Give The Climate Skeptics A Chance Says Chief Scientist

Image of a Melting Glacier

Scientists must be more honest and open about the uncertainties of global warming, the Governments chief scientific adviser declared yesterday. Professor John Beddington said climate researches should be less hostile to skeptics who question their predictions. But he added that the underlying physics of climate change - that carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels warms the planet - was 'unchallengeable'. Professor Beddington's comments follow a series of blunders by climate scientists.

Last week, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was forced to apologize after wrongly claiming most of the Himalayan glaciers would vanish within 25 years. The warning, which appeared in the IPCC's 2007 report, turned out to be taken from a news story from New Scientist magazine in the late 1990's based on an interview with a glacier expert. The expert later admitted his comment was speculation. The same report also exaggerated claims that global warming will increase the number of tropical storms.

In November, leaked emails appeared to show scientists at the University of East Anglia manipulating data to strengthen the case for man-made climate change - and debating ways to stop skeptics getting hold of their raw temperature data.

Professor Beddington said public confidence in climate science would be boosted by greater honesty about its uncertainties. "I don't think it's healthy to dismiss proper skepticism," he said. "Science grows and improves in the light of criticism. There is a fundamental uncertainty about climate change prediction that can't be changed." He said that the false claim about glaciers in the IPCC report revealed a wider problem with the way that some evidence was presented.

"Certain unqualified statements have been unfortunate," he added. "We have a problem in communicating uncertainty. There's definitely an issue there. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be the level of skepticism. All of these predictions have to be caveated by saying, there's a level of uncertainty about that."

Professor Beddington also said that computer climate modeling resulted in 'quite substantial uncertainties that should be communicated. "it's unchallengeable that CO2 traps heat and warms the Earth and that burning fossil fuels shoves billions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere," he told the Times. "But where you can get challenges is on the speed of change. When you get into large-scale climate modeling there are quite substantial uncertainties. On the rate of change and the local effects, there are uncertainties both in terms of empirical evidence and climate models themselves."

The UN is under increasing pressure to reform the IPCC and include research from skeptical scientists in its reports. Dr Benny Peiser , of the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) think tank, said of professor Beddington's remarks: "His public rebuke is a highly significant development which we hope will help to restore some much needed balance and realism to the climate debate."


TheIlluminatifiles Comment..

What we are seeing here is nothing more than a damage limitation exercise by those elitists wishing to push the global warming agenda for political control and monetary gain. The global warming agenda has been found out for exactly what it is, a complete farce! Time and time again they have been caught manipulating the data, telling outright lies and deliberately keeping contradictory evidence from the prying eyes of the outside world and really, in light of recent leaked emails and being caught red-handed spreading misinformation, they have no choice but to issue such a statement in the mainstream press in order to claw back some credibility and save face.

Whilst no one would argue with the fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas which helps trap UV light from the Sun; the fact remains that human activity contributes very little to the overall level of Carbon Dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere, with the vast majority coming from volcanic activity. In addition to this, very little is said about the fact that the Earth has two major 'carbon sinks', namely, the ocean and the rainforests, both of which, naturally remove CO2 from the Earth's atmosphere. In the case of the oceans; carbon gets deposited on the ocean floor where it forms limestone and in the case of the rain forests; trees and plants use CO2 in photosynthesis, where it gets converted into the body of the trees.

Perhaps a better question to ask, in light of the above scientific facts, is why haven't the IPCC made moves to outlaw rainforest logging? If global warming is such a realistic and serious threat to the whole world, then one would assume that the IPCC would have made some serious moves in that direction, given the fact that the vast majority of Governments who would have been responsible for issuing permits to log rainforests, would have been present at the Rio de Janeiro summit. Do they really expect us to believe that by the collective cooperation of you and I turning our heating down by 1 degree or taxing the populou heavily on the use of fossil fuels is going to have any significant impact on atmospheric CO2 levels, while the rainforests continue to disappear at an alarming rate?

This is not about some realistic, impending catastrophe; this is about power, control and monetary gain for the few who sit at the top of the proverbial tree. These people sit at the head of powerful multinational companies and controlling organizations, many of whom stand to make billions on the back of global warming, whilst your liberty and freedoms will be eroded in the name of saving the planet. Thanks to the European Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, you can't even buy or sell a house in the UK without first paying out a vast sum of money to have an assessment carried out on the property to check its so-called 'green rating'. It's only a matter of time before more legislation is brought in making it compulsory for any homeowner to carry out certain work that such a survey deems fit, with the real threat of fines or repossession if it's not. This as always, will happen very slowly as not to alienate the general public against the global warming agenda and create a backlash. One thing is certain, though, once the concept of global warming has been accepted by the vast majority of the general public, it will happen!

Global warming in and of itself is not a threat but the concept of global warming is; should it be allowed to capture the public imagination and become universally accepted by the general population. There has been a lot invested into the concept of global warming and I don't expect the elite to give up on the idea anytime soon. There is a lot at stake here, and as the University of East Anglia email scandal has proved - by the resulting call for the resignation of the professor in charge of the department - there are jobs and reputations at stake for anyone that has harmed the cause. There is a common myth among the non-scientific populous, that science is objective and deals only in truth. The real truth, however, depends on who is paying the wages.


Paypal Donate

Turn off your TV
Click Here To Donate Supported Credit Card Logos - American express, Matercard, Visa debit Visa Credit, Maestro and others

Banking The Greatest Scam on Earth

The American Dream