Letter: Proof vs. consensus

Dear Editor,

Man-made climate change is a hoax. First of all, when did science become a consensus of a group of people that are supposed to be scientists? I was always taught that science is true and provable, such as gravity and the life cycle of humans and animals, where humans and animals give off carbon dioxide and breathe oxygen, and plant life gives off oxygen and takes in carbon dioxide.

Second, what did man to end the ice age? I’m sure there is a consensus explanation among the junk scientist. And as far as that goes, what caused the demise of the age of the dinosaur? Again, that has not been touched by the consensus scientist. There have been several ideas put forward, but as far as I know, there is no consensus. In other words, no proof.

Third, what did mortal man do to cause the flood that occurred during the time of Noah? I’m not even sure that the consensus scientist even believes that the flood ever happened.

When and why did the hoopla about man-made climate change come into being? I would suggest that if the money trail was investigated, we could find out why the subject ever came up. Could it be the likes of Al Gore?

There have been dire predictions about the horrific and life-threatening things that were going to happen and never did. Again, does Al Gore ring a bell? The scientists have a terrible time predicting the weather one, two or three days out and they want us to believe they know what is going to happen 25 years, 50 years or even 100 years from now. Does that not strike you as odd?

Now, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez has become a predictor of what is going to happen in 12 years. What makes her think we can believe that when she doesn’t even make sense in economics, the field she is supposed to be educated in?

Meanwhile, life goes on.

Raymond Lunbeck

Sikeston, Mo.