I have just sent this letter to Sir Peter Gluckman, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the New Zealand
Government.
Dear Sir Peter
I would like to comment on the speech Trusting the Scientist
published at http://www.pmcsa.org.nz/blog/trusting-the-scientist/
a summary of which you delivered to the recent seminar Scientists Speak Out
organised by the New Zealand Association of Scientists.
You begin with the following statement:
It is instructive here
to consider what the public role of science has been until now. For much of
history beyond the classical period, the answer is a simple one: little or
none. Or so it was, at least up until the modern inter-war period,
and even then it was rather limited until perhaps the late 1980s. Before then
the scientist with a media profile was, too often, looked upon with suspicion
by his or her colleagues.
Surely science has always had a vital public
role if you interpret science
to mean the discoveries which are the basis for the many technologies
which have led to the progress of human race. You seem to accept the existence
and importance of the early science which culminated in ancient Greece and was
the main influence throughout the Middle Ages. Modern science is regarded as
beginning well before the 1980s with Copernicus, Kepler Galileo and
Newton.
Early astronomy had always been professional. In Britain King Charles the second who founded the
Greenwich Observatory in 1675 appointed the first Astronomer Royal John
Flamsteed.
The King had already founded the Royal Society
of London in 1663. In 1714 the British Government offered a prize for a
simple practical method for determining longitude. Isaac Newton was one of the
administering Committee. The story has been told in the book by Dava Sobel. The
winner, John Harrison competed with the Astronomer Royal Nevil Maskelyne. One
of Harrison’s chronometers was used by
Captain Cook on his second voyage in 1772.
The French Revolution set up a committee which
led to the metric system in 1799. A shame they did not do a better job on the
calendar.
Weather Forecasting has a long history. The
British Government set up its Meteorological Office in 1854 with Admiral Robert
Fitzroy, former Governor of New Zealand. Its first gale warning for ships was
1859. Fitzroy was a mathematician and
cartographer who believed in scientific measurements. He even designed a
barometer.
You might note that the New Zealand Weather
Service is by far the most popular scientific TV programme. It presents the
climate of the entire earth every night and it enjoys the trust of everybody
who consults it.
Scientists had a positive media profile when I
grew up. Ernest Rutherford attracted crowds to his lectures. My school took us
regularly to the lectures at the Royal Institution where we were introduced to
the wonders of science.
I recently bumped in to a former colleague in
the DSIR Chemistry Division who made a comment on how the public rang up the
DSIR on any subject and had absolute trust in the reply. Hamish Campbell at the
Seminar showed how he helped people with geological questions today.
So we now have to get down to what was the elephant in the room
at the NZAS Seminar. Why is it that some scientists today are not trusted?
Everybody there knew the answer to this but
nobody dared to mention it.
The truth is that many people are beginning to
believe that some of the
statements from scientists who are involved with climate change are
deliberate lies.
I will give you some examples.
Some weeks ago the Dominion Post had a front
page spread with a map showing how Wellington will soon be overwhelmed
with a rise in sea level. This was inspired by climate scientists.
Now there are no science journalists nowadays,
so it did not occur to the presenter to enquire whether there is any evidence
for this coming disaster. He did not know, for example that there is a tide
gauge in Wellington harbour which has shown a fall in the sea level for the
past ten years, and there are similar measurements all over New Zealand which
provide no reason for imminent action.
Most people probably fell for the scare as their
knowledge of science was insufficient to find out the facts.
But there are many local residents on our coasts
whose experience has shown them that sea level is not rising, so they have been
disturbed by demands from local Councils that they must immediately upgrade
their coastal defences or vacate their properties because of the advice of
climate scientists to the Council that urgent action is needed. Some have
succeeded in reversing this nonsense. But
their opinions of scientist have taken a dive.
The same thing has happened in the Pacific
Islands. The Australian Government established in 1991 an elaborate programme
for monitoring sea level in 12 Pacific Islands using state of the art equipment
called Seaframe. There has
been little or no change in sea level in any island since then,
particularly after GPS levelling was introduced in 2000.
Yet everybody believes the islands are about to
fall into the sea. This belief suits the Island Prime Ministers since it
attracts aid and ease of emigration. But why does the New Zealand Government
endorse this lie?
Then, we
continue to be drenched with stories claiming the continued effects of global
warming. Yet the preferred technique for assessing this properly, the Mean
Annual Global Surface Temperature Anomaly Record which has been used to claim
global warming in all previous IPCC Reports, has now been practically
constant with little change for over 18 years. The excuses they give are
pitiful - the change is decadal, when we
already have nearly two decades. Then it is natural variability when they have previously
assumed that this was not involved in the temperature rise. Only now it matters.
The Climate Models which are supposed to give projections and not predictions
consistently fail to agree with current global or lower atmosphere
temperature measurements.
Your own climate paper features the claim
that the Arctic ice is melting: when it is largely influenced by ocean
currents, but you do not mention the Antarctic continent, which now has record
amounts of ice.
The UK Met Office which has been taken over by
Climate Change people has consistently predicted warm winters when there are
record cold ones. The recent US snowstorm led to protests by people wondering
where the global warming had gone.
Your speech showed no sign that you would do
anything about its subject except to encourage the rogue scientists to promote
their lies, on the Dr Goebbels Principle that maybe people will believe them if
they are repeated enough.
Regards,
Vincent GrayWellington
9 comments:
Trust is earned and easily squandered.
How fortunate you were that your school took you to lectures at the Royal Institution. Nowadays students and their teachers are more likely to be taken to the local marae for 'cultural education' instead of all that dull science stuff. Let's get our priorities right!
Sir Peter Cluckman shows a readiness to regurgitate dogma as evidenced by his recent discourse on the Fluoridation of public water supplies.
How do we get a rating for lack of performance for appointees who fail to perform?
Well put Vincent! This issue is one with so many distortions of truth.
My own experience was of watching that global warming movie years ago while on a flight to Moscow. It described how the Aral Sea has been devastated by this effect, dried up. Showed fishing boats high and dry etc. I looked out the window, as we were flying over that very sea. All I could see was water!
On arrival, talked to locals about this subject. I was told there has been a drop in the levels of this massive make as canals were dug to transfer water for irrigation into Ukraine during the Communist era.
Great Letter
I cannot wait to read the reply.
What an erudite letter! Thank you for exposing this matter.
We have indeed been fed a line by the "climate change specialists", as they would see themselves.
Many thanks, Vincent, for your continuing efforts to promote truth and true science.
A couple of weeks ago there was a most distressing article in the Hutt News, reporting the findings of a local scientist based on recent ice core studies. She reached the most alarmist conclusions and made outrageous claims about (among other things) the rapid rate of decrease of Antarctic ice and the rapid rate of sea level rise. How can they get away with peddling such tripe?
“there is a tide gauge in Wellington harbour which has shown a fall in the sea level for the past ten years, and there are similar measurements all over New Zealand which provide no reason for imminent action.”
I would like to get more information on these tide readings. Can you please provide a source. Thanks
Post a Comment