If you have any doubt that Science is under assault from the Climate Change Obstructers (self-styled “sceptics”), you need look no further than this piece of what I consider to be utter, utter, fetid 30-day-old left-in-the-sun tripe :-
https://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/04/global-warming-flaks-reduced-t
The number of outright inaccuracies in the piece is astonishing, including the switch on what Phil Jones really claimed about “statistically significant” global warming.
And it concludes with clear evidence of a globally organised campaign to bring down Climate Change Science, by hook or by crook :-
“There is vastly more material here than you will ever be able to absorb. I realized as I ploughed my way through it, or some of it, that the conclusion is encouraging. I am confident now that the official version is going to be overwhelmed, and that the mainstream media reporters are going to be overwhelmed, too. They are right now facing their own Tsunami of dissent. Politicians know very well what is happening, and cap and trade will not pass the U.S. Senate.”
“Coverage at such warm-supporting organs as the Washington Post and the New York Times has been reduced to a strategy of denial. They have been forced to deny that that there is any problem with the official story beyond what the climate officials themselves admit (and they admit very little — little more than typos).”
“But it doesn’t matter. The web has made all the difference and the reporters working to uphold the official version have more and more been forced into a defensive crouch. The exposure of this massive fraud will be a watershed in the history of environmentalism and it will continue to unfold whatever the mainstream media think or say.”
We have a (non-violent) fight on our hands, not of our own choosing : keep telling the truth, and insisting on correcting falsehoods; or face an uphill ramp of complications and delays.
Do we really need the Met Office to spend another three years analysing data ? We know what the general trend of the observations is : warming (consistently), accelerating (probably), feeding back badly (possibly) :-
https://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7039264.ece
Putting the data back under the microscope for three years will achieve only one thing : the obstructers win. This process will license them to carry on carping and whining and undermining by saying, “the science isn’t settled”. They will continue to pour doubt on the quality and integrity of the work of Climate Change Scientists, and they will increase their audience. It’s a Public Relations disaster.
For what reason is the entire canon of Science now under suspicion ? Because Steve McIntyre and his many acolytes say so ? What right does he have to question Climate Change Science ? Why does anyone take what he says seriously ?
My opinion is that it is wrong to be concerned about public opinion.
Only around 20% of the population really care about the Environment. That figure is not going to change very quickly, even as Climate Change disasters mount up.
The only important group of people to convince of the coming dangers are those who make the actual decisions : about energy, transport and trade; those who deal with the companies and organisations that will make the actual adaptation to Climate Change and mitigation of Global Warming.
The general public don’t count : they don’t have a vote on Climate Change policy.
Climate Change has never been an election issue, and even though the Ask the Climate Question campaign is trying, Climate Change may still not be the Number One election issue.
In point of conclusion, the Media has lost its usefulness in terms of communicating Climate Change, by allowing itself to be intellectually corrupted by the Climate Science Obstructers’ fallacious non-arguments.
But it doesn’t really matter what the mainstream Media say, as the views of their general readership don’t count.
However, what matters is that the law-makers, the decision-makers, are not swayed by the nonsense of the Climate Obstructers – and sadly, a lot of them still believe what the Media propagate.
So, if you care about the changes that Society has to undergo to respond to the threats of Global Warming, you still need to care about accuracy in Climate Change reporting.