Written by Viscount Monckton of Brenchley -
Email of support received by The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
SPPI receives many kind emails from members of the public who support our quiet but increasingly successful work in bringing some scientific and economic truth and perspective to the over-politicized debate about the climate. Here is a letter from an eminent scientist who has recently discovered what nonsense "global warming" is.
I have been working in drug discovery over 30 years. I am an experimentalist by training, with a PhD in organic chemistry, and have been with my present company for 22 years, during 20 of which I have been involved in the computational side of drug discovery. I am one of the inventors of the first anti-migraine drug, which won Queen's Award for Innovation. I am also on the review panels of several learned journals, and I often give presentations and run workshops at major international conferences.
Climategate triggered my interest in the controversy about "global warming" caused by mankind, with CO2 branded as the main culprit. What shocked me the most was the language which the Climategate scientists used to describe anyone who was trying to disagree with the science behind the models that the IPCC was advocating. Labels like "denialist" belong to religion, while skepticism is the driving force behind the scientific truth. Any scientific finding MUST be treated with scepticism, until proven beyond doubt.
I still remember when all the team that had been involved in development of one of my company's major drugs was invited to see the huge lorry full of documents detailing each experiment done over 10 years, and the protocols that had been obeyed by specially-registered scientists, as it left for the United States to be examined by the Food and Drug Administration before it could be approved for use in humans. Until that point, not only had the company not made a single penny from that work: it had spent close to 2 billion dollars to develop it, and any future income depended on approval by the FDA.
On the other hand, the "global warming" issue has resulted in absurd amounts of money being poured into computer models that have no connection with physical reality, and world governments have been making major decisions about use of our resources, collecting taxes and preventing third-world development, all based on theoretical models.
When I started to look into climate change models that predicted the destruction of the Earth, coupled with the Hollywood disaster movie starring Al Gore, based on so many ifs and buts, and yet claiming a confidence interval of 90%, I just could not believe it. If I was reviewing the IPCC's 2007 report, in which that 90% confidence is expressed, I should not be able to pass it, since it fails to adhere to basic good scientific practice.
The IPCC's two main claims ignore the following points:
- Both temperature and CO2 concentrations and ranges as they are today have been seen in the Earth's past climate. They are neither unprecedented nor unusual.
- CO2, which is now described as very bad, is anything but. It was CO2, early in the history of the Earth, that formed the first atmosphere and, as a greenhouse gas, helped to stabilize the Earth's climate.
- CO2 is an essential ingredient in photosynthesis, liberating oxygen into the atmosphere.
- CO2 is a key part of the bio-chemical processes that support life. Every breath we breathe emits CO2 to the atmosphere.
- The current contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere is only 0.038 and, out of total CO2 emissions, represents only 3%, for nature emits and recycles the other 97%.
So the bottom line is that we are trying to claim that just 250 years' human emissions of CO2, a mere trace gas that is present in the atmosphere at a concentration of less than 0.04%, the gas that is insignificant compared with water vapor, will cause major effects in the future, even though today's fluctuations in temperature and CO2 have been seen in the past.
I have followed the reports of the way the media has been treating SPPI and its spokesmen, and I should like to thank you for your hard work and enduring so many terrible media attacks. In my semi-retirement, I will start my own little and modest contribution towards educating the general public about the very poor scientific practices that the "global warming" industry is using - practices that are now being exposed. I will start writing contributions to scientific editors of our key journals and submitting presentations for forthcoming conferences.
Two things need to be done -
First, we should organize an open letter to all major media houses, signed by as many experimental scientists as possible, calling upon scientists who support the IPCC to answer specific observation facts that are clearly contradicting the model prediction. All those experimentalists who still maintain that we are on course to doomsday should put their names down and point out the experimental evidence that they claim to have. It seems to me that everything now done by the IPCC is controlled by modelers and environmental and governmental forces looking to line their pockets with carbon taxes.
Secondly, following the popularity of the recent BBC series Planet Earth, it would be a real eye-opener to do a similar series drawing on observations from astrophysics, astronomy, geology, theory of clouds, and most importantly the effects of the Sun and the galaxy on our climate.
Once again, I thank SPPI for its hard work in opposition to the current trends. One humble scientist will join your efforts to expose the criminal behavior in the name of science that has done so much to destroy scientific credibility, on the basis of a case that has no scientific basis whatsoever.
Robert Ferguson, President
Science and Public Policy Institute