Richard Lindzen makes an ungracious return to this collection of untidy minds, appearing courtesy of The Times, which is rather disappointing. If any editors of any newspaper know the detrimental value of lying propaganda, it should be those at the top at The Times, which is normally the channel for Government-sourced snapshots and snippets, sometimes deliberate leaks.
The number of outright mistruths and sneaky fiddlings in Richard Lindzen’s statement is astounding.
Let us unpack a few here :-
“From The Times : December 3, 2009 : Fight Club: Is Man largely responsible for global warming? Two climate science experts go head to head […] NO, says Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology : Or rather, we can’t tell. “Global warming” refers to changes in an index known as the global mean temperature anomaly. This index has increased irregularly by about 0.75C since the Industrial Revolution began, but it always shows some warming or cooling, and fluctuations of 0.5C are common. Claims of record-breaking years hinge on fluctuations of tenths of a degree. Such changes go unnoticed because local fluctuations are much larger and significantly uncorrelated with the global index. Nevertheless, when the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued its statement that man was likely responsible for most of the warming since 1957, it was essentially referring to this index. The statement was hardly alarming and was consistent with Man having a small impact.”
We can most definitely tell that mankind’s activities in burning Fossil Fuels and deforestation are the main causes of Global Warming in the latter part of the 20th Century.
However, if you don’t believe or accept the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, you won’t be convinced by this from their Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers, which shows how the data only matches models that include the human-induced or anthropogenic component :-
Contrary to what Richard Lindzen claims, this is significant.
And also contrary to his claims, the trend in Global Warming easily and clearly rises above the natural variability :-