Letter writer confuses relative scale of climate problem

I must take exception to the conclusion drawn by Mr. Hubler in his letter published on Dec. 16. If you look at the details of the report, they conclude that the contribution of humans to the increased effects of climate change are irrefutable.

Now I cannot refute Mr. Hubler’s conclusions regarding the use of nuclear reactors to reduce the effects of dispersing electricity. In fact, I tend to agree with him in much of this argument. However, that does not excuse the misinterpretation of the message published in the IPCC report. This is an extensive report that is authored by a large contingent of scientists from all over the world. Furthermore, there are multiple assessments of the results published in the report that fundamentally conclude that climate change is real and driven by human involvement.

It is worthwhile to examine the comparison to the IPCC AR5 report and the IPCC AR6 report (Google it) and the conclusions I have drawn are apparent. Now, to be fair to Mr. Hubler referenced a series of tables from the report which appear to support the conclusions he has drawn. I think he has confused the relative scale of the problem and overlooked the impact of small changes in global warming to the impact on the climate. A further difficulty in understanding this issue is the overall complexity of the analysis. This is a problem for our policymakers as well.

Gordon Taylor

Anamosa