More cracks in the climate “consensus”

June 2, 2010

Great Britain’s Royal Society has for several years been one of the bulwarks supporting the theory of anthropogenic global warming, and their strong endorsement has been used both as a shield and a club by alarmists in their arguments with skeptics.

That time may just have come to an end:

Rebel scientists force Royal Society to accept climate change scepticism

Britain’s premier scientific institution is being forced to review its statements on climate change after a rebellion by members who question mankind’s contribution to rising temperatures.

The Royal Society has appointed a panel to rewrite the 350-year-old institution’s official position on global warming. It will publish a new “guide to the science of climate change” this summer. The society has been accused by 43 of its Fellows of refusing to accept dissenting views on climate change and exaggerating the degree of certainty that man-made emissions are the main cause.

The society appears to have conceded that it needs to correct previous statements. It said: “Any public perception that science is somehow fully settled is wholly incorrect — there is always room for new observations, theories, measurements.” This contradicts a comment by the society’s previous president, Lord May, who was once quoted as saying: “The debate on climate change is over.”

The admission that the society needs to conduct the review is a blow to attempts by the UN to reach a global deal on cutting emissions. The Royal Society is viewed as one of the leading authorities on the topic and it nominated the panel that investigated and endorsed the climate science of the University of East Anglia.

The Royal Society made a serious mistake by taking sides in the first place, instead of remaining a neutral forum for debate and research. Any change away from their pro-alarmist stance is to be welcomed, and we can hope that this encourages more skeptical researchers to “come out of the closet” and engage before the Green Statists in and out of government do terrible harm to Western economies and liberties.

(via Baseball Crank)


A fair and impartial kangaroo court

March 23, 2010

In the wake of the scandals surrounding deep evidence of scientific fraud regarding claims that global warming was anthropogenic in nature, the UK’s Royal Society, which should be the gold standard for objectivity in science, has announced who will lead its inquiry into what’s been broadly called “Climategate.” James Delingpole gives us the comforting news:

And guess what? The man could scarcely be more parti pris if they’d given the job to Al Gore.

His name is Lord Oxburgh and, as Bishop Hill reports, he is:

  • President of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association
  • Chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables
  • A member of the Green Fiscal Commission

In other words, someone with a large financial interest in seeing the pro-alarmist cause redeemed. This is like asking Bill Gates to investigate Microsoft’s business practices.

If this produces anything but a gigantic cover for Dr. Jones and the CRU, I’ll eat my hat.

Well, if I had one, that is.