The National Academy Lays a $6-Million Egg
by Dr. Fred Singer
The report of the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences [Advancing the Science of Climate Change, May 2010] claims that the climate is warming and that the cause is human. http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2010/05/three-academy-reports-urge-clima.html?etoc
The first claim of this federally funded $6-million exercise is meaningless and trivial, the second claim is almost surely wrong. Their recommendation is that the United States should put a price on carbon to staunch emissions of CO2; it is pointless, counterproductive, and very costly..
The climate certainly has warmed considerably since 10,000 years ago (the end of the last Ice Age) — and much less since 1850, the end of the Little Ice Age. No one disputes these facts. But the climate has not warmed during the past decade — in spite of the steady rise in human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. According to a BBC interview of Dr Phil Jones, head of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (CRU-UEA, of Climategate fame), there has been no warming trend since 1995.
The 2007 report of the UN-sponsored IPCC furnished no credible evidence for anthropogenic global warming (AGW). None at all – see here the Summary of the NIPCC report . “Nature – Not Human Activity – Rules the Climate” http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC_final.pdf
The NRC-NAS panel did not add any new relevant information – nor did it have the expertise to do so.
The IPCC panel was made up of many qualified atmospheric scientists, active in research. The NAS panel was politically chosen and listed among its ‘climate science experts’ a sociology professor and a professor of ‘sustainable development‘ – whatever that may mean. That certainly doesn’t inspire much confidence in the NAS conclusions.
“This is our most comprehensive report ever on climate change,” said Ralph Cicerone, president of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), at a briefing to discuss the effort, more than 2 years in the making and involving 90 scientists. It “analyzes the reality of climate change and how should the nation respond. … It emphasizes why the United States should act now.”
Ironically, this report comes at a time when the venerable and respected Royal Society (London) is having second thoughts about their past record of climate alarmism. In the words of outgoing RS president Lord Martin Rees (May 28, 2010): “Science is organized scepticism and the consensus must shift in light of the evidence.”
Looking back, this may well have been a low point for the NAS, which will inevitably discredit all other NAS activities. But it will provide a useful lesson to other scientific organizations that have uncritically jumped on the AGW bandwagon
Tags: Fred Singer, NAS, NRC climate Report