Climategate: Dear Mr Ban Ki Moon

9 12 2009

The Secretary-General of the United Nations Ki Moon, not that other one you was thinking about.  After the open letter to President Obama a while back, we now have another to entertain us, this time to the Head of the UN from 141 various PhD bearing Scientists challenging the IPCC’s consensus.

His Excellency Ban Ki Moon

Secretary-General, United Nations

New York, NY

United States of America

8th December 2009

Dear Secretary-General,

Climate change science is in a period of ‘negative discovery’ – the more we learn about this exceptionally complex and rapidly evolving field the more we realize how little we know. Truly, the science is NOT settled.

Therefore, there is no sound reason to impose expensive and restrictive public policy decisions on the peoples of the Earth without first providing convincing evidence that human activities are causing dangerous climate change beyond that resulting from natural causes. Before any precipitate action is taken, we must have solid observational data demonstrating that recent changes in climate differ substantially from changes observed in the past and are well in excess of normal variations caused by solar cycles, ocean currents, changes in the Earth’s orbital parameters and other natural phenomena.

We the undersigned, being qualified in climate-related scientific disciplines, challenge the UNFCCC and supporters of the United Nations Climate Change Conference to produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous human-caused global warming and other changes in climate. Projections of possible future scenarios from unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation.

Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:

  1. Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;
  2. Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
  3. Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate;
  4. Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities;
  5. The incidence of malaria is increasing due to recent climate changes;
  6. Human society and natural ecosystems cannot adapt to foreseeable climate change as they have done in the past;
  7. Worldwide glacier retreat, and sea ice melting in Polar Regions , is unusual and related to increases in human GHG emissions;
  8. Polar bears and other Arctic and Antarctic wildlife are unable to adapt to anticipated local climate change effects, independent of the causes of those changes;
  9. Hurricanes, other tropical cyclones and associated extreme weather events are increasing in severity and frequency;
  10. Data recorded by ground-based stations are a reliable indicator of surface temperature trends.

It is not the responsibility of ‘climate realist’ scientists to prove that dangerous human-caused climate change is not happening. Rather, it is those who propose that it is, and promote the allocation of massive investments to solve the supposed ‘problem’, who have the obligation to convincingly demonstrate that recent climate change is not of mostly natural origin and, if we do nothing, catastrophic change will ensue. To date, this they have utterly failed to do so.

For the list of signatories go here.  Also so you know I haven’t just pulled this out of my arse.  It really does seem like a conspiracy with all these claims and counter-claims being thrown back and forth.  I think the only way to sort this out is if we got Jerry Springer to host a show-down between Al Gore’s Scientific team against the “evil deniers” and have a gladiatorial battle live on TV.  I’d suffer the hoots of “Jerry!  Jerry!” to see this issue finally debated instead of dictated.




2 responses

9 12 2009
Sir Henry Morgan

My brother posted a link to this in the Guardian comments.

Yes, that’s right – so he posted the link again, twice – didn’t even get a “moderated” notice this time, just total Stalinisation.

That’s serious censorship – your not allowed to know that the science isn’t settled after all. People who say that are morons: if it’s settled it isn’t science; if it’s science it isn’t settled. As Einstein himself said, you can prove a thing is right a thousand times, but if one extra experiment proved it wrong, then wrong it is and the theory has to be discarded.

If the data and the theory don’t match, then it’s the theory that has to be junked, not the data ‘adjusted’ to fit.

9 12 2009
Jack the Ripper jr

Too much is riding on this. Sadly, if this doesn’t work, the Bastards that Be will just move onto another plan.

We’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t, we really do need a miracle with the amount of brain-dead walking among us.

More horse-trading – even though they’re meant to be looking after them instead of flogging them.

Bastards the lot of em!

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: