of studies by qualified scientists showing; that although there is some peripheral melting, the polar ice-caps, representing over 99% of the planet's ice, has increased steadily since satellite measurements began; that sophisticated measurements of the average sea-level has shown that there has been no significant increase, and in fact in some critical areas has actually gone down; and except for one area on Alaska, the overall polar bear community has been steadily rising over the past few years.

This information, and much more, has been carefully researched and recorded in books by Nigel Lawson and Christopher Booker, with fully detailed footnotes on the sources used. Although Al Gore's film and book have been fully discredited his conclusions still form the basis of government policies. Monitor's call for the wider issues to be debated responsibly is very timely. Governments are making enormous economic commitments to solve problems which are founded on very questionable assumptions indeed.

The more light thrown on the global warming saga the better, and Monitor's report on the collapse of a major untruth is a good step in the right direction.

Yours sincerely,

Dennis Buckingham

DEAR SIR,

REGARDING the Himalayan glaciers and the rate at which they are receding (‘Glaciers not melting!' Daily Bulletin 22 Jan 2010) reminds me of speculations concerning the melting of the north and south poles made by some, following studies during the 1957-8 Geophysical Year. A pattern of warm air currents was confirmed as rising from equatorial regions, travelling at high altitudes and descending on the Polar Regions. It was these that would speed the melting of the ice. It was further suggested that ice at the poles remained there not because it was cold, rather that the white reflective qualities deterred melting by the sun. Historically ice at the poles represented the final stage of the last ice age, being finally cut off by climatic changes at the lower latitudes. Speculation follows that this is a natural Earth pattern which accelerates at the change over period and puts man-made global warming and rising sea levels very much into a secondary position. The rate at which the Himalayan glaciers are, or are not melting, could prove a very useful barometer over a period of time. Meanwhile a world-wide tax on global warming, whether it exists or not, will be very useful at funding bureaucratic excesses.

Mike Baylis, Puerto Pollensa