Thank goodness for two so very different opinions.
The problem for lay persons, such as me, is that it is very difficult to read in the popular media well-reasoned arguments for each side of important issues, such as climate. You can see my confusion being expressed in the opening paragraphs of an earlier Post on Climate Change.
It might not be rhetoric to say that the issue of man-made climate change could be one of the most pressing issues of all for mankind. Thus having two very clearly opposing views is incredibly useful. Learning from Dogs is grateful to both guest authors.
On the 16th October, we published a general Post about the subject that tended to lean towards the view that mankind was not affecting the climate in such a direct way as had previously been thought.
That was then followed by a Post largely consisting of an article by Patrice Ayme arguing, scientifically, that there was a direct link between mankind and global warming.
Then a Post that contained the full article by Alan Carlin arguing, again on scientific grounds, that there was not a direct link.
Patrice commented on the Alan Carlin article. But to give greater visibility to this debate, this Post carries Patrice’s comment. We hope to have a response from Alan Carlin soon.





who should be shrinking, it undermines growing standards of living and can even bring them down.”