Posted by: Grant | January 27, 2014

Garth Paltridge On Failure Of Science

 Garth Paltridge is an emeritus professor at the University of Tasmania and a fellow of the Australian Academy of Science. He is the author of The Climate Caper: Facts and Fallacies of Global Warming. He was a chief research scientist with the CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research.

January 22nd 2014 print
Garth Paltridge
Climate Change’s Inherent Uncertainties

…The scientists in environmental research laboratories, since they are not normally linked to any particular private industry, were forced to seek funds from other government departments. In turn this forced them to accept the need for advocacy and for the manipulation of public opinion. For that sort of activity, an arm’s-length association with the environmental movement would be a union made in heaven. Among other things it would provide a means by which scientists could distance themselves from responsibility for any public overstatement of the significance of their particular research problem.

The trap was partially sprung in climate research when a number of the relevant scientists began to enjoy the advocacy business. The enjoyment was based on a considerable increase in funding and employment opportunity. The increase was not so much on the hard-science side of things but rather in the emerging fringe institutes and organisations devoted, at least in part, to selling the message of climatic doom. A new and rewarding research lifestyle emerged which involved the giving of advice to all types and levels of government, the broadcasting of unchallengeable opinion to the general public, and easy justification for attendance at international conferences—this last in some luxury by normal scientific experience, and at a frequency previously unheard of…. “

” …What has happened to the scepticism that is supposedly the lifeblood of scientific inquiry? The answer probably gets back to the uncertainty of it all. The chances of proving that climate change over the next century will be large enough to be disastrous are virtually nil. For the same reason, the chances of a climate sceptic, or anyone else for that matter, proving the disaster theory to be oversold are also virtually nil. To that extent there is a level playing field for the two sides of the argument. The problem is that… “

~meGarth is being kind to his profession. It’s the same problem as trying to get a doctor to badmouth another doctor or a lawyer to badmouth another lawyer. They just won’t do it. There were no research laboratories into global temperature and no such thing as “climate science” before a political movement at the UNIPCC invented their global warming doomsday alarm. Their political success has resulted in all science being infected with their cult-like spiritual beliefs that humanity is evil because it despoils the perfect, unchanging natural environment and we must reduce mankind to a privileged elite living in a high-tech total harmony with nature.  The scientific establishment have failed the scientific philosophy and the scientific principles. “Money makes da world go around, da world go around, da world go around; money, money, money. money… “


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: