To the editor:

Regarding my Jan. 11 guest commentary (“Ignoring the bias in climate change science”), Mr. Richard Brandt claims “disinformation,” (“Response to Jed Dukett’s commentary on climate bias,” Jan. 17).

He takes issue with my reporting that the influence of human sulfur pollution since WWII has driven the extent of the Arctic sea ice. I strongly disagree with Mr. Brandt’s claim that it is “nonsense” to compare the climatic effect of sulfur pollution from volcanoes with human pollution.

The Arctic doesn’t distinguish the darkness and cooling created by the unregulated spigot of sulfur pollution after WWII and the sulfur from a volcanic eruption. In a 2017 study, “observations show an increase in sea ice from 1950 to 1975 as large as the subsequent decrease in sea ice observed from 1975 to 2005.” The culprit here would be human sulfur dioxide emissions.

I agree that summer-September Arctic sea ice declined from the start of satellite records in the late 1970s — convenience for the climate crowd. But here is my point: the 1970s also saw the beginning of the decline in sulfur pollution. However, the more recent Arctic sea ice data, 2007-2024, shows no declining trend. The good news is that human sulfur dioxide pollution lost its grip over the Arctic in the mid-late 2000s.

Discussing the Arctic sea ice trend from the late 1970s to 2024 is a real disservice to the reader because of the bias associated with human sulfur pollution. The Arctic sea ice trend has been flat for the last 18 years, while CO2 has kept rising, and the climate crowd keeps reminding us of the “existential threat to humanity.”

Jed Dukett

Saranac Lake