Global warming did not cause UK storms and floods, says expert
With the British media and many high profile scientists and activists blaming the storms and floods on global warming, it is a major embarrassment that a top "mainstream" scientist has said it has nothing to do with it
In a major embarrassment to "consensus" views on global warming in general and the recent storms and flooding in the UK in particular a senior scientist connected with the Met Office and also the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has poured cold water on the widespread notion that recent events have anything at all to do with global warming.
Professor Mat Collins was quoted by the Daily Mail this weekend as saying the storms were driven by the Jet Stream moving south for reasons that are simply unknown:
"There is no evidence that global warming can cause the jet stream to get stuck in the way it has this winter. If this is due to climate change, it is outside our knowledge," he said.
Professor Collins' dramatic intervention flies in the face of a veritable deluge of reports and features from mainstream media outlets such as the BBC and Sky NEWS the thrust of which have blamed the much publicised flooding on human-induced climate change.
Dissenters from what is habitually referred to as the "consensus" on climate change range in their views from those who argue that human induced climate change via CO2 emissions is real but may not amount to much to those who argue that the science has become highly politicised, skewered by the vast amounts of funding it attracts, and is in any case dubious.
The Mail pointed out that: "In 2007, the Met Office said that globally, the decade 2004-2014 would see warming of 0.3C. In fact, the world has not got any warmer at all in this period."
It is verifiable facts such as these that have caused many people to adopt a sceptical stance in relation to claims about catastrophic climate change. Supporters of the "consensus" say they are dealing with complex phenomena but that the fundamentals of their arguments stand up to scrutiny.
If so, counter the sceptics, why do "consensus" scientists and activists resort to ad hominem attacks on their opponents or even, as in the case of celebrated journalist and climate sceptic Mark Steyn, attempt to use legal means to shut them up?
We are wholly dependent on the kindness of our readers for our continued work. We thank you in advance for any support you can offer.