Denying the storms

Guest Blogger, Jim Jepps of the Daily Maybe Blog has basically said everything I have been thinking since Climate Gate started but in a much more eloquent way………

There are few people less sceptical than “climate change sceptics.” If there is an impossible theory or bonkers idea going, they will be willing to seize it with both hands as long as it confirms their prejudices.

It seems there is a world conspiracy of scientists, governments, Greenpeace and the BBC, all co-ordinated by David Attenborough, who without having met each other or even communicated have come up with a dastardly plan designed to convinced the rest of the world that the planet is getting hotter.

Why? In order to raise taxes, apparently.

I have to say, though, if there is a conspiracy between such a vast array of luminaries, I’d be very disappointed to find out that they had such poverty of ambition that they simply put this scheme to work in order to raise taxes, like a global version of speed cameras.

I mean, there was always the option of, well, raising taxes to achieve the same ends without the need for that secret headquarters in the volcano or anything.

Sadly, for a set of ideas that are the bastard son of the Daily Express and Jeremy Clarkson, climate change denial is becoming increasingly respectable. So much so that not only has the media debate shifted back to whether climate change is happening at all, public opinion has moved significantly in the last six months.

According to a BBC poll published at the weekend, just one in four people are now convinced that climate change is happening and that mankind is contributing to that process. That’s the same number of people that don’t believe it is happening at all. This latter group includes members of the shadow cabinet who may shortly be in charge of negotiating international climate targets.

There’s no question that some of this shift is down to the UEA email leaks that seemed to show that scientists in UEA’s Climate Research Unit were covering up awkward evidence and were partisan in their opposition to climate deniers. It’s got to the stage that any error on the part of any climatologist, like recent inaccurate predictions over the Himalayan glaciers, becomes more evidence that perhaps it’s all hogwash. This ignores the fact that scientists make mistakes and it’s the cumulative collation of data that’s important, not any single prediction or study.

The mistake that the deniers make is that even in the worst-case scenario – if the UEA Climate Research Unit was simply a propaganda unit for climate change “believers,” which certainly is not the case – one set of scientists getting things wrong does not discount the enormous weight of evidence gathered across the world by a myriad different organisations over decades.


Comments are closed.