Back to HOMEPAGE Book Review
An appeal to reason: a cool look at global warming
Nigel Lawson
Duckworth, London (ISBN 978-0-7156-3786-9)
James Irvine
Teviot Scientific, Cultybraggan Farm, Comrie, Perthshire
Editor: www.land-care.org.uk
Filed 23 May 08
©www.land-care.org.uk
At last a well argued rebuttal has been published countering the flawed and excessive claims trumpeted by "green" climatologists and their computer models, along with the masses who have been converted to the faith through the actions of lobbyists and all too gullible politicians, who think they are on to a vote winner.
In his little book An appeal to reason: a cool look at global warming, published this month by Duckworth, Nigel Lawson persuasively debunks most of the arguments that have led to the extraordinary demands for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to be drastically reduced on a global scale, or else catastrophe waits us.
Lord Nigel Lawson: formerly Chancellor of the Exchequer and
Secretary of State for Energy, author of
"Appeal to reason: a cool look at global warming"
(Duckworth, 2008).
Although he makes no claim to be a scientist, Nigel Lawson's opinions should be listened to. He was formerly a Chancellor of the Exchequer and Secretary of State for Energy. Also, the book is written in commendably clear language and is succinct. It has also been well researched, with an informative bibliography and notes to help elucidate points where the reader way wish more detailed information. This book, with only 106 pages of main narrative, has been compiled by someone with a clear and rational mind. To help the reader along, there are some delightful bits of humour, but he is never flippant.
Among Lord Lawson's main targets is the Stern Review that was published in 2006. At the time Sir Nicholas Stern was Head of the Government Economic Service. According to Lawson
"The Stern Review.... was only embarked upon after the event, and is essentially a propaganda exercise in support of the UK government's policy in seeking a world leadership role on climate change. As a result, while its 692 pages contain much of interest, neither its conclusions nor the arguments on which they are based possess much merit".
Also highlighted by Lawson is the now notorious 'hockey-stick' chart of global temperatures over the past 1000 years advanced by Professor Michael Mann and his colleagues, Bradley and Hughes, in the United States in 1998. The allegedly constant global temperature over the long period before reliable scientific observations were first recorded resembled the straight handle, while the subsequent 20th century rise resembled the curved blade. This striking imagery was prominently displayed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001 and soon became the icon of conventional global warming wisdom.
Lawson also points to the report of the Met Office Hadley Centre in conjunction with the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia which gives the most recent global temperature measurements for the 21st century to date. They have shown no change between 2001 and 2007 in spite of the fact that global CO2 emissions have been rising faster than ever. May be there is just a temporary lull in the rise of global temperatures, but may be there are major flaws in the computer models used by the relatively new science of climatology. Those who work in the field of viral diseases of livestock - such as foot and mouth disease and bluetongue disease - know all too well how fallible the epidemiological computer models of predicted disease spread can be: and just how costly these over-confident, over-sold predictions can be.
The book jacket
We are also reminded by Lawson that CO2 is a normal constituent of the atmosphere, and not a poison. Indeed, it is the lifeblood of plants in the process of photosynthesis.The great bulk of it in the atmosphere is not man-made, but natural. Indeed, in general terms, the more CO2 there is in the atmosphere the better the development of plant life on the planet. C02 can be regarded as plants' fertiliser, which is no bad thing.
There is no doubt that the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have increased by 30% during the 20th century and continue to do so. There is also very little dispute that this increase is very largely man-made as a result of carbon-based emissions caused by the rapid worldwide growth of carbon-based energy consumption through the burning of coal, oil and gas.
It is also agreed that CO2 is one of a number of so-called 'greenhouse gases' whose combined effect in the earth's atmosphere is to keep the planet significantly warmer than it would otherwise be. By far the most significant of these 'greenhouse gases' is water vapour, with CO2 being a poor second. Water vapour is no more a pollutant than is CO2. But the science of clouds is in its infancy.
In his assessment of the conduct of the majority of the scientific community regarding climate change and global warming in particular, Lawson gives much credit to the persistence of Professor Ross McKitrick and Steve McIntyre: two Canadians who prepared a penetrating critique of the 'hockey stick' fallacy referred to above and featured by the British government in its 2003 energy White Paper.
The IPCC gets even more stick from Lawson for its conceit that we can have any useful idea of what the world will be like in a hundred years time through the use of computer modelling. The IPCC in its 2007 Report includes references to 'estimated multi-century warming' and its consequences. What justification can the IPCC possibly have for such scaremongering when the science on which their models are based is so shaky? But it is all good fodder for the likes of Al Gore and his mission to save the earth. In this context it is worth noting that a High Court judge who ruled on whether Gore's climate change film, 'An Inconvenient Truth', could be shown in schools said it contains nine scientific "errors". Mr Justice Burton said the government could still send the film to schools - if accompanied by guidance giving the other side of the argument. Seemingly the propaganda machine needed a High Court judge to constrain its excesses from misleading the young. Lawson's little book would ne just the thing to accompany Al Gore's film.
While it may be taken as agreed that the marked, and largely man-made, increase in carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere has contributed to the modest 20th century warming of the planet, it is far from clear just how great a contribution it has made. Lawson makes a reasoned assessment, which is well worth reading, of the possible impact of climate change on water, ecosystems, food, coasts and health. He paints a very different scenario for each of these parameters than that which the lobby groups, politicians, and the media ram down our throats on a daily basis.
But does the earth really need saving? Well, not really: according to Nigel Lawson's 'Appeal to reason'. Central to his argument are the possible benefits from climate change and mankind's ability to adapt.
I personally can recall listening to a doyen of dome, Professor Peter H Raven (Director, Missouri Botanical Garden and George Engelmann Professor of Botany, Washington University in St. Louis) giving a lecture at the Royal Society of Edinburgh with the sponsorship of Scottish Natural Heritage - an organisation not known for its quality of scientific assessment or application. After some 45 minutes of unmitigated gloom I politely asked if there were not any benefits that could arise from climate change. He answered with a simple 'no.' But as Lawson points out there are, and they could be substantial for some of us. The difference between Raven and Lawson would appear to be that the former looks at the world from a very narrow perspective, while Lawson takes a much wider and more pragmatic view, with an eye on global economics. Lawson also allows for the extraordinary inherent ability of humans to adapt to their circumstances.
Lawson argues that, even on the basis of the IPCC's flawed economic assumptions, the existential threat to the planet is merely that living standards in the developing world in a hundred years time are projected to be 'only' some 8.5 times as high as they are today, instead of 9.5 times as high, without the alleged ravages of global warming.
"Save the planet must surely be a strong contender for the most ludicrous slogan ever coined"
On that basis Lawson argues that it is equally ludicrous to damage the global economy so severely in a forlorn attempt to reduce global CO2 emissions sufficiently to make any material difference. He is persuasive in his view that global agreements are unattainable. And he is understanding towards the position of China and India in wanting to carry on boosting their economic prosperity, as the best way they have of overcoming poverty amidst their populations and all the evils that poverty brings.
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) set up under the Kyoto agreement, and with which Europe's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is linked, is recognised to be a massive scam.
The conduct of the global scientific community, and more importantly of those who control their funding and advancement, is well described by Lawson as being little else than religious fanaticism. To criticise the faith was and continues to be sacrilege. The propaganda of lobby groups, the media and politicians (with agendas of their own) saw to that. But scientific truths are not determined by head counts, but through the discipline of scientific discovery and logic.
Even what is regarded as the highest scientific body in the land, The Royal Society, seems to have got itself into the mire of promoting this pseudo-scientific religious faith when they allegedly told Exxon to stop funding climate change denial.
Indeed, the situation is so bad that even someone so well known as Lord Lawson had great difficulty in finding a publisher for his book. All the British publishers whom his agent approached turned it down, with one rejection letter stating
'My fear , with this cogently argued book, is that it flies in the face of the prevailing orthodoxy that it would be very difficult to find a wide market.'
Let us hope that this excellent little book does find a wide market, because that is what it certainly deserves.
©www.land-care.org.uk
Other Land-Care articles relevant to global warming
Irvine, James (2007). Is global warming is due to the sun: not industrial CO2?
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 15 Mar 08, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View
Irvine, James (2007). The head of NERC responds in the climate change debate with more emotion than logic
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 18 Mar 08, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View
Linklater, Magnus (2007). A brilliantly Swiss scheme to ignore global warming: Magnus Linklater is aghast at pig-headed frivolity on the Matterhorn.
This article was originally published in The Times on 18th July 2007. It is reproduced here with the kind permission of its author and of the newspaper
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 19 Jul 07, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View
Irvine, James (2006). Biofuels Workshop: Grangemouth 9th November 2006
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 12 Nov 06, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View
Irvine, James (2006). SAC Outlook Conference 2006: making positive choices.14th November, Murrayfield , Edinburgh. Part 1: keynote address - Peter Russell, Head of Rural Group, SEERAD
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 24 Nov 06, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View
Irvine, James (2003). The Arrogance of Academics pontificating about Rural Affairs
Are they letting us down? ECRR Conference: Scotland’s Landscape - a Fixed Asset?
Battleby, Perthshire, 8th May 2003
See SOCIAL/ECONOMIC/POLITICAL Homepage, filed 14 May 03, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View
Irvine, James (2006). Flood prevention measures at Comrie.
See ENVIRONMENT Homepage, filed 20 Dec 06, www.land-care.org.uk Click Here to View
Finis
|
