By Andrew Bolt
TonyfromOz prefaces …..
These are dramatic times in Australia, mainly in the political arena, but the genesis of those political dramas lies with the Climate Change Debate, and the Government’s wish to pass Emissions Trading Legislation, oddly labeled as the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. (CPRS) The Government’s wish was to have this passed before the Copenhagen Conference, even though if passed it will not come into effect until mid 2011. It now looks likely to fail for a second time in being passed by the Senate. The political fallout has achieved one thing, that being that it is now causing widespread debate in the wider community. The fallout from Climategate has only added to the debate, and now, at last, we are getting the debate we should have had all along. The revelations adding to Climategate are coming thick and fast now, as other areas are now being caught up in the widening net, and it looks like the UN may just have a pretty grubby hand in all this, as this post from Andrew points out.
Green journalists may ignore them, but scientists cannot. In fact, even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change itself is threatened by the Climategate emails.
Professor Mike Hulme is of the University of East Anglia from which the emails were leaked, and is named by ScienceWatch as “the 10th most cited author in the world in the field of climate change, between 1999 and 2009”. The leaked emails of IPCC authors show an organisation corrupted by a clique of warmist evangelists, and even Hume now says the IPCC may have run its course:
(The UN’s Copenhagen summit) is about raw politics, not about the politics of science… It is possible that climate science has become too partisan, too centralized. The tribalism that some of the leaked emails display is something more usually associated with social organization within primitive cultures; it is not attractive when we find it at work inside science.
It is also possible that the institutional innovation that has been the I.P.C.C. has run its course. Yes, there will be an AR5 (fifth report) but for what purpose? The I.P.C.C. itself, through its structural tendency to politicize climate change science, has perhaps helped to foster a more authoritarian and exclusive form of knowledge production – just at a time when a globalizing and wired cosmopolitan culture is demanding of science something much more open and inclusive.
Andrew Bolt is a journalist and columnist writing for The Herald Sun in Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Read more excellent articles from Andrew Bolt’s Blog
papundits
Ditzy Dee
Grumpy Old Man
T Lee Humphrey
marlin6
Annie Apple
TonyfromOz
Carl
Turtle
steevesna
Doc'
Joe from PA
mjmotley
sosUSA
Aussie
patpacer
Guest Contributor
Posted on 11/28/2009 by papundits
0