(Provided graphic — Curt Stager)

It’s not always easy to speak up when a conversation turns contentious, but sometimes it is necessary. A recent commentary published in this newspaper on March 22, titled “Climate change is not a hoax — It’s been going on forever,” raises several claims that misrepresent climate science. At this time when truth and trust in science are under attack more than ever before, it’s especially important to respond to climate misinformation with the support of reliable evidence.

Let’s start with the central premise: Yes, Earth’s climate has always varied — we climate scientists are the ones who discovered and documented that fact in detail. This is one of many reasons why we also know that the rapid, planet-wide warming we’re experiencing now is not part of any natural process or cycle. It’s a different kind of change that is primarily driven by a buildup of heat-trapping carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.

A temperature chart included in the commentary misleads readers by incorrectly suggesting that there was a dramatic local cooling in Indian Lake from 1900 to 1980, followed by only a slight warming afterward. But properly vetted data from the U.S. Historical Climatology Network that are freely available through NOAA show something very different: maximum daily temperatures at Indian Lake have actually increased over the last century, albeit erratically (Chart B on the figure). That pattern also holds when looking at mean daily temperatures in Tupper Lake and Dannemora as well as Indian Lake. In short, the broad regional trend here is warming — not cooling.

The commentary uses its inaccurate temperature chart to support the false claim that global warming is mainly due to clearer skies since 1980 as restrictions on sulfur emissions were enacted. But the evidence tells another story.

Although it’s tempting to rely on one’s own backyard to make sense of a planet-wide issue, the Adirondacks alone can’t tell the whole story. Climate change is complex — it plays out differently in different places. That’s why scientists use global-scale averages to track the long-term trend, which shows that our planet as a whole was warming even before those pollution restrictions took hold — during a time when sulfur emissions were actually increasing (Chart A on the figure). That’s because the main driver of today’s warming is a buildup of carbon dioxide, not the absence of shading by sulfur particles. This is supported not just by one scientist or one local dataset, but by numerous reputable studies and decades of research worldwide.

The commentary also cites other claims that have long been disproven, such as the idea that there’s no connection between sea level and CO2 (there is), or that Arctic sea ice melt is raising sea levels (it’s not). The so-called “Medieval Warm Period,” often invoked by climate deniers to suggest that today’s warming is nothing new, was not global in scope but a regional change that doesn’t compare to today’s worldwide temperature rise.

It’s also worth considering where the commentary’s information comes from. One cited source, Dr. William Happer, is a physicist with expertise in optics and nuclear science — not climate science. He’s widely known for spreading discredited claims that align with the interests of wealthy fossil fuel backers and that fly in the face of what hundreds of climate experts around the globe are saying. When evaluating complex issues like this, credibility matters. So does transparency.

To be clear, healthy skepticism is welcome in science. Sincere, fact-based discussion makes us stronger. But such debate must rest on accurate data, peer-reviewed research and a commitment to scientific integrity — not cherry-picked examples or unfounded opinions. The truth is, the overwhelming consensus — from climate scientists, the U.S. military, global insurers and even Exxon’s own researchers — is that human-driven climate change is real, it’s mainly being caused by the combustion of fossil fuels, and it’s already reshaping our world.

The science behind human-driven climate change is so strong now that denying the central role of greenhouse gases is a waste of time that serves nobody but the fossil fuel interests who continue to fund such naysaying. Moving forward to find solutions with the support of the best available science is both a responsibility and a path to empowerment. It’s about choosing to be well informed, to care for our communities, and to protect the people and places we love. We all want what’s best for our future — let’s make sure we’re building that future on a solid foundation of reliable facts.

——

Curt Stager is a climate scientist at Paul Smith’s College and University of Maine’s Climate Change Institute. He lives in Saranac Lake.