Global Warming

Former ambassador to China and GOP presidential primary contender Jon Huntsman normally takes reasonable positions, but he has waffled on the question of global warming ("Gingrich has double-digit lead in new national poll," Dec. 7). Mr. Huntsman was quoted in The Sun as requesting the scientific community to state its position on whether humans have played a role in climate change more clearly. Mr. Huntsman should be aware that the National Academies of Sciences, the nation's spokesman for the scientific community, has unequivocally stated that global warming is in part man made and poses an serious threat to mankind.

The latest word on climate change is not good — world emissions of carbon dioxide from energy use rose 1.4 percent last year to set a new record, according to the International Energy Agency. At this pace, the agency reports, global temperatures could rise a startling 9 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, which would be disastrous for all nations. And yet this latest report has received minimal attention in the United States, at least outside the climate science community and its usual advocates.

Hey, I wonder what those correspondents who declared that the twin blizzards proved global warming was a hoax and a fraud think of the early summmer twin heat waves? Hot enough for ya now? Douglas J. Kaplan, Baltimore

While I applaud Tim Wheeler for shining a light on the risks of climate change in his recent article "Rising temperatures increase health risks" (May 10), I'm saddened by these three esteemed universities investing time and effort into researching what appears to be common sense. Most all of us know intuitively and from experience that extreme heat - whether it results in heat stroke, dehydration, sunburn, other physiological reactions, or just lack of ability to participate actively in daily activities - is not good for us. The more of it we experience as a society, the higher the number of individuals who will be impacted.

I laughed when I read Mike Tidwell's "The sky really is falling" (Feb. 14). The fact that this winter has been the snowiest on record in Baltimore proves nothing. Climatologists know that climate change is constant and there have been many periods of warming and cooling throughout earth's history, some more extreme than anything we have experienced in human history. Therefore, no one can prove that our back-to-back blizzards were freak events. Nor can anyone prove that they were due to man-made global warming.

If the debate on global warming has been decided in favor of climate change skeptics, as Richard Haddad suggests ("Get past alarmism on global warming," Oct. 26), it is not apparent from information available on the web. Even a cursory search reveals dozens of scientific, newspaper and magazine web sites that flatly contradict his undocumented assertion. To take just one example, Richard Muller, a physicist at the University of California, Berkeley and a former global warming skeptic, recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal (Oct.

Extreme weather is on the rise ("Maryland braces for second heat wave," June 7). Maryland's heat wave is just one example, and scientists predict these extreme events will become increasingly common due to global warming. Heat waves are actually more lethal than other extreme events and pose greater danger to at-risk groups. In our recent report, "Global Warming and Extreme Weather," we found the number of heat waves has gone up since 1960, while 2010 is tied for the warmest year on record.

In response to Richard Haddad's recent op-ed piece ("Get past alarmism on global warming," Oct. 26), I wish I could understand why he thinks that a growth in world population of 6 billion people in only 207 years when it took all of time to reach 1 billion in 1804 has no effect on a finite planet. We continue to use cars that spew carbon dioxide, industries continue to spew carbon dioxide, etc., etc., etc., and than we continue to cut down trees that absorb carbon dioxide. The things we need to live are being depleted rapidly - air, water, soil - all because of human activity.

I have carefully read and digested Erica Fuhrmeister's piece on geoengineering ("Fight climate change through geoengineering" May 26 )The thrust of her comments is on various ways to combat "global warming," which is neither man-made nor under man's control. Once again you have used valuable space on your editorial commentary pages in an attempt to misinform the public concerning the disproved "global warming" concept. Indeed, the climate is continuing to cool and warm in cycles, as it always does.

A recent letter to the editor confused long-term shifts in the Earth's climate with global warming ("Snow does not prove global warming," Readers respond, Feb. 16). Scientists know the Earth goes through different orbital configurations that bring it closer to or farther from the sun. Those shifts take place over tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of years. Recent climate change, however, has taken place in a relatively short period of time. The sun and other natural factors haven't changed over that time period.

Your editorial on green energy light bulbs exposed The Sun's true colors in its intolerance of the idea that conservatives might have a different point of view on the subject of global warming ("Don't save the planet," May 4). The editorial blatantly denigrates conservatives by making them the butt of a "how many conservatives does it take to screw in a light bulb?" joke and using the term "mush-brained" to describe them. To write that conservatives "take pains not to recycle" or "enjoy dumping used motor oil down the storm drain while no one is looking," along with other ridiculous statements, is just over the top in exposing your hatred and intolerance of anything conservative.

Income inequality and global warming represent existential threats to our country, far surpassing the dangers from international terrorism ("The economic elephant in the room: widening inequality," April 24). And at this time our legislators in Washington obsess about immigrants overstaying their visas and border security, which is now more tightly controlled than at any time in the last 20 years. Give me a break! Jack Kinstlinger, Baltimore Text NEWS to 70701 to get Baltimore Sun local news text alerts

Spurred by a recent article in Rolling Stone, some Baltimore television meteorologists are weighing in against global climate change -- and are drawing some criticism for it. WBAL-TV's Tony Pann shared the article, which calls some TV meteorologists "climate crackpots", on his Facebook page. He, along with others like WMAR-TV's Mike Masco and former WMAR meteorologist Justin Berk, argue climate change is an unproven theory. The Rolling Stone article, published Dec. 5 , questions why more TV meteorologists don't agree with global warming.

Global warming should be more in the news, with interviews with climatologists and scientists who study weather. There has been much coverage of the destruction wrought by Superstorm Sandy, but little about the changing weather patterns that cause such events. Many people believe that weather patterns are cyclical. But while the weather does seem to go in cycles, the number and ferocity of storms has increased in recent years. Yet there are people who remain in denial about the damage done to the people and places where these killer storms strike.

Given events like Snowmageddon, Hurricane Irene, and last month's derecho storm, it's no wonder officials are calling the recent uptick of extreme weather the "new normal" ("Severe weather renews climate-change talks in Washington, Annapolis," Aug. 1). To drive home the point, a recent Environment Maryland report confirms that extreme rainstorms and snowstorms are happening 55 percent more frequently in the Mid-Atlantic region than in 1948. And the strongest storms in Maryland are dumping 14 percent more precipitation.

The "derecho" that blacked out much of Maryland several weeks ago," back-to-back tropical storms last summer and "snowmaggeddon" two winters ago weren't just fluke weather events, according to a new report by Environment Maryland .  They're part of a growing trend of extreme weather events that climate experts have predicted will come with the planet's gradual warming. Drawing on information from the National Climatic Data Center , the environmental group says heavy downpours and snowstorms in the region have increased in frequency 55 percent since 1948.  Where there used to be at least one heavy rain or snow every 12 months, on average, they're now hitting every 7.7 months, the group says.

Perhaps the environmental movement in America is stalled because the vast majority of scientists who support the idea that global warming is a result of human activity are social scientists ("Green movement's blues," Dec. 29). Hard science points in the other direction. It recognizes that the warming comes first, caused by irregularities in the sun's energy reaching earth, followed by an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide released from sea water. True science trumps computer models any day. William Vail, Glen Burnie

I am writing In response to the July 5 letter on Columbia's open space. In order to manage storm water runoff, save us money, and be "green," CA has increased stream buffer areas and done some community reforestation centered around Earth Day and supported by grass roots groups and local residents. There is no big plan to eliminate open, unforested areas, and an area doesn't need to be a grass field in order to be considered "usable. " Many residents prefer to use open space with trees and shade.