A climate change researcher has echoed the claim made by many well informed but not academically qualified commentators, that climate scientists are confusing their role as impartial observers with green activism after his paper challenging predictions about the speed of global warming was rejected because it was seen as less than helpful.
Professor Lennart Bengtsson, a former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, says recent pressure resemblig a medieval witch hunt from fellow academics forced him to resign from his post on a climate sceptic think-tank.
Bengtsson, a research fellow at the University of Reading claims a paper he co-authored was deliberately suppressed from publicatoin in the scientific research journal Environmental Research Letters by scientists who peer-reviewed the work because of an intolerance of conclusions that dissent from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change view that catastrophic climate change can only be aveterted by shovelling shitloads of money into research projects that will confirm more research is needed thus enabling
useless fuckers research scientists to keep their piggy suouts in the trough of taxpayers money and never face the horrific prospect that they might have to get proper jobs.
The problem we have now in the scientific community is that some scientists are mixing up their scientific role with that of climate activist, Bengtsson told The Times newspaper which is behind a paywall.
Professor Bengtsson claims a scientist advised him that the paper, which challenged findings that global temperature would increase by 4.5C if greenhouse gases were to double, should not be published in a respected journal because it was less than helpful.
Helpful to what. If any of that blether about scientific integrity and the scientific method means anything at all, then the only thing that is helpful is people publishing the findings of their research, not ignoring anything that is a tad inconvenient. Such science is similar to the European Union’s neo Nazi approach to democracy.
The Daily Stirrer and our friends Little Nicky Machiavelli and Boggart Blog are sick of saying we told you so and the number of times we have knocked gaping holes in the “expert knowledge” of scientists and academics by simply stating the absoeffinglutely obvious have become too many to count. So here’s veteran television critic and purveyor of common sense spiced with caustic wit, Clive James to say it for us:
Clive James writing in The Daily Telegraph
Because of its many beautiful images of my homeland, I couldnt help watching the repeat of Australia with Simon Reeve (BBC Two). I thought I was being idle, but suddenly a big idea occurred to me.
It wasnt my usual idea of ordering my secret squad of ninjas (Agents of CLIVE) to waylay the unacceptably confident Simon and inject him with a suitable narcotic to take the edge off his deplorable enthusiasm. Besides, there must be a lot of viewers, along with his employers, who find his enthusiasm to be the opposite of deplorable: ie they think him an interesting bloke, and even take that terrible little moustache to be a sign of keenness.
No, this was a bigger idea: an idea relevant to countless BBC programmes about the environment over the course of the past decade and a half. Let me try to evoke the moment in which the idea occurred. Simon was talking to a man in charge of a South Australian wine factory which covered thousands of acres with its enormous shining silver vats and bins. The factory produces a zillion bottles of wine per year, and uses, in the process, a gazillion gallons of water.
The water is drawn from the Murray-Darling river system. If it occurred to you to wonder what would happen to the output of wine if the input of water were to be restricted, it occurred to Reeve too. So did he ask the professionally knowledgeable bloke in charge of the wine whether he anticipated any restrictions in the water supply?
No, he asked a climate change expert. In Australia, climate change experts are not hard to find. Indeed it is very hard to keep them out of your car: unless you wind the window all the way up, one of them will climb in. This climate change expert was called Tim. Armed with his ability to read the future, Tim predicted that any dry area of the Murray-Darling system was an indication of whats coming, and that what Australia is experiencing here now would eventually be experienced by hundreds of millions of people around the world.
Simon nodded his moustache sagely but didnt once ask whether the flourishing wine industry was not part of what Australia is experiencing here now. Nor did he ask whether, in view of climate change, the wine industry was doomed. It was then that the big idea hit me. Why hadnt he asked the wine grower? It would have been easy to frame the question, perhaps along the lines of: In view of what is happening to the planet, have you any plans for selling all this colossal acreage of silver metal for scrap?
It would have been worth asking the wine grower because his whole way of life depends on what he thinks about the water supply, whereas, with Tim, nothing depends on what he thinks about the water supply except his next research grant and his prospects of getting on screen with the visiting TV presenter so that they can shoot off their mouths together. And at that point I started thinking about all those BBC environment and nature programmes from the immediate past that might just turn out, in retrospect, to have been souping up their science with science fiction.
Read all Clive James at The Daily Telegraph
So there you have it. Genuine environmental research that challenges the official line that climate change is man made and only punitive taxes on everything, leading to the enslavement of entire populations can avert it. Droughts are caused by climate change – they have nothing to do with draining natural aquifers and other water resources for industrial and domestic water supplies, hurricanes are caused by climate change and climate changes is happening faster than even the most dramatic computer models predicted in spite of the fact that we have had less hurricanes in the past few years than before climate change scaremongering became profitable.
Sea ice is melting faster than ever as is proved by the norther sea ice extent increasing more last year than in any previous year. And antarctic ice is melting so fast that a scientific research ship sent to measure how much ice had disappeared in the southern ocean got stuck in ice which would not have been there at the height of an antarctic summer but for global warming.
Anyone who previously though science was about studying things carefully to gain knowledge can be disabused of such a ridiculous notion. science is about corporate profits and political power. QED.