Dear liberal, non-thinking, Scientific American editors:

I get so tired of your constant political non-science, especially in the March, 2010 issue.   Jeffrey Sachs can’t seem to understand the climate debate log jam…….Stan Wullschleger and Maya Strahl’s article on climate change:  a controlled experiment, is replete with “could’s” and “maybe’s” and “what-if’s” and many fantastic predictions for the future.  It is hard to know where to start with you idiots.  That’s right, IDIOTS!  If you weren’t so political in your views you could print the reasons why there is a climate debate log jam.  But, alas, you are so far left-wing that you can’t see the forest for the trees.  You are ingenuous, hypocritical and downright liars.  There is more methane from termites than there is from humans,  the sea levels have not changed an iota, water vapor is the largest greenhouse gas and NOBODY seems to want to talk about it, and volcanoes produce most of the carbon dioxide on earth.  Our Sun is the biggest weather predictor.  The amount of sunspots or the lack thereof makes our Earth warmer or colder……as if you IDIOTS haven’t noticed!  Greenland was much warmer 1000 years ago……hard data from ice cores.  Wullschleger noted several times how more carbon dioxide makes trees and plants grow more and guess what, the more they grow, the more we get oxygen from them.  Isn’t that what we want?  And again, haven’t you noticed that about every 20,000 years Earth goes into an ice age and then warms up and then goes back into an ice age.  20,000 years ago humans were numerically not enough on Earth to influence anything but the lifespan of a fly.  Our current non-warming has nothing to do with the combustion engine nor bovine flatulence but it has a lot to do with how idiotic you appear.  Scientific American used to be known for trusted science but you idiots have thrown that down the drain.

Richard Hauley DMD

slcdentist@aol.com