Bishop Hill A private communiqué
Jul 21, 2015 Climate: WG3 Royal Met Soc Royal Society Royal Society Edinburgh The hijacking of learned institutions by political activists is something of a theme at BH, and today's news brings further depressing evidence that the situation has not changed. It seems that the managers of a group of UK learned societies have decided to try to influence the political agenda ahead of the Paris conference, issuing a joint call to arms (another one!), no doubt without consulting a single one of their members.
The communiqué opens with a decidedly shonky statement about the scientific evidence:
The scientific evidence is now overwhelming that the climate is warming and that human activity is largely responsible for this change through emissions of greenhouse gases.
Sorry guys, but unvalidated computer simulations are incapable of giving "overwhelming" evidence. Hints and suggestions, perhaps, but not "overwhelming evidence". This is yet another example of scientists behaving in a way that would get city financiers sent to jail.
The science thus dealt with, it moves on to the politics:
[G]overnments should demonstrate leadership by recognising the risks climate change poses, embracing appropriate policy and technological responses, and seizing the opportunities of low-carbon and climate-resilient growth.
Whatever that means.
Interestingly, the only place you seem to be able to read the comminque itself is the Guardian and Carbon Brief - my straw poll of the websites of some of the societies involved turns up no mention of it. This either means that the Royal Society et al have decided to keep the news "in the green family" and want to give them a proper exclusive or that everyone else has seen through it for the sham it is and is ignoring it. I wonder what's going on?
[Update, the Royal Society has now posted it on their policy pages]
Reader Comments (69)
Rupert Wyne's open letter to Paul Nurse (in response to Nurse's tawdry letter to Nigel Lawson in 2013) is worth remembering on such occasions as this. Here is an extract containing some of his observations about the Royal Society and other 'consensus proselytisers':
They may have moved on to becoming 'overwhelming evidence proselytisers', but that is mere window-dressing that has even less respectability than their consensus flag-waving. Their shoddy manipulations remain in place, and this communiqué is one of them.
Spectator
Many thanks for introducing a most welcome vision of pints of Guinness (the real stuff of course) into this discussion.
It would be so interesting to see a list of the institutions that were approached, but who failed to sign up, together for their reasons, but of course we will not. A turnout of 24 signatories certainly looks as though mustering a respectable number was a struggle.Given the vast number of institutions that might have signed up, and the claims made for consensus, it all looks pretty meagre.
Professor Peter Wadhams , professor of Ocean Physics, and Head of the Polar Ocean Physics Group in the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge. He is best known for his work on sea ice forecasted that the Arctic would be ice free by 2015 – or 2016 at the latest.
http://www.iol.co.za/scitech/science/environment/vanishing-arctic-ice-caps-actually-no-1.1888728#.Va9QmLX-Xdg
Well Arctic sea ice has since grown rapidly and here in 2015 is nowhere near ice free. This guy spoke from a position of authority 3 years ago and has been shown to be totally wrong. The bilge quoted from the FRS is a similar unjustified pile of tosh from "authority".
Everything thay say becomes less and less credible as the FRS become less and less credible with their prognostications about climate. And don't get me started on Antarctic sea ice is about 2 standard deviations above average and global sea ice has recovered to about average since the low of 2012. They didn't manage to model this correctly and it's only short term modelling. Where's the death spiral?
Whilst the Labour party and Trade Unions are trying to shed the image of the"block vote", whereby a select few can claim to represent the views of tens, or hundreds of thousands of people, some of our (previously) respected professional institutions are assuming theses dictatorial tactics, without even asking their members for agreement.
The block vote is all about fabricating consensus, and authenticating mob rule, under the direction of the priviliged few. It ties in so perfectly with global warming alarmism, but presumably these professional bodies know that.
No comments up on the Royal Society blog yet. I've remarked on it -
"Remarkable that such an important - and for some, controversial - topic has yet to attract any comments".
In moderation...
osseo, who controls the moderators at the Royal Society?
They couldn't possibly be the same people trying to steamroller their views across the entire membership?
There are now 4 comments on the RS blog, from Ilma, John Archer, osseo and me.
Golf Charlie, how can you be so cynical?
Four comments are now up on the RS blog.
Osseo, Paul Matthews
The Royal Society will be able to report to its members, that after a week, less than a handful of people had registered any issues of concern, and these may be disregarded as being part of the lunatic fringe. Therefore it can be assumed that ALL members support ALL the recommendations.
Long live democratic efficiency. Death to all cynics. Another consensus duly fabricated, delivered and approved, without actually obtaining anybodies opinion.
Osseo, Paul Matthews, I suppose it would be too cheeky to ask to see the scientific proof for the conclusions reached by the Royal Society, on behalf of its members, and whether or not any peer members had a chance to review anything at all?
Don't take the Royal Society's word for anything
Unless the Chinese and Indian Governments have also signed the RS communique then they are just p1ssing into the wind. Nothing they do or say will make the slightest difference to CO2 emissions, global temperature or polar ice.etc,etc. Kings on a castle made of sand waiting for the tide to come in from the east. Pathetic.
Ivor Ward, unfortunately the Royal Society believe that if we all stand together, and hold hands, we can p1ss into the wind without getting our shoes wet.
How the Royal Society and others treat their members:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlatan#/media/File:Hieronymus_Bosch_051.jpg
A Russell above writes:
Now Eli knows a Russell or two, and indeed this is, if he is a particular Russell that Eli knows, one of his best.
Perhaps because not too many of those 30000 signers of the Oregon Petition were bona fide scientists,
Perhaps because vanishingly few of them were or are members of the AAAS
Perhaps because Marcia McNutt is not, nor ever was President of the AAAS or any other learned society
Also perhaps because, in general, the members of learned societies are ignoring the bleatings of a few
Besides which, as everybunny knows consensus in science is without value, or at least that is what Eli reads here.
Maybe somebody has already raised this point, but...when was the last time science found meaningful support in the Royal Society of Arts?
ps I have to report my disturb at finding agreement at least in principle with Eli. I see mentions of the Oregon Petition just as silly as claims of Greenland catastrophic melting. Please stop!!
Golf Charlie, grand statements of principle often fail because they do not apply to themselves. Thus, the maxim “There are no general maxims” only makes sense by reading into it the qualification “(except this one)”. Similarly, to the basic proposition of logical positivism “Nothing is significant that is not verifiable” must be added “(except this statement)”. And some of us have been saying for decades that the Precautionary Principle should only be applied where it is shown that no damage can result.
Analogously, the Royal Society, when it says “Take no-one's word for it”, is to be understood as adding “(that doesn't apply to us, obviously)”.
Here is a little evidence showing a lack of recent warming ... http://www.kiwithinker.com/2015/07/the-decadal-global-climate-bet-june-2015-update/
Well, there is always RSA animate