« Friday Night is Music Night (Harmless Old Hippy Edition) | Main | Recipe of the Day - Traditional Mincemeat »

Times Calls The 60% Of Us Who Are Sceptics Idiots

Changing the climate -Times Online

The poll in The Times today reveals that only 41 per cent of respondents believe that climate change is happening and that human causation is an established fact. A third of the public believes in the fact of climate change but remains unpersuaded that it is the work of human hands. Nearly one in ten people believes that climate change is a purely natural phenomenon and blaming humans is propaganda put about by environmentalists. Fifteen per cent of the country simply do not accept that climate change is happening at all.
There has clearly been a serious failure of political communication but the last group at least should be easy to convince.....

Sophisticated critics, of course, do not deny any of this. They argue that change is constant in the natural world, not that it has miraculously ceased. They deny not climate change but human causation, suggesting instead that global warming is due, variously, to the Sun, volcanoes and el Niño. Fifty-nine per cent of the respondents to this newspaper’s poll do not, for one reason or another, believe that human action is responsible for climate change.

Again, the failure of political communication is very stark. ...
Natural factors alone cannot, on any but the most extraordinary assumptions, get anywhere close to the temperature rises that have been witnessed. Hardly any serious scientists dispute this any longer.

It is possible that the collective expertise of brilliant scientists could be wrong. The best minds in the world once held a geocentric theory of the solar system. Before the discovery of sub-atomic particles they believed that everything was made of earth, air, fire and water. Right up to the 19th century, serious scientists wrote recipe books for making animals. But no previous process of scientific trial, error and progress has ever overturned such a well-attested thesis. Lord Rees has reminded us that we now live in a global village and it is, he pointed out, probably inevitable that there will be some global village idiots.

It's all about politics in their mind, not about the science.

Comments

'Before the discovery of sub-atomic particles they believed that everything was made of earth, air, fire and water'.

No they didn't. Before they discovered sub atomic particles they discovered atoms and laid the basis for the chemical industry.

This warming madness is not driven by science or scientists but by marxist politicians and marxist journalists

I would have some respect for these journalists if they ever attempted to explain to the 'idiots' why they should accept the sacred cows of warmist science.

The CO2 sensitivity figures used in the GCMs.
The hockey stick graph and dendrochronology as a temperature proxy.
The UHI contaminated land based temperature network.
The tipping point.
The idea that adaptation is impossible.

The temperature increases you mention above are not accepted by all "serious scientists". Overall, the average world temperature has decreased this century, but with wider extremes, so for some locations there is a strong impression of warming, with less credence given to those "awkward" locations where there has been cooling. Also, unbelievably, some still accept the totally discredited "hockey stick" graph, which was embedded in the IPCC's original doom scenario and that they have yet to repudiate. The level of misinformation generated by this graph, compounded by Al Gore and his tedious little film, is now accepted by the majority as factual and this entrenched attitude will not be corrected easily. There are new, major, atmospheric heat transfer mechanisms still being discovered, some of which point to a self-regulating system with which we interfere at out peril. In fact, some (serious scientists, natch) suggest that if all the proposed green actions are followed (and fat chance of that happening), global cooling, leading to a new ice age, could result within 100 years.

This "well-attested thesis" is nothing of the sort. If you go back to when MMGW (as we then use to call it) first kicked off there was very little scince to support it. Basically all the alarmists had was the hockey stick and a loudmouthed failed US politician to shout about it. Since then we've really only had numerous computer models - which not science in any form - and a growing, very select, incestuous band of useful idiots to shout about them. Papers cross referred to by the same small band; IPCC reports doctored by this same small group; ad hominem attacks on anyone who doesnt share their view etc - hardly the hallmarks of a "well-attested thesis".

We still keep getting told about the CO2 link despite global average temperatures flattening and falling over the last 12 years. Just because two lines on a graph head in the same direction doesnt mean there is any causal connection between them. This is a supposition not a proven piece of science. For another perfect example go and look at the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster website to see the graph of rising temperature vs the number of pirates in the world....frivolous, but it makes the point.

It's only in the last few years that any real, peer-reviewed, evidence based science has managed to fight its way through the alarmist's shout-fest. The vast bulk of this new work shows that the "facts" so beloved of the ecochondriacs are nothing of the sort. Only today a paper from India's leading climate scientitst shows that the Himalayan glaciers are grwoing not shrinking, the complete opposite of the position taken by the alarmists.

Unfortuanately, and not entirely against their will, our leaders have been completely hoodwinked by the Climate Change lobby (note the cynical change of name since the early 90's) and are following policies that have no basis in fact but, conveniently, do work towards increasing their control over us all, what we do and how we live our lives.

Where are the men of principle in our political system who will stand against this fraud?

"Since then we've really only had numerous computer models - which are not science in any form..."

They're not even mathematics in any form.

R V Jones (Most Secret War) tells us about the great Lord Cherwell who maintained that rockets were scientifically impossible and the photographs of V2's on the ground were German deceptions. How the great men of sience can get it so wrong - especially in the case of Cherwell's error - the rockets went on to kill thousands.

There is a very good essay on 'Global Warming as a Religion' by Prof John Brignell at http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/religion.htm

It is remarkable that not one of the recent developments in the science, most of which detract from the AGW theory to the point of knocking the whole foundation out of the shrine, merits a mention in the Times piece, while the piece finds adequate room to repeat falsified claims of "proof" that it is happening. This might lead a fair minded reader to have serious doubts about both the scientific basis for the theory and the ethics of those that espouse its veracity. But more importantly it leads the fair minded reader to believe that the reporting on the topic is all a scam designed to frighten the masses into accepting restrictions and hardships that would otherwise not be tolerated.
Well, at least they didn't use the "worse than was thought" line.

Post a comment