To the editor:

Over some time, I have clipped, from your newspaper, articles with headlines like “Report: Arctic melt faster than expected” (May, 4, 2011), “Scientists: Get used to hotter summers” (June 9, 2011), “Biggest jump ever seen in global warming gases” (Nov. 4, 2011), “Greenhouse gases hit record level” (Nov. 22, 2011), “New planting map reflects global warming” (Jan. 26, 2012), “Drought-parched soil leads to homes cracking” (Sept. 10, 2012), “Drought clouds crop outlook” (Oct. 12, 2012), “Recent rain barely a drop toward making up deficit” (Oct. 16, 2012).

All are evidence that scientific predictions are proving accurate, that humanity’s excessive emissions of greenhouse gases from using fossil-based fuels (coal, petroleum, natural gas) will cause climate disruptions that affect all aspects of our lives. It’s clear that conscientiously reducing our output of greenhouse gases is absolutely essential. Although it will probably not be politically advantageous for a candidate to speak openly about global warming until its effects have become extreme, truly our most urgent need now is for leaders committed to policies that will drastically reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.

Between the two presidential candidates in the upcoming elections, voters do have a clear choice: Mitt Romney bases his “economic plan” on driving full-speed into extracting coal, oil and natural gas from every possible source on U.S. soil. President Obama can, at least, emphasize his priorities to invest in the education, scientific research and technology development needed to make us world leaders in energy efficiency and a brighter future less reliant on climate-disrupting fossil fuels. Voters, let’s keep this in mind as we cast our 2012 ballots.