Next week metropolitan bigwigs are off to the Foundation for Science and Technology for a debate on the correct level of response to manmade global warming. Speakers include Mark Walport and sceptic MPs Peter Lilley and David Davies and it's sure to be an interesting occasion. With an influential audience, the debate could prove quite important.
One can't help but wonder, therefore, if a wish to set the tone of Monday's debate is not a factor behind some rather disreputable journalism at the Guardian today. The article in question considers Walport's views on the subject of responses to climate change, which is fair enough, but bizarrely goes on to suggest that Benny Peiser, of all people, is right behind the chief scientist's views.
Benny Peiser, director of the climate sceptic Global Warming Policy Foundation, which is against many policies to tackle global warming, welcomed Walport's call to action. "It's not about the nitty-gritty details of the science. It's about finding the best way of dealing with a big issue that has a potential to cause a lot of problems in the future," he said.
I don't think readers need me to point out that this doesn't sound much like the Peiser we know and admire, and I emailed to ask whether he had been quoted out of context. Here is his reply:
No, I'm misquoted.
I said that climate change and climate policy both have the potential to cause problems in the future.
Neither did I welcome "Walport's call to action."
I said I welcomed opening up the climate policy debate **if all views were allowed to be voiced**
Oh dear.