A Weblog monitoring coverage of environmental issues and science in the UK media. By Professor Emeritus Philip Stott. The aim is to assess whether a subject is being fairly covered by press, radio, and television. Above all, the Weblog will focus on science, but not just on poor science. It will also bring to public notice good science that is being ignored because it may be politically inconvenient.

Thursday, November 06, 2003

The science behind the Kyoto Protocol increasingly under assault.....

This piece from the Calgary Herald (November 4) is representative of a new type of reporting on the Kyoto Protocol: 'Kyoto critics better duck. Global warming industry doesn't want to hear that their pet project is flawed'. Over the last few months, the science behind the Protocol has been increasingly under attack from a wide range of sources. The latest hits fair and square at one of the pet constructs - the famous, or infamous, (take your pick) temperature 'hockey stick'. The Herald thinks that the 'global warming' bunnies will not be at all happy down there in their model burrows. Here are two direct quotations from the paper's report about the alleged criticisms:-

"That's why Toronto-based analyst Steve McIntyre and University of Guelph economics professor Ross McKitrick had better be battening down the hatches. Their paper, published last week in the respected British journal, Energy and Environment, is arguably the most damaging attack to date on the science behind Kyoto."

"In a nutshell, they convincingly reveal that flawed calculations, incorrect data and a biased selection of climate records led Kyoto ... to declare that the 20th-century temperature rise was unprecedented in the past millennium. After correcting the data ... they found no such increase in global temperature variations had taken place, which places Kyoto's whole rationale in question."

Hm! Fascinating. Do we see a second l'affaire Lomborg looming over the Rockies (Biff, Banff, Boff!)? This, I might add, follows on from the severe criticisms of the science at the recent Moscow Climate Change Conference (where 90% of the contributions from the floor questioned the science), not to mention the challenging new work of Veizer and Shaviv on the cosmic ray flux (CRF) and its capping effects on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, plus various other sundry critiques (see previous blogs for October 4 and 9).

I shall be rivetted to observe how much of the inevitable attack on 'M & M' (as, I gather, they are now referred to) is ad personam and how much on their work. For own part, I am genuinely convinced that the 'global warming' scenario is less and less tenable. But the vested interests in the 'global warming' industry are truly enormous, from the pedlars of wind energy to the 'we-must-go-back-to-the-mud-hut' wallahs - taming such a mythical beast will be nearly as hard as ending the monarchy! Now, what does the butler think of climate .....?

Tea. Earl Grey, of course. No milk. Thanks. Philip. (Actually, gunpowder tea is far classier, especially around November 5).

PS. Don't miss, by the way, the increasingly excellent new web site: Wind-Farm.org. Highly recommended with your tea.

[New counter, June 19, 2006, with loss of some data]

WWW EnviroSpin Watch

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?