Thursday, February 26, 2009

The consensus takes another hit...

This time my attention was drawn to this Register report by a number of email correspondents, and it comes from some Japanese scientists.
Exclusive Japanese scientists have made a dramatic break with the UN and Western-backed hypothesis of climate change in a new report from its Energy Commission.

Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN's IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. Remarkably, the subtle and nuanced language typical in such reports has been set aside.

One of the five contributors compares computer climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century has ceased.

The report by Japan Society of Energy and Resources (JSER) is astonishing rebuke to international pressure, and a vote of confidence in Japan's native marine and astronomical research. Publicly-funded science in the West uniformly backs the hypothesis that industrial influence is primarily responsible for climate change, although fissures have appeared recently. Only one of the five top Japanese scientists commissioned here concurs with the man-made global warming hypothesis.

JSER is the academic society representing scientists from the energy and resource fields, and acts as a government advisory panel. The report appeared last month but has received curiously little attention. So The Register commissioned a translation of the document - the first to appear in the West in any form. Below you'll find some of the key findings - but first, a summary.

Three of the five leading scientists contend that recent climate change is driven by natural cycles, not human industrial activity, as political activists argue.

Kanya Kusano is Program Director and Group Leader for the Earth Simulator at the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science & Technology (JAMSTEC). He focuses on the immaturity of simulation work cited in support of the theory of anthropogenic climate change. Using undiplomatic language, Kusano compares them to ancient astrology. After listing many faults, and the IPCC's own conclusion that natural causes of climate are poorly understood, Kusano concludes:

"[The IPCC's] conclusion that from now on atmospheric temperatures are likely to show a continuous, monotonic increase, should be perceived as an unprovable hypothesis," he writes.

Shunichi Akasofu, head of the International Arctic Research Center in Alaska, has expressed criticism of the theory before. Akasofu uses historical data to challenge the claim that very recent temperatures represent an anomaly:

"We should be cautious, IPCC's theory that atmospheric temperature has risen since 2000 in correspondence with CO2 is nothing but a hypothesis. "

Akasofu calls the post-2000 warming trend hypothetical. His harshest words are reserved for advocates who give conjecture the authority of fact.

"Before anyone noticed, this hypothesis has been substituted for truth... The opinion that great disaster will really happen must be broken."

If you are interested in this, do go and read the whole article: much of it backs up what I—and other sceptics—have been saying for some time now (especially the concerns about the US land temperature record). There is little more that your humble Devil can add to it.

There are, however, bonus points for the first person to spot one of the AGW faithful saying "well, they aren't real scientists, you know"...


Lex said...

Like the famous quote: "Well, he would say that wouldn't he?"

The Filthy Smoker said...

And yet, from the Telegraph - the fucking Telegraph! - we get this:

Britain will become one big city in order to cope with climate change refugees

Britain could be one high rise city by the end of the century due to the number of migrants who will move here because their own countries have become too hot, scientists have predicted.

If the world warms by an average of 4 degrees Celsius in the next 100 years, the worse case scenario suggested in certain climate change models, it is expected many areas in the south of the world will become too dry to support human life.

James Lovelock, who developed the "Gaia" theory which sees the Earth as a self-regulating "superorganism", said people from these countries will come to countries like Britain as "climate change refugees".

Firstly, no one except Lovelock is predicting a 4 degree increase.

Secondly, it doesn't seem to have occurred to him that we have the option of telling these 'climate change refugees' to fuck off to sunny Greenland.

Thirdly, I see mad old men talking bollocks down the pub all the same. Why doesn't the Telegraph report what they say?

Neal Asher said...

That bit in the Telegraph strikes me as fear-mongering. Right, guys, we've tried the one where we say AGW won't lead to warming in Britain but huge cooling, what else? I know, immigration is top of the public's fears so let's connect AGW to that. Utter bollocks.

Hey, noticed the news stories about that bunch of envirotwits and politicians in the Antarctic? I wonder if they haven't heard about the satellite sensor that went down and inadvertently missed 500,000 square kilometres of ice? I mean surely they didn't deliberately neglect to mention it?

Bill Sticker said...

Concensus? There never was a real concensus, only in the mind of certain politicians and media types with no real brains and a financial agenca. It's colder than usual. Why don't they concede that?

As for the Telegraph's content that's gone downhill like a bobsleigh team on steroids in the last 12 months. I think the old Torygraph is having an identity crisis and can't decide whether it's a broadsheet or Tabloid.

cornishgiant said...

Hmmm, strange. I didn't see a single mention of this story on the BBC news website. I wonder why, a bit remiss, no?