I refer to the letter by Patrick Lui ("Astounding to deny that climate change is caused by humans", January 3) in reply to my letter ("Still a lot of doubts about climate change", December 17).
It is interesting that Mr Lui attributes one of the world's leading solar scientists' concerns about present solar activity to him "conveniently" ignoring the 11-year cycle and affording greater heating value to the sun than it deserves. And yet are we not repeatedly warned never to look at the sun directly, as it could have a detrimental effect on our eyesight, even though it is 93 million miles away ?
Lee Sai-ming, from Hong Kong Observatory ("Most of globe experienced warming", December 24) says we anthropogenic global warming deniers (that is what we are talking about, global warming caused by human-generated carbon emissions, recently morphed into "climate change") are cherry-picking data.
The cherry pickers are those who, even when confronted with evidence that their computer models are flawed, that so-called "peer reviewing" is virtually non-existent in many cases, continue to cherry-pick data to maintain the deception, with the help of a compliant media, and to ensure their continued ride on the funding gravy train.
No better example of this exists than in the "Summary for Policymakers" to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's AR5 report.
Mr Lui brings ocean warming into the argument, an issue that has only recently been cherry-picked by the "warmists" to account for the apparent lack of atmospheric global warming - the warming is still taking place but believed to have been absorbed by the deep ocean; they can think of no other explanation. Can Mr Lee and Mr Lui comment on the absurdity of the Antarctic expedition, the subject of a very expensive and dangerous rescue operation, the main aim of which was to prove the reduction in polar ice cover due to climate change.
Didn't these scientists get a rude awakening? I believe they will find that the ice cover in Arctic regions is above normal for this time of year. And all Mr Lui can tell us is that global temperatures have increased by 0.8 degrees Celsius in 210 years.
If this rate continues, where will we be by 2224? Most interesting of all, Mr Lui places "land use changes" ahead of "fossil fuels combustion" as the main causes.
G. Bailey, Ta Kwu Ling