Thursday, August 04, 2005

Letters to the Editor (re House of Lords report)

Three letters in today's Daily Telegraph. Unfortunately these letters may not be archived, so I will precis them:

First, from Lord May of Oxford, President of the Royal Society. A very disappointing rejoinder to the article from so eminent a scientist. Sounds like a typical Royal Society "them and us" spat in progress. I quote "The committee did not produce a good account of the science of climate change, concentrating as it did on some uncertainties in our knowledge and neglecting the work of the thousands of scientists, from many countries, upon which the consensus view of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is based. You know, it is the uncertainties in a theory which need to be highlighted, researched and tested. That is what the Royal Society has always supposed to have been about but, as Jenny Ungar in the "Lunar Men" has pointed out, the establishment has never been very good at innovation!

Second a letter concerning the flawed concepts of the Kyoto protocol and how the intermittent resources of wind and wave will need nuclear backup.

Third, a letter from Prof. Philip Stott, another "global warming can be good for us" advocate. I have no doubt his blog will cover this letter, so check it out there. This letter, when compared with Lord May's, contains good analysis and some original thoughts to contribute to the debate. The fact that East Asia and the Pacific are going to ignore Kyoto is particularly telling for the "old world" politicians. That is, if they are listening!


Post a Comment

<< Home