Mr. Richard Suffron argues that the science of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) or global warming is a fraud, listing seven points in support (Cochrane Eagle Sept. 26, 2016). Mr. Suffron writes that he has a solid education in science, yet his list is without sources. It is a core practice in science to provide sources so that the information provided can be assessed and scrutinized by others. Without supporting sources his points can be considered baseless and without merit. Regarding his rejection of the claim about scientist rejecting ACC, 97 per cent of climate scientists, the experts on this subject, support it (Cook 2013, “Quantifying the consensus on ACC in the scientific literature,” http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf). Non-climate scientist also overwhelming support (92 per cent) ACC (Carlton 2015, open access journal “Environmental Research Letters,” “The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists,” http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/094025/meta. In this article, Carlton concludes that, “These results suggest that scientists who are climate change skeptics are outliers and that the majority of scientists surveyed believe in anthropogenic climate change and that climate science is credible and mature.” The 2014 article in Scientific America, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-determine-the-scientific-consensus-on-global-warming/, provides an excellent overview of the alleged controversy purported by Mr. Suffron. Finally, an excellent source of information on climate change is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change website http://www.ipcc.ch. As a person of science, Mr. Suffron may want to examine the information in the Assessment Reports (ARs) against his list of claims. Dennis Stefani
