« Panic! 2.2ppm CO2 in Atmosphere! | Main | BBC - Don't Mention the Muslims »

The science is settled

Christopher Booker

Mr Obama begins by saying that "the science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear". "Sea levels," he claims, "are rising, coastlines are shrinking, we've seen record drought, spreading famine and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season."

Far from the science being "beyond dispute", we can only deduce from this that Mr Obama has believed all he was told by Al Gore's wondrously batty film An Inconvenient Truth without bothering to check the facts. Each of these four statements is so wildly at odds with the truth that on this score alone we should be seriously worried.

I think we can safely surmise that Obama used the strongest "facts" he could find in his speech and this ties in with some research I have been doing. The CAGW case seems to rest on five pillars.
The recent rate and level of global warmth is unprecedented.
This correlates and is caused by the human caused rise in CO2.
The climate system is unstable and is close to a tipping point.
The effects of global warming are a clear and present danger, and are distinguishable from natural climatic variations.
The science is settled and only the wicked and corrupt would deny it.

Can anyone point me to a single bit of evidence to support any one of those propositions that can not easily be found to either be debunked or seriously put in question. It is a serious request, because I'm getting bored of the whole subject of CAGW, there doesn't seem to be any battles to be fought there anymore on the science. The battle has moved on to how to persuade people that they are being sold a lie, a dangerous costly lie at that.

Comments

I have asked that question so many times, including most recently over here of the name-dropping Alex Lockwood:

http://www.alexlockwood.net/2008/10/28/engaging-across-blogging-divides-on-climate/#comments

It seems the question is the king trump, as soon as it is asked debate ends. A few weakly try to deflect the question by saying "Go read IPCC AR4" but when you ask them to indicate where in IPCC AR4 there is conclusive proof that the relatively small amounts of human emissions of a trace gas cause measurable global warming, the debate again comes to an end.

Amongst other things, I am a mature student in Manchester, and my eybrows are permanently raised by the blanket acceptance of all things 'global warming'. Reviewing 'Cool It' for the University magazine I tried to proffer that there might be an alternative view. Talk about falling on deaf ears, the eco brainwash is impenetrable, or so it would seem. Maybe the rising cost of the worthy green dollar will now force folk into looking at other opinions on offer, financial meltdown trumps climate meltdown any day.

Amongst other things, I am a mature student in Manchester, and my eybrows are permanently raised by the blanket acceptance of all things 'global warming'. Reviewing 'Cool It' for the University magazine I tried to proffer that there might be an alternative view. Talk about falling on deaf ears, the eco brainwash is impenetrable, or so it would seem. Maybe the rising cost of the worthy green dollar will now force folk into looking at other opinions on offer, financial meltdown trumps climate meltdown any day.

Oh dear, despite thorough proof reading I just want to reassure you that I have eyebrows and not the other alien gadget - eybrow. And why oh why do I insist on pressing the enter button more than once.....

It is time politicians employed apolitical scientific advisers rather than lobby groups to arrive at the policies they choose to follow. If Obama continues down this route he will be the greatest failure in history rather than the promised saviour of the USA.

Whatever happened to students being at the forefront of debate and free-thinking?

I can only assume that most students have not seen enough of life to realise how they and their parents have been conned before with scares and lies. The incompetence of the mainstream media to put forward balanced, impartial, and balanced articles must also be partly to blame.

Students have always been abject conformists. In the 70s at York I tried suggesting that the death of Chairman Mao was not an unmitigated disaster, and that 'People's Kampuchea' was an evil state, and was called a fascist and many other things. If anything I think it was worse then.

Graham, you should have done Mining Engineering, upsetting lefties was a sport we greatly delighted in. We were hated by the politicised students but couldn't give a toss.

Post a comment