« Mandy's Postal Strike | Main | Vote Against Nanny »

Science Museum Fails to Prove It - but ignores your vote anyway.

Science Museum - Prove it! is presenting the evidence for human caused climate change and why we should support Copenhagen.

I've looked through it and I still can't see the evidence - yes the climate is changing, the long term average temperature for the last couple of hundred years is a gentle increase, yes humans have pumped CO2 in to the atmosphere, yes there is a linkage (they are careful not to say what) between CO2 levels and global temperature but none of that is the evidence they claim for CAGW.

Here is what they have to say about the effects we are already feeling:

Earth's rising temperature is causing knock-on effects. Rainfall patterns are changing. After three centuries of stability, sea level is now rising. Ice in the Arctic is melting further back year on year. Extreme weather, such as droughts and hurricanes, is becoming more common or more intense.

No evidence that rainfall patterns are altering more than they ever have done before, the sea level rise has not accelerated, the arctic ice hasn't melted more for the last two years - not more year-on year - (and what about Antarctic ice?) and hurricanes and droughts aren't increasing. A pretty poor showing for the best they can produce.

Luckily they allow you to say if you are convinced or not.

PROVE IT! is your chance to check out the evidence and decide if you want to back a strong, effective, fair deal at Copenhagen.

Vote No and this is what you get...

"...thanks for being part of PROVE IT! By adding your voice, you're supporting a strong, effective, fair deal at Copenhagen."

That's modern consultation for you...


The Director of the Science Museum is that renowned warmist and misanthropist Chris Rapley, former Director of the £40 million a year budget, British Antarctic Survey. Amazing how these people are shoe-horned into a nice sinecure on retirement, complete with nice fat index linked pension.

Antarctic glaciers thinning fast
BAS press release No: 03/2005 02 Feb 2005

The contribution that rapid thinning of the Antarctic ice sheet is making to global sea-level rise is a cause for concern according to Director of British Antarctic Survey, (BAS), Professor Chris Rapley. Speaking this week at a conference hosted by the Met Office in Exeter he summarised the latest understanding from one of the frozen continent’s most remote and inhospitable corners.

Professor Rapley said,“Satellite measurements tell us that a significant part of the West Antarctic ice sheet in this area is thinning fast enough to make a significant contribution to sea level rise, but for the present, our understanding of the reason for this change is little better than hypothesis. The last IPCC report characterised Antarctica as a slumbering giant in terms of climate change. I would say that this is now an awakened giant. There is real cause for concern.”

He made big headlines especially in the Independent: "The head of the British Antarctic Survey, Professor Chris Rapley, disclosed that the vast West Antarctic ice sheet, previously thought to be stable, may be beginning to disintegrate, which would cause a sea-level rise around the world of more than 16ft"

Strangely he didn't seem to know what research his own scientists were doing; this very next press release came out 3 weeks after his statements at Blair's Exeter scare fest on Dangerous Climate Change.

Antarctic ice shelf retreats happened before:
No: 4/2005 23 Feb 2005
The retreat of Antarctic ice shelves is not new according to research published this week (24 Feb) in the journal Geology by scientists from Universities of Durham, Edinburgh and British Antarctic Survey (BAS).

A study of George VI Ice Shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula is the first to show that this currently ‘healthy’ ice shelf experienced an extensive retreat about 9500 years ago, more than anything seen in recent years. The retreat coincided with a shift in ocean currents that occurred after a long period of warmth. Whilst rising air temperatures are believed to be the primary cause of recent dramatic disintegration of ice shelves like Larsen B, the new study suggests that the ocean may play a more significant role in destroying them than previously thought.

The University of Durham’s, Dr Mike Bentley, one of the leaders of the project said,‘We know that rising air temperatures can break up ice shelves but there has been a suspicion for some time that the role of the ocean may have been underestimated. This is some of the first evidence that a shift in ocean currents can actually destroy ice shelves. In this case it’s possible that a preceding warm period may have primed the ice shelf to disintegrate when the ocean currents shifted.’

Of course, that didn't make the papers.

Count me out: I guess the results are going to be a little skewed when people see this!

To be counted out, just tell us who you are. We'll pass the results on to the government to let them know where you stand.


The "count me out" choice includes an "are you sure" step - presumably to reduce the numbers choosing it.
For obvious reasons I didn't want to risk it but I bet the "count me in" doesn't have one.

They also have a "tell us what you think" option. It's got about as much chance of being read/published as the typical polar bear has of drowning, but I sent them this:

The climate is, and always has been changing. In fact, there is no such thing as "climate" per se. "Weather" is the instantaneous state of a chaotic system, "climate" is a longer-term average of that same system. The average of a chaotic (and noisy) data series will always vary, depending on the particular timespan chosen for the averaging process, not to mention the particular states of the chaotic system during that time. There is no evidence that human influence in general, let alone CO2 output, is having any significant effect on weather patterns and, at any rate, if such an effect existed then it would be impossible to isolate from other naturally-induced changes. Depsite this lack of evidence, we are being hounded, taxed and bullied by "green" groups and governments (all of whom stand to make financial gain from such activities) whilst our economy and general quality of life risk being sacrificed in the process.

Even if anthropogenic climate change was identified as a significant effect, scientific and economic resources would be much better spent on adaptation and mitigation of the effects, as opposed to blindly and stubbornly attacking an unconfirmed and unlikely "cause" (i.e. CO2), which just so happens to go hand in hand with attacking "unfashionable" but highly-necessary industrial and commercial activity.

The entire anthropogenic global warming debacle is a self-perpetuating socio-political entity and has increasingly little to do with science. The sooner previously-respectable organisations such as the Science Museum distanced themselves from this mess the better.

I visited the Science Museum today with my daughter. The Prove It section, predictably, is a crock. Massaged or disingenuous stats designed to scare the ignorant.

However if you want to have a rant at the stunned face of a Hadley Centre apparatchik it's great.

"Can you justify to me the statistical treatment of the Tiljander proxies?"


The poll email confirmation system doesn't work.
So someone has hiked the 'count me out' vote up using a computer.

Post a comment