An Aug. 14 letter to the editor (“What about climate change’s positive effects?”), suggesting that the law of nature is that harms and benefits from climate change “cause 50-50 results,” is factually inaccurate. The dinosaur is gone; so too were buffaloes and wolves in North America, before focused reclamation efforts saved a few. But thousands of plant and animal species are gone forever. No 50-50 saved them.

Arctic and Antarctic ice and glacial ice systems are melting at accelerating rates. Sea levels are rising on every continent. Low-lying land areas (whole nations in some settings) are at risk. No 50-50 is saving them.

If one looks at the cause, climatologists point to the fact that the 10 most recent years are the warmest years on record. This accelerating trend goes back decades. And this trend is producing weather changes of growing magnitude. Hotter summers; near year-round forest fires of growing magnitude; more frequent and more intense tornadoes and coastal storms; damage curves that are unprecedented and growing. No 50-50 here.

Climate change deniers hate the label; the letter writer acknowledges that Maine’s climate has changed from what it was 14,000 years ago. The ice has receded, and Maine emerged – a positive benefit. But the earth’s entire population then was less than 4 million people. Most could position themselves out of harm’s way. One hundred years ago, the earth’s population was 2 billion; today, the global population is 8 billion; there is no place to run, hide or quickly move to. On the same day the Press Herald letter was published, the New York Times noted that Europe’s 2023 heat wave caused 47,000 deaths.

In short, yes, there are some benefits from climate change – new land areas will become productive; the rebuilding of storm or fire-damaged areas will employ people. But when the damage curve is at 10, we are not societally better off when the benefit curve is 1, or 2 or 3. Only a fool wedded to the continued use of fossil fuels believes the present harm/benefit reality is 50-50.

This brings us to the 800-pound gorilla in the room in today’s global warming/climate change debate: the global fossil fuel industry. Whether rooted in coal, gas, or oil rich western (largely democratic) countries or in similarly endowed eastern (more autocratic) countries, this relative handful of nations and the corporate interests that do their work on the ground are of one mind – retain political power and maximize corporate profits by continuing to use fossil fuels, without regard for global warming damage.

It is a cynical (ruthless, even) strategy played out in a variety of ways; the continued search for new gas or oil rich sites; delaying tactics (lawsuits, extended regulatory hearings) when green energy options seek to expand their footprint in a given nation or part thereof; the refusal to expand and interconnect grid (energy transmission) systems; the unbridled use of pricing mechanisms to extort what the traffic will bear from energy-poor nations and from energy-poor areas within otherwise energy sufficient nations.

The letter writer did not touch on any of these issues. His glib parting threat to stop reading about global warming in favor of “more funnies, sports,” is part of the problem, He plays into the hands of the global fossil fuel industry. I would urge a different tack. In much the same way that we restored the buffalo and the wolf, i.e., government regulations, we can say no to new fossil fuel exploration, no to new drilling, no to new pipelines, no to delays of expanded grid systems, no to energy price increases that are unjustified.

In sum, if we care about our children and their children; if we care about life on earth, we can slow (even stop) global warming, and in so doing, stop the mounting damage we see today.

That’s the task we need to be about.