Maurizio – Omnologos

Where no subject is left unturned

The Sad State of Climate Science

leave a comment »

(my final comment in the online debate “Climate Change Challenge” instigated by the UK NERC “Natural Environment Research Council”)

Proponents of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) have to rely also on models as evidence, depend in part on “attribution-by-exclusion”, show little tolerance of scepticism and let political representatives mingle in their field of work

Not really signs that AGW is a “strong” scientific theory

And now for the details:

1- Scepticism

Colin Prentice (CP) in #355: “There isn’t any contradiction. Of course, ‘sceptics’ can say what they like”

Leaving aside attacks to individuals and institutions, NERC imply scepticism of AGW is not valid and anti-scientific, as per text (A) “…there are STILL sceptics who dispute the data… If you don’t BELIEVE the science…” (my emphasis)

But CP writes in #351 “Without sceptisism, there would be no science! I would defend your right to be sceptical!”

If that is true, considering also that “the best evidence comes from a combination of models and observations” (CP, #265), shouldn’t we _expect_ plenty of valid scepticism of AGW?

Therefore, (A) should change to “…there are OF COURSE sceptics who dispute the data…”

2- Attribution-by-exclusion

CP in #355: “The GHG explanation for climate change is not attributed ‘by exclusion'”

Steve Schulin #362 answers that

But my point is that a scientific discipline should abhor attribution-by-exclusion as a matter of principle: unless anybody here wants to support Intelligent Design as “science”

3- Science and Government

AGW is unique as it mysteriously has to go through an “Inter_GOVERNMENTAL_ Panel”

In the words of Associated Press (Jan 23), the upcoming IPCC report is written and reviewed by 1,200 scientists and then “edited by bureaucrats from 154 countries”

Note that the IPCC report is not just a policy document: it collates and presents the science of AGW

If I were a climate scientist I’d find the whole setup upsetting and humiliating. I wonder what “bureaucrats” had to say about evolution or
particle physics

Written by omnologos

2007/Jan/29 at 00:35:35

Posted in Climate Change, Science, UK

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: