See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Global warming research suppressed due to intolerance of scepticism, claims scientist
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en ... -climate-sceptic-argument.html
Published: May 16, 2014
Author: Claire Carter
Post Date: 2014-05-16 08:38:11 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 78
Comments: 1
A professor claims his paper questioning the speed of climate change was deliberately rejected for publication due to intolerance of views seen as "sceptical" Professor Bengtsson's paper about global warming challenged the findings of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change A climate change researcher has claimed that scientists are confusing their role as impartial observers with green activism after his paper challenging predictions about the speed of global warming was rejected because it was seen as “less than helpful.” Professor Lennart Bengtsson says recent McCarthy-style pressure from fellow academics forced him to resign from his post on a climate sceptic think-tank. The research fellow from the University of Reading believes a paper he co- authored was deliberately suppressed from publicatoin in a leading journal because of an intolerance of dissenting views about climate change by scientists who peer-reviewed the work. “The problem we have now in the scientific community is that some scientists are mixing up their scientific role with that of climate activist,” he told the Times. Professor Bengtsson claims a scientist advised that the paper, which challenged findings that global temperature would increase by 4.5C if greenhouse gases were to double, should not be published in a respected journal because it was “less than helpful.” The unnamed scientist, who was asked to peer review Professor Bengtsson’s paper, said in his comments: “Actually it is harmful as it opens the door for oversimplified claims of ‘errors’ and worse from the climate sceptics side.” The paper, co-authored with four other scientists, challenged the findings of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) but was rejected by Environmental Research Letters published by the Institute of Physics, one of the most highly regarded journals in the area. Professor Bengtsson said he accepted emissions would increase the global temperature but questioned the rate at which this would take place and suggested more work needed to be done to determine this. However he said it was unacceptable that a paper was rejected on the basis it might advance the argument of climate sceptics, as he suggested scientists were losing their impartial role. He added: “It is an indication of how science is gradually being influenced by political views.” IOP Publishing, which publishes Environmental Research Letters, did not respond directly to Professor Bengtsson’s comments. A spokesman for the journal said his research was rejected for publication because two independent reviewers found errors in the paper and that the work did not represent a “significant advancement” in the field. He said: "As a consequence the independent reviewers recommended that the paper should not be published in the journal which led to the final editorial decision to reject the paper." The professor, who is a former director of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg, resigned as a member of the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s academic advisory council this week after spending just a month in the post. In his resignation letter he described “enormous group pressure” which had become “unbearable.” The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), which was founded by former chancellor of the exchequer Lord Lawson, was established because of concerns that government policies to combat climate change may be too radical. The think tank describes itself as 'open-minded on the contested science of global warming'. Lord Lawson has agreed that Professor Bengtsson’s reference to McCarthyism were “fully warranted.”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Ada (#0)
(Edited)
That might be true if it was possible. However, water vapor is over 95% percent of earth's greenhouse gases and it is not possible without extreme increase in temperture to double the amount of water vapor. CO2 is an insignificant trace gas with about 1 part per 3,000 of the earth's atmosphere. We need more, not less CO2 in the atmosphere. The earth has been losing CO2 from the atmosphere for billions of years and is now CO2 starved. 440 million years ago there was over ten times as much CO2 in the atmosphere and the temperture was the same. See: The primary reason the the temperture is less than average now is because we are still in the middle of an ice age which started 3 million years ago with a short term warm period. Our 12,000 year warm period is far to short to show on the graph.
Professor Bengtsson claims a scientist advised that the paper, which challenged findings that global temperature would increase by 4.5C if greenhouse gases were to double...
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest