BusinessDay
Specialist Sections >> Auctions
Last Updated: Monday, 02 November 2009 10:58:41

Religious fervour

Published: 2009/11/20 06:11:21 AM

Prof Bruce Hewitson’s intemperate response (Uninformed Vitriol, Letters, November 19) to Andrew Kenny’s article on climate change (Ideology and money drive global-warming religion, November 16), seems to prove Kenny’s point that “CC” — as initiates like to call it — is fast assuming all the attributes of received religious dogma.

Although making no direct rebuttal of Mr Kenny’s assertions, Prof Hewitson is particularly incensed by his remarks about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on which the professor says he served as a lead author. He dares Mr Kenny to repeat his accusations of deceit face to face over lunch.

The professor’s lunching arrangements are his own affair, of course, but I’d rather see the issue thrashed out in print, if he doesn’t mind.

As I read it, Mr Kenny’s principal charge was that the IPCC airbrushed the Medieval Warm Period of 900AD to 1200AD out of their 2001 report because it would have spoiled the symmetry of their famous Hockey Stick Graph, which sought to illustrate the sudden and rapid rise of global temperatures caused by human activities in the 20th century.

Well, did this happen or didn’t it?

Mr Kenny apart, there are many reputable scientists across the world who take issue with the whole concept of CC as it is currently forced down our throats. It is also undeniable that a lot of money and many careers are at stake.

Mr Kenny’s view that the earth’s climate is constantly changing, as it has done for millions of years, and will continue to do so regardless of what we do or don’t do, sounds about right to me. It is human arrogance to believe otherwise.

For fellow sceptics I recommend Francis Wheen’s 2004 book, How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World — a refreshing demolition of all nonsense from voodoo economics and medical quackery to alien abduction, New Age mysticism and irrational public hysteria.

Richard McNeill

Parkwood

Post comment here (You must login first)   Login | Register
All comments are moderated and will be posted only if they are about the subject and are not abusive, vulgar and/or discriminatory
Article Tools
Print
By: etheeboom On: Dec 1 2009 6:15PM
My reply is quite late after the above letter was published but... Climate Change is not religeous dogma, although some people may adopt it as such. It is peer-reviewed, heavily debated science. Richard, you are right that the Earth's climate does evolve constantly and naturally. That does not preclude climate change which is human-caused and which is likely to be extremeley harmful to most countries. You claim it is arrogant to assume humans can change the environment. This is no more arrogant than thinking we could put a man on the moon. Engineers and scientists now discuss how one day we may terraform Mars. In fact, we are pretty confident that we can alter the world's climate simply by detonating a reasonable percentage of the world's nuclear arsenal, bringing about a global nuclear winter (i.e. climate change)as well as wiping out "life on earth as we know it". Arrogance again? Why can we not cause climate change through slower, more gradual processes? This is not arrogance. It is simply denial to say that we are not changing the world on a global scale in almost every way due to our incredible and recently acquired technology. The hole in the Ozone layer is another perfect example (unless you deny this too?) or light pollution which has changed the face of our planet at night, as viewed from outer space. It sounds crazy but air conditioners in Califormia and keeping our vegetables cool in fridges in South Africa has resulted in massive increases in skin cancer in Australia... this is not arrogance but fact. We must accept the responsibility that comes with our power. As for the Medieval Warm Period, scientists and engineers often remove information when they are presenting public reports to avoid "confusing" messages (and believ me, if you ever tried to write an environmental risk assessment for a politician, you'd know what I was talking about...). This information is not at all "secret", it is widely and openly debated, but eventaully you make a call on how to present the final data for the public. To get into the discussion about why the medieval warm period was removed, or why this and why that, is to bore the public to death with a scientific debate, and to confuse the overiding message of massive evidence for global warming. Finally, to say that "many reputable" scientists are skeptical of climate change, is much like the religeous extremists saying that many scientists reject the theory of evolution... it is simply wrong. Over the past 40 years, an overwhelming consensus has developed among scientists, from the US to China to Europe to South Africa, that climate change is indeed happening and we are the cause. I challenge you to take responsibility rather than spuriously equating climate change to New Age mysticism and alien abduction.
By: Andrew Taynton On: Nov 20 2009 1:10PM
@Richard McNeill - The worlds top climatologists (including Prof Bruce Hewitson) totally demolish Kenny's nonsense here on the IPCC web site where the average denialist fears to tread in case they are forced to admit they are nuts. Visit http://www.ipcc.ch/
Advertisement

  Breaking News

News
World News
Markets
Available RSS Feeds
 
 

Subscribe  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Register  |  SiteMap  |  NewsLetter

Financial Mail   |  Summit TV   |  Bignews   |  Netassets   |  I-Net Bridge   |  Business Media in Education   |  Pearson Plc   |  Avusa

BDFM Publishers (Pty) Ltd disclaims all liability for any loss, damage, injury or expense however caused, arising from the use of or reliance upon, in any manner, the information provided through
this service and does not warrant the truth, accuracy or completeness of the information provided.
online publishers association member Proudly Part of Avusa Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2009 BDFM Publishers (Pty) Ltd. All Rights Reserved