Dear Editor,
I am totally opposed to the sentiments and suggestions expressed in your editorial, “Climate change could make our forest invaluable”. Our forest is indeed “invaluable” but government and Guyana’s policy on the effective utilisation of our forests cannot be guided by propaganda. Local commentators on global warming and its causes cannot afford to use tunnel vision to come up with a viable conclusion.
There are contrasting schools of thought on the reason for global warming and cooling, which need our scrutiny. The Internet is ripe with information, which shows that carbon emissions may not be the culprit and that earth solar positioning from time to time may be the contributing factor.
Research has shown that the earth has constantly gone through phases of warming and cooling long before the existence of this fuel consuming civilisation. The contribution of carbon emissions and greenheart gases to the global warming theory is not 100% conclusive. There are many independent scientists who disagree with this theory and call it a hoax.
In the US, the Democrats and Republicans share different views on this topic. As I have said before, the pendulum swings back and forth in American politics. The Democrats are inclined to go green and may very well put forward and support proposals for carbon credits then have it all nullified when a Republican takes office. Someone is right while another is wrong. We do not know as yet. Which end of the stick would Guyana be holding if we go by this editorial?
While we are bombarded with the global warming propaganda certain recent factual observations have gone unnoticed. Ironically there seems to be a cooling trend going on at present. The year 2006 was the coolest in the last five years and 2007 was just recognised as the coolest of the century. Projections are that 2008 would be even cooler. The editor should delve for information outside the mainstream media.
My position should not be misconstrued to mean that I believe global warming is not real and that I am not concerned about deforestation. In fact, I strongly believe that our forest should be properly managed to ensure its existence and continued generation of wealth for many centuries.
We should also be moving towards the plantation foresting of our best species, for instance purpleheart and crabwood, as is done in Costa Rica. Proper processing and marketing of our exotic woods species can and will generate much more income than projected carbon credits.
We cannot afford to set our forestry and developmental programmes based on uncertainty and the swing of a pendulum. Sitting back and waiting on carbon credits is an act in stupidity.
Yours faithfully,
F Skinner
