Repetition of repetitions



There comes a time when one has to dismiss a writer who questions readers’ intelligence by continuing to repeat already answered queries as though they had never been fully addressed.

I wrote an article published on Aug. 7 in The Express on the scientific evidence of man-made global warming and entitled, “No evidence of global warming?”

In it, I dealt at length with letter writer Mike Kerstetter’s question on “normal cycles.”

I also explained that the term “denier” is leveled at those who disagree that current global warming is caused by greenhouse gases and not aimed at the virtually non-existent few who deny that climate is always changing.

I have answered Kerstetter’s other repeated questions in the past with futility, even though they’ve been explained over and over again by peer-reviewed climatologists who are but a Google click away.

Nevertheless, in a recent letter, and for the umpteenth time, Mr. Kerstetter repeats himself by asking: “Are we outside of a normal climate pattern as it pertains to the climate that has been changing since the beginning of time?”

He additionally repeats his frequent complaint: “The writer of the article falls back on a familiar tactic by calling those who are skeptical of man-made climate change ‘deniers’.”

Several years ago, in response to very similar questions from Kerstetter, I put a lot of time into researching and publishing an article on man-made climate change.

During a discussion of the subject in the newspaper’s comment section, I referred Kerstetter to that article. He told me he did not and would not read it.

Kerstetter’s apparent lack of knowledge on the subject is lamentable.

His refusal to learn anything about the topic, however, is inexcusable. His repeated pontification on a topic about which he knows so little is an epic exercise in shameless audacity.

While Kerstetter’s knowledge gap about the subject is apparent, I used to wonder if his unwillingness and inability to learn about it comes from mindless, uninformed obtuseness, automatic reflex, laziness, or bad faith.

It turns out I didn’t really have to choose because now I’m pretty certain it’s a combination of all of them. Repetitions reinforce repetition; they do not establish the validity of “alternative truths.” But I repeat myself.