Global warming is real science

What is the common citizen of this amazing blue planet to make of Mr. Berry’s op-ed piece “Global warming just eco-religion?” (August 31, 2014)? 

Those of us who have come to the informed conclusion that climate change is a real threat caused by humans do not find it helpful to have our reasoning reduced to “their environmental religion requires it.” Mr. Berry asserts that “Consensus is... irrelevant to science where logic and data prevail.” Is there really a pure land of logic and data? 

I’m sure Mr. Berry understands Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and its ramifications for the measurement and interpretation of data much better than I do. As a non-scientist trying to wade through the literature, I always try to determine the author’s emotional bond with his/her subject. Evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould said that “we will not fight to save what we do not love.” 

Gould’s words are not an indictment of science, but rather of academic fundamentalists who maintain that science works inversely to passion while overlooking their own zeal for confident rationality. 

Love and connection, of course, are not substitutes for careful thought. However, personal motives and passions do matter, and different motives and passions lead to very different kinds of knowledge and very different ecological results. 

I respect Mr. Berry’s convictions. I wish he would afford those who disagree with him the same regard and civility. —Bob Muth Sr., Kalispell