If you know some climate science, we’d love your essay

Jarrod Gilbert, NZ Herald, 22 January, says:

Based on all of the information available to us, there is no sound argument against the existence of anthropogenic climate change, only ignorance of the scientific consensus and an arrogance to argue against it – often by people armed only with an elementary education and an internet connection.

When you have highly educated scientists amassed on one side, it’s prudent to stick with their assessment of matters relating to science. If you want to understand how to be a complete twonk, seek notes from those peddling the other side. But for science, definitely stick with the scientists.

It’s a bit early for arguments against its existence. First, we need a sound argument for the existence of anthropogenic climate change—right now, there’s none. Gilbert thinks he has “all of the information available to us” and maybe he does. Because we have none, and it’s not for lack of looking.

I should hasten to add that I mean we have no evidence that mankind is causing dangerous warming. We have plenty of evidence it’s natural.

The 1500 pages of the AR5 (2013) provide no evidence. On being asked directly what the evidence is, the IPCC, the Royal Society, the Royal Society of New Zealand and the Ministry for the Environment all refuse to provide any.

The foot soldiers of the UN climate campaign, those who trudge to our door for endless argument and abuse,  shout that of course we’ve seen the evidence, but we’re denying it. But they never describe it, either.

There’s always the chance I’m putting you wrong, but you can ask these august institutions yourself. Whether they give you evidence that dangerous anthropogenic global warming exists or they don’t, it’s still a step forward, which is good for everyone. I’d be delighted if you could announce you had some evidence, I’ve been looking for years without success.

If you’re a scientist who studies weather and climate and you’ve seen through the nonsense from the IPCC about atmospheric gases and radiative effects and the modelling that predicts climate catastrophe in just a few years—perhaps you know about the effect of water vapour and clouds on the weather—WE NEED YOUR HELP.

Speak up, do it loudly and in a public place. Like this blog. Reasonable people, as Gilbert advises Herald readers in his attack on sceptical thinking, stick with the scientists.

That doesn’t mean the loud, public scientists living off public money since they crossed their hearts and promised to believe the orthodox IPCC climate science garbage. It means the real scientists, those who don’t need to obfuscate the science and are really curious about the climate.

If, instead, you have studied the IPCC reports with an open mind and find flaws in the evidence and the chain of reasoning, give us a hand to spread that knowledge around.

First step is to add a comment below and start a conversation (that’s our aim in life); second step will be to write a short essay we could publish. Love to see it.

Thanks.

Views: 14