"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong." Richard P. Feynman

Monday, February 15, 2010

BBC Interview - Phil Jones Confesses Science is Not So Settled

In a stunning BBC interview Professor Phil Jones retreats from the certainty of the "science" buttressing the AGW Global Warming theories.Anthony Watts summarises points made by Jones that agreed with sceptics claims but have been previously vigorously denied by the Warmists.

Specifically, the Q-and-As confirm what many skeptics have long suspected:

Neither the rate nor magnitude of recent warming is exceptional.
There was no significant warming from 1998-2009. According to the IPCC we should have seen a global temperature increase of at least 0.2°C per decade.
The IPCC models may have overestimated the climate sensitivity for greenhouse gases, underestimated natural variability, or both.
This also suggests that there is a systematic upward bias in the impacts estimates based on these models just from this factor alone.
The logic behind attribution of current warming to well-mixed man-made greenhouse gases is faulty.
The science is not settled, however unsettling that might be.
There is a tendency in the IPCC reports to leave out inconvenient findings, especially in the part(s) most likely to be read by policy makers

1 comment:

  1. This had to happen and in spite of what he now reveals, he clearly blames the leaking of the emails for his present predicament and complains about being taken out of context.

    How about considering what the situation might have been had he been open and truthful about these issues all along?

    At best he is guilty of sitting back and doing nothing while letting the IPCC publish a flawed document that has now been proven to have misled governments of the world and the public at large on a massive scale.

    Someone in his position could have and should have spoken out as soon as he saw what was happening.

    No matter what he says now, or whatever attempts he makes to defend his action, he can never overcome the fact that he stood by and did nothing while the public was misled.

    I find it difficult to believe that his inaction was motivated by anything other than his desire to maintain his position, gain funding and continue to build his empire.

    Where were his quality assurance systems, a basic requirement in any government funded activity of this magnitude?

    If they were lacking, as the head of his unit, this was his direct responsibility and if they were there and conveniently ignored, the buck still stops with him.

    You have run out of places to hide Phil!

    Teejay
    Benowa Queensland Australia

    ReplyDelete