To the editor,

Wow! Science debated in our local paper! Space doesn't allow me to address all of Mr. Pazdernik's points from last week's Journal, but I do have a few comments, as I struggle spinelessly under the ultra-left boot on my neck. The "global cooling hypothesis" got some attention in the 1970's, largely from projections of Milankovitch cycles and estimates of climatic effects from air-born particles and droplets (aerosols). These do have a cooling effect. I recall following this controversy. Even then, though, the majority opinion among professionals was that CO2 increase would swamp out these effects. This has been borne out by an additional half a century of data. (See atmospheric https://www.co2.earth).

Also what people think of as "sea level" isn't really level. It's a dynamic surface formed by interaction of many factors such as wind waves, currents, atmospheric pressure, local salinity, etc. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level). Since the 1990's specialized satellites give us the best global measurements. These document an average rise of 98 mm (about 3.8 inches) since 1993 (https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/), with estimated totals of 8-9 inches since 1880. The exact amount, and the resulting impact, thus, varies from place to place. Nine inches may not sound like much when storm surges can raise water 15-20 feet about normal. But a lot of coastal cities, such as Fort Myers, are at average elevations of 10 feet or lower. The extra rise is significant when they are unlucky to experience such storms, as well cope with the greater inland flooding from the high tides.

Okay. I'm done. Thank you!

William S. Cordua

River Falls