It is regrettable that audacity. org and Living Marxism consider the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change platitudinous and lacking in robust thought (Letters AJ27.7.00).Robust thought is always to be encouraged, untrammelled by unsupported preconceptions, such as 'the earth has no static carrying capacity'. It would be interesting to hear from Ian Abley, of audacity. org, what 'abstract principles derived from scientific study'he has found to support this conclusion . . . or is it more an ideology? I refer him to the first law of thermo-dynamics. There is, of course, the extra-terrestrial source of all our energy which must be much more directly tapped than via the finite reserves of the fossil fuel-fuel we currently squander.
Architects already have a 'duty of care in the performance of their services'. Nice interpretations of the legal implications of such terms are constantly evolving, but that does not render them unworkable. Neither is there any conflict between that duty of care and experts taking responsibility for their own ideas.
Kate Macintosh, Finch Macintosh Architects, Winchester, Hampshire