To the editor:

Jed Dukett’s recent guest commentary reflects the perspective of a lab technician with expertise in acid rain, but his opinions about climate change diverge from well-established science. While his understanding of acid rain may be sound, his interpretation of the role of greenhouse gases in global warming is incorrect.

Dukett attributes recent warming to reduced sulfur pollution and changes in solar output, dismissing the role of carbon dioxide and claiming that climate scientists ignore these factors for “money and dogma.” However, rigorous studies of the main global climate drivers — sulfur pollution, solar activity and carbon emissions — show that CO2 is the principal cause of warming over the past half-century. Under the influence of sulfur emissions and solar output alone, there would be no such warming. Only CO2 levels have risen sharply in tandem with global temperatures.

The evidence supporting this conclusion is robust and multifaceted. NASA’s observations confirm Arctic sea ice loss, with recent changes in the trend linked to ice thickness rather than a lack of warming. Paleoclimate records from sediment cores, ice cores and tree rings also rule out natural cycles or solar variability as primary causes. Moreover, the cooling of the stratosphere alongside warming of the lower atmosphere aligns with greenhouse gas science; if the sun were the dominant factor, the entire atmosphere would warm.

While a handful of scientists cling to solar-driven explanations, their findings do not withstand unbiased scrutiny and are often funded by sources tied to the fossil fuel industry. The broader scientific community views these positions with skepticism because they conflict with the overwhelming body of evidence.

It’s important to approach climate science on the basis of reliable data rather than conspiracy theories. Thousands of reputable scientists worldwide work under challenging field conditions to advance our understanding of climate change, and their conclusions are grounded in rigorous, peer-reviewed analyses. Over 95% of those climate experts agree on the central role of carbon dioxide in recent warming–not because of “dogma,” but because the evidence overwhelmingly supports it.

Dukett is correct in advocating for reduced sulfur pollution. However, it’s crucial to separate this valid goal from his unfounded dismissal of the role of fossil fuels in driving climate change. Let’s focus on addressing our environmental challenges with clarity and fact-based solutions, not on amplifying misinformation.

Curt Stager

Professor of Natural Sciences at Paul Smith’s College

Saranac Lake